STILL Upset Because of Bush’s “Cronyism”?
I’ll tell you, disagreeing with someone leads to a plethora of bizarre allegations. Now, I apparently have a “methodology.” But, here’s the thing: While I disagree with most of Carol’s politics, I find her a respectable writer who makes her points without (usually) overtly attacking the opposition. Curiously, Carol never attacks MisterE when he takes proof texts, collects them and elicits mis-facts, yet I’m suddenly being labeled a “methologist” when I summarize her ideas through less than complete verbage. Interesting. If my philosophies meshed with hers we wouldn’t even be having this “conversation.”
With that said, let me get back on topic. Cronyism is an integral part of politics. What I find so offsetting about this overt attack on the Bush administration is that there is no consideration of any other causal factor that intermingles with Katrina or any other situation that has birthed a classic Bush mis-step.
Who is Carol – or RyanW – or anyone else for that matter to claim that the individuals chosen by this administration – or any other for that matter – are unfit for their positions? Sure, I agree that situations have been painfully mismanaged, but in a bout of fairness I’d have to pose the following question: If the Clinton administration had been faced with Katrina or 9/11, how would its members have reacted? Fortunately for Clinton (but unfortunately for America), his administration ignored the rising al Qaeda, so dealing with 9/11 was something that was saved for future administrations.
This is not the intro to an anti-Clinton rant, rather it is a question that should be considered and deemed extremely important when exploring the overwhelming fact that America and her leaders had never faced any events remotely calculable to the pain, loss and extreme devastation experienced on 9/11 and following Hurricane Katrina.
Sure, America should have been ready, but how? History shows us just how easy it is to look back and reminisce: Could of, should of, would of. Unfortunately for the Bush administration, this is a sentiment that will forever haunt its members.
In the end, it’s not about the political appointments themselves, rather it is about filling positions with people who are willing, able and capable of completing the job. Show me names and proof showcasing the plethora of people who Bush has placed in power (with evidence from mainstream, unbiased media)…This isn’t a challenge, rather it is out of interest. I’ll be waiting for comments on this.
Now, back to Iraq: What are Carol and company really saying about Iraq? Are they claiming it was an event that was caused purely to benefit Bush’s cronies, or are they simply stating that money has been made from the Iraq conflict? Please advise.