Thursday, September 01, 2005

Waiting for a Leader

Sacrifices may be necessary to make sure that all these things happen in an orderly, efficient way. But this administration has never been one to counsel sacrifice. And nothing about the president's demeanor yesterday - which seemed casual to the point of carelessness - suggested that he understood the depth of the current crisis.

Confidence in the President has so eroded that; even the NY Times has biting remarks at his performance. When will this President put politics aside and forgo the photo-ops and smirks? His arrogance is demoralizing to those millions in the Gulf Coast suffering from this disaster. His promises mean nothing. It is clear that Americans must go it alone without clear and effective leadership.

No, no, no radical right wing, we are not blaming Mr. Bush solely for this natural disaster, we are blaming him for everything else - his and this government's economic incompetence regarding the needed funding to protect New Orleans from this type of tragedy; his delayed response and call to action, with glazed eyes and speech-by-number sound bytes; his lack of understanding and prioritizing the American people, sending National Guardsmen to Iraq when they would have been more effective here on home soil. This removal from responsibility is not the mark of a leader and certainly not presidential. The American work ethic has come to dictate that one is hired with the expectation that he or she will perform the duties to the best of their abilities - attempt to be prompt and responsible, respectful and courteous, willing to admit mistakes and move on only to perform better. Not every job is for every person. In the case of this Administration, we now know that this is true.

The disaster in Louisiana and Mississippi is overwhelming, upsetting, and very real. There is no time for spin. But, does BushCo really care? Note that over 50 percent of residents in this area are black and poor. In fact, the Gulf Coast represents one of the poorer areas in the United States. It is implied that we live in a pay to play society and "those" folks - the ones left behind struggle enough to keep afloat everyday. And now they are wading down Canal Street with nowhere to go and no expectations that they will survive. This is not the America I signed up for...

8 Comments:

At 5:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear bro,

Are you dense? "EVEN the NEW YORK TIMES" is criticizing the president!!!!!!!! ALERT THE MEDIA!

Have you ever read the New York Times in the past 40 years? When is the last time it PRAISED a republican president or even ACCURATELY reported the news? If the NY Times is the most reliable news source you have, I would stop trying to post meaningful commentary on your blog and start educating myself a little about the editorial slant of the New York Times.

 
At 5:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh yeah, and you're stupid.

 
At 5:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Microsoft blogger draws fire for criticising Massachusetts OpenDoc policy
Microsoft Office program manager Brian Jones may have gotten more than he asked for when, in his blog, he attacked the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for moving to the OASIS-backed Open Document file format for ...
It's really nice to find blogs like yours. I hope more and more people like you write a lot of stuffs you are

talking about.

Bulletin Board is a topic that is also nice to discuss. I hope

you can do some Bulletin Board related stuff.

More power to you!

 
At 6:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"even the NY Times has biting remarks at his performance"

might as well say "even michael moore dissed the pres" or "even espn says we should watch more sports" or "even abc says disneyworld is fun"

the point is they are partisan. they have an agenda. nytimes is not news, its propaganda. just lost all your credibility, foo'

 
At 9:41 AM, Blogger JC said...

At least I got the response I needed. The maturity level indicated here tells me that you spend more time worrying about the New York Times, who by the way employs the current jailed Judith Miller, backer of BushCo's ill-conceived war in Iraq, than what is actually happening in New Orleans.

The fact is here, you cannot deal with the truth - the fact that BushCo is a poor leader. The New York Times, Newsweek, Boston Globe, and many major editorials across the country are finally criticizing the President's lack of response. Does this make them "biased?" No, it means they are doing their job.

Your "outrage" over the biased New York Times may be warranted and is your opinion. Fine. But, I consider it a mainstream corporate rag. Period. Sure, there are a few overtly liberal editorial journalists on board, but what of it? When is the last time the full editorial board - during Bush's presidency - has been this blunt with Mr. Bush’s performance? Opposing viewpoints are necessary for all forms of debate. That does not make me trust or not trust the paper any other way.

People seem to be handing out stupidity and credibility critiques lately. I am sorry your emotions are so high. Let's have a real discussion. Stop resorting to the right-wing Michael Moore response.

 
At 9:58 AM, Blogger JC said...

Here is a pretty good critque from The Daily Howler about how the New York Times is incredibly not as partisan as you think: http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh032604.shtml

As I read between the lines and carefully, as Mr. Anonymous would think I do not, it makes me wonder what their agenda really is all about? The Times is framed by your typical radical right wing sources as being this ultra-left wing liberal machine that is out to get you. C'mon! What bogus crap. How can you believe that nonsense when you never read the paper except for a few editorials brought to your attention by the National Review?

 
At 6:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't let them get you down jc. This is a typical desparate reaction from an party in disarray. They resort to your standard FoxNews "YOUR A LIBERAL" response. No coherent dedate is allowed.

Obviously, certian OpEd columns in certain newspapers lean one way.But, the New York Times has been "out of character" lately and has NOT necessarily been particularly harsh, as this latest comment suggests. So, your statement that these previous posters suggest as naive regarding that even the New York Times was blunt does not surprise me. These people think there is some kind of left-wing conspiracy out there, when it is fiction provided by the right-wing.

To bad this people don't actually concentrate on the actual tragedy in New Orleans. Keep up the good work.

Mary
Harrisburg, PA

 
At 7:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mary

Absolutely right! Had I not been gone all week, I would have slapped these two fools days ago. I mean, c'mon, do you really think that the New York Times is ultra liberal. Sure, they may swing left more times than not, but they have been lax with this fool for a president. What we need is more critizism of this administration from the mainstream Media. In the Clinton years, the Times was ruthless. Not so in the last 5 years. Anonymous (x2) seem to think that we should be outraged. It would help if they backed up their arguments with other than "Your stupid."

Wow, what credibility.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 License.