Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Terror war may have hurt storm response

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Terror war may have hurt storm response
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:29 pm Post subject:

EFLtrainer wrote:

Look up the term "criminally negligent", as in homicide, etc.

Well, before I explore "criminally negligent, as in homicide, etc." I think I'd like a listing of the elements of "criminally negligent cronyism," and please also tell me whether it is a state or federal crime.

desultude

Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:42 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

Desultude: Your example refers to "manslaughter," a specific crime.

You have accused (or supported the accusation) Bush of "criminally negligent cronyism" and I'm waiting for a listing of the elements of this crime or an admission that is was just hyperbole.

President Bush put a man in charge of emergency management for the United States and hundreds of millions of people who had no experience or training for the position. It has cost lives. How many has yet to be determined, but each day that goes by with people still in attics and on roofs adds to the toll.

If he were the head of a corporation and he put someone in charge of safety who had as little expertise, and lives were lost, there would be, at the minimum, lawsuits citing negligence, and also at least the possibility of prosecution.

Where did you stand, by the way, for empeaching Clinton for a little play in the backroom? How many lives did it cost?

EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:04 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

EFLtrainer wrote:

Look up the term "criminally negligent", as in homicide, etc.

Like I said, argumentative and childish response. The meaning is crystal clear. Perhaps your reason for these types of posts is to distract from the issues being discussed?

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:09 pm Post subject:

desultude wrote:

Gopher wrote:

President Bush put a man in charge of emergency management for the United States and hundreds of millions of people who had no experience or training for the position. It has cost lives. How many has yet to be determined, but each day that goes by with people still in attics and on roofs adds to the toll.

If he were the head of a corporation and he put someone in charge of safety who had as little expertise, and lives were lost, there would be, at the minimum, lawsuits citing negligence, and also at least the possibility of prosecution.

Where did you stand, by the way, for empeaching [sic] Clinton for a little play in the backroom? How many lives did it cost?

I thought that impeaching Clinton was ridiculous. I supported Clinton, voted for him twice, just as I voted against Bush twice.

I think that impeaching Clinton was not quite as ridiculous, however, as all the idiots who continue to cite what the other party did to their candidate or president dating back to Watergate.

Where does all this bullshiat end?

Presidents have always placed political supporters and friends in positions of power around them.

What experience did McNamara have in Defense before Kennedy appointed him Secretary of Defense, where he managed the escalation of the Vietnam War?

What experience did Robert F. Kennedy have in federal law enforcement before JFK made him Atty Gen.? What experience did RFK have in espionage and foreign policy, except for the Ian Fleming novels he and his brother avidly read, before JFK made him de facto chief of CIA in the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs?

Nixon placed a guy from the Bureau of the Budget in charge of CIA in '73.

I can't think of any example of any Secretary of State ever who was a professional foreign service officer.

Citing Bush for placing an inexperienced guy in charge of FEMA is arbitrary, then. It is also simplistic. These guys have a great deal of expertise in the form of a huge number of experts and professionals to advise them in their jobs.

It is a problem in govt: how to balance bureaucratic expertise with political control? It is, after all, a presidential-centered -- and not a bureaucratic-centered -- political system, isn't it?

This problem was particularly manifest during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and scholars have been looking at this event, and what we should learn from it, for years.

So, again, my position is that people are taking advantage of a natural disaster to push their politics. And it's sickening.

Last edited by Gopher on Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:14 pm; edited 1 time in total

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:11 pm Post subject:

EFLtrainer wrote:

Gopher wrote:

EFLtrainer wrote:

Look up the term "criminally negligent", as in homicide, etc.

Like I said, argumentative and childish response. The meaning is crystal clear. Perhaps your reason for these types of posts is to distract from the issues being discussed?

No. Just to keep your hysteria and hyperbole in proper perspective.

So, you don't have a definition for "criminally negligent cronyism," do you? That's because it doesn't exist. That's because you were foaming at the mouth and not thinking about what you were saying...

desultude

Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:25 pm Post subject:

I hope you are just being petty to make a point, I hope you understand that it is not the "cronyism" that is the crime (though if it itsn't, it should be) but the negligence. Criminally negligent cronyism describes cronyism that resulted in criminal negligence. Maybe the wording should have been "cronyistic criminimal negligence". But of course, diversion that it is, it is not an entertaining diversion. The fact remains that the president's cronyism put someone in a position of extreme responsibility that was not competent. How about a discussion about that. The discussion about semantics you are trying to generate is vapid.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:33 pm Post subject:

desultude wrote:

I hope you are just being petty to make a point, I hope you understand that it is not the "cronyism" that is the crime (though if it itsn't, it should be) but the negligence. Criminally negligent cronyism describes cronyism that resulted in criminal negligence. Maybe the wording should have been "cronyistic criminimal negligence". Rolling Eyes

But of course, diversion that it is, it is not an entertaining diversion. The fact remains that the president's cronyism put someone in a position of extreme responsibility that was not competent.

How about a discussion about that. The discussion about semantics you are trying to generate is vapid.

I did discuss it, above, in the post that you didn't read before responding.

Teufelswacht

Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Location: Land Of The Not Quite Right

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:49 pm Post subject:

flakfizer wrote:

When did my country get like this?

Everything has become politicized. A natural disaster hits and some people use it as a chance to protest the War in Iraq. Some people use it to help demonstrate that global warming blah blah blah. Others use it to inidict the country on charges of racism. Others use it as another opportunity to call Bush a dolt or point out that Rice bought shoes.

I think democracy is the only way to go and I believe that free speech is absolutely necessary, however, even good things have their down sides. And the down side these days is that everybody and their uncle spouts off so much policitcally charged nonsense whenever anything happens. We may not vote as much as we should, but we all know how to interpret politically any event that happens. We all know what is really going on in the inner workings of government and inner workings of people's minds. We know that if New Orleans was mostly white, those levees would have been built to withstand a level 5 hurricaine. We know that if the US had signed the Kyoto dealie, that Katrina would have been no more than a sneeze. Blah, blah, blah.

Will a storm ever be just a storm again?

I understand exactly what you mean, flak. But take heart, Dave's forum/board is nothing copmared to some of the stuff I have been reading on other boards/sites.

Case in point:

Quote:

I had no idea how deeply my hate for that man ran. My lack of an interaction, with a * supporter is still haunting me a couple of hours later.

I was on my home and was on the ramp getting off the highway. I saw a mini-van on the side of the road. There was a lady standing next to the van and in her arms she held her child. I can only assume her mini-van had broken down. I don't know, perhaps with so many gad stations being out of gas, she had also run out. I slowed down and started to pull over to offer her a ride. At the very last second I noticed a "W" sticker on the back of her vehicle and I sped up and drove off.

I feel really bad as a human being. That child is not responsible for their parent's belief system. They are innocent and do not deserve to be out in the heat. (It is warm but not so bad that they would even break a sweat) I try not to punish people for what they believe.

On the other hand, so many hateful thoughts went through my head. I wondered how a person could see what was going on in NO and still have one of those awful stickers on their car. How could they support an awful excuse for a human being that has let our country down and is letting Americans die after they have made it through the storm? How can someone be so blind and so stupid?

I thought that if she loves * so much, maybe he would come along and help her the same way he is rescuing all of those poor people in the weather stricken part of our country. Let's see what her hero can do for her.

I never did go back. I was so upset with that sticker and with the fact that someone would support an idiot who is so clearly running our country into the ground.

So why am I writing this? It is not to boast, I really feel bad about passing this child and not picking up their mother. Perhaps it is for a catharsis of sorts? That would be an educated guess. I suppose it is because I feel conflicted and I am writing this to try and sort through what I am feeling. There are two emotional sides, for me, on this incident and neither seems completely right or wrong to me. Even writing this, I am still not able to work through what happened. I feel like I am floating between right and wrong and am unable to grab either side.

Thanks for listening.

So to recap, she left people (including a child) stranded because of the GW bumper sticker on their car. It is also disheartening to read the comments left after this story was posted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4582698

mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:54 pm Post subject:

Quote:

I feel like I am floating between right and wrong and am unable to grab either side.

I'd say she's floating between wrong and really wrong. Or trolling.

desultude

Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 10:13 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

desultude wrote:

I did discuss it, above, in the post that you didn't read before responding.

Yeah, missed that one. I apologize.

Some of the cases you cited are clear cases of cronyism. The Kennedy's are no more excused by me than the Bushes. Bobby was a well educated attorney, I do believe, though. Please don't confuse me with a Democrat- both parties in the States are a huge problem, but this administration is culpible now of huge problems, lies, and extraordinary incompetence coupled with arrogance.

Please don't defend the competence of this man. Yes it is politics as usual- does that make it right? He sat on CNN the other night, acting like he was actually "in charge" of something, and said he didn't know there were people in the Convention Center until Friday, but it had been on CNN continually for days. Yes, this administration has an intelligence problem.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:04 pm Post subject:

desultude wrote:

Please don't defend the competence of this man. Yes it is politics as usual- does that make it right? He sat on CNN the other night, acting like he was actually "in charge" of something, and said he didn't know there were people in the Convention Center until Friday, but it had been on CNN continually for days. Yes, this administration has an intelligence problem.

I would never defend the competence of Bush, or even suggest there was any competence to even measure for that matter. (All administrations have intel problems, though -- when analysis is inconvenient for their policy objectives, they cast it aside.)

In any case, Bush is by far the worst president I've seen in my lifetime.

I just don't think he's antichrist.

desultude

Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:26 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

desultude wrote:

Well, on that we agree. From what I can see, I would say that he is not overly bright or ambitious, arrogant in his ignorance, and lazy as hell. At least JFK and Clinton (and Nixon for that matter) has both intelligence and a shred of dignity, and actually some class.

There is lots of blame to go around, as I have said before, but as the facts surface, this administration has a lot to account for.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe