Pitting Bush forStuff That Isn't Worth Its Own Thread, Early 2006 Edition

[elucidator]

@UncleBeer

…My sole argument, one more time because you still don’t appear to be getting it, is that the incompetence cannot necessarily and automatically laid at the feet of the Bush administration. There are many other entities which shared responsibility for the engineering, design, approval, construction and oversight of these gas-fueld power plants. Goddamn it, man. I can’t put it in any simpler terms…

So where does the buck stop? None of this would have been necessary had we not been forthrightly led straight into the Shitswamp, no? If the Admin that insisted on the necessity of this comic-opera with corpses had not done so, none of this would have happened.

If I run down a little old lady in the crosswalk, and the hospital emergency room screws up, am I thereby relieved of my burden of responsibililty? And do I still get to keep the ten point bonus for the crosswalk?

[World_Eater]

From here…

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11941620/

Bolding mine

He also defiantly defended his warrantless eavesdropping program, and baited Democrats who suggest that he broke the law.

Calling a censure resolution “needless partisanship,” Bush challenged Democrats to go into the November midterm elections in opposition to eavesdropping on suspected terrorists. “They ought to stand up and say, ‘The tools we’re using to protect the American people should not be used,”’ Bush said.

:rolleyes:

I believe protect should be in quotes.

[Voyager]

@UncleBeer

I’ve read the link. And I agree entirely with you (and the author of the IEEE article at that link) that the plan for reconstructing Iraq’s power plants was short-sighted and probably incompetently executed. I have never made a single argument against that. My sole argument, one more time because you still don’t appear to be getting it, is that the incompetence cannot necessarily and automatically laid at the feet of the Bush administration. There are many other entities which shared responsibility for the engineering, design, approval, construction and oversight of these gas-fueld power plants. Goddamn it, man. I can’t put it in any simpler terms.

<Jon Stewart>The buck doesn’t stop anywhere near you people, does it?</Jon Stewart>
Right, you can’t blame them for the initial screw up. You can blame them for not enforcing any kind of accountability. You can blame them when contractors who have ripped us off get more contracts. You can blame them when they refuse to admit anything is seriously wrong, so not major effort is needed to fix it.

A supervisor can’t be blamed for his subordinate’s incompetence - unless the subordinate is continually incompetent without penalty. Any one who wouldn’t demand Rumsfeld’s resignation is an incompetent idiot.

But I’ll admit that electric power is maybe so far down the list of screwups as to not merit major attention at this time. Hardly anyone’s dying from it - except for the people getting electrocuted from the private generators, that is.

[UncleBeer]

@elucidator

So where does the buck stop?

Why ya askin’ me? I dunno. I haven’t sufficiently investigated the root cause of the power plant fiasco. I suppose after someone does that, it’ll become quite obvious where the buck should stop. But from what I can see, it’s too soon to start placing blame. Fuck, we don’t even really know the extent of the problems yet.

[World_Eater]

@Voyager

<Jon Stewart>The buck doesn’t stop anywhere near you people, does it?</Jon Stewart>
Right, you can’t blame them for the initial screw up. You can blame them for not enforcing any kind of accountability. You can blame them when contractors who have ripped us off get more contracts. You can blame them when they refuse to admit anything is seriously wrong, so not major effort is needed to fix it.

Don’t forget that as we march down the road towards Iran, the admin seems destined to make the same mistakes.

Has anyone in the admin even mentioned the need to be careful with Iran intel assessments considering we messed up Iraq? Doubtful.

[El_Cid_Viscoso]

Say, if we’re going to go to the extremes of “pitting” Mr Bush for his incursion into Iraq, shouldn’t we at least be putting Ahmed Chalabi to the pillory? How come this guy isn’t at the business end of a noose by now?

[Voyager]

@El Cid Viscoso

Say, if we’re going to go to the extremes of “pitting” Mr Bush for his incursion into Iraq, shouldn’t we at least be putting Ahmed Chalabi to the pillory? How come this guy isn’t at the business end of a noose by now?

Nah, that guy deserves a spot in the Conmen’s Hall of Fame. Next building over is the Chump’s Hall of Fame, with its new, shiny, Neocon wing.

[RTFirefly]

@UncleBeer

I’m not making your point for you at all. Surely it’s possible for intelligent & dilligent & honest people/agencies to victim(s) of fraud, isn’t it? It sounds to me like you’re saying otherwise - that only persons and institutions which are incompetent can be victims of fraud. That can’t be what you’re saying because it’s patently absurd.

Then what, exactly, did you mean by “nd frankly, given the contract administration environment in Iraq, and the revelations about how much money has gone missing through nefarious intent, that seems a very strong possibility to me.” Sure sounded to me like you were blaming the ease of fraud on the rather lax supervision by those representing the U.S. government in Iraq.

Of course it’s important. Or at least I think so. It’s the only intellectually honest approach.

Then let’s shut the board down right now, OK? Or I guess we can leave MPSIMS open. Because there are very few occasions here where one proves one’s case, beyond the shadow of a doubt, in the minds of the people on the other side of the argument. But that’s what you’re asking for.

[SteveG1]

@Merijeek

Right. So how many of the above are violations or abrogations of your rights?

Nowhere above did you say, “I don’t mind being wiretapped because I’m not a terrorist” or “If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to be afraid of”.

-Joe

I would never ever ever say that, because I just don’t believe it. I have nothing to hide, but I value my privacy all the same. I intend to keep it. We don’t need no stinking police state.

[RTFirefly]

Concerning this kerfluffle with Unc, I’d like to note that when two people of opposite political views are arguing around here, one generally is conceded the option of accepting the other guy’s assertions as facts, for purposes of the debate. One can question them, but one doesn’t have to. So if John Mace, who is unquestionably not a Bush-basher, tells me, “we screwed up the power plant system,” I get to respond by taking him at his word, if I so choose. It’s perfectly reasonable for others to correct any inaccuracies later to get the debate on a more solid footing, but my point is that it’s perfectly reasonable, by normal SDMB standards of debate, for my initial response to be as it was, without any further research required.

Once new facts are introduced that are less favorable to the point I’m making, I need to respond to those, but that’s later. Unc’s saying I needed to investigate on my own before agreeing with John, but that’s not usually expected around here, IME.

[UncleBeer]

@RTFirefly

Concerning this kerfluffle with Unc, I’d like to note that when two people of opposite political views are arguing around here, one generally is conceded the option of accepting the other guy’s assertions as facts, for purposes of the debate. One can question them, but one doesn’t have to. So if John Mace, who is unquestionably not a Bush-basher, tells me, “we screwed up the power plant system,” I get to respond by taking him at his word, if I so choose. It’s perfectly reasonable for others to correct any inaccuracies later to get the debate on a more solid footing, but my point is that it’s perfectly reasonable, by normal SDMB standards of debate, for my initial response to be as it was, without any further research required.

Once new facts are introduced that are less favorable to the point I’m making, I need to respond to those, but that’s later. Unc’s saying I needed to investigate on my own before agreeing with John, but that’s not usually expected around here, IME.

Fair enough, RT. You raise good and valid points. I’m not sure why I responded to your post with such . . . vigor. I’m certainly feeling more than a little apathetic about the whole thing today. I guess maybe I expect to see government wasting vast amounts of money on ill-considered plans and shoddy equipment. I don’t necessarily equate that with the personal incompetence of the chief executive (Heh, unless he’s a Democrat) and not necessarily indicative of any nefarious plan. It’s just that it seems to me stupid shit like this is done every day and blaming Bush for all of it is too easy.

[World_Eater]

@SteveG1

I would never ever ever say that, because I just don’t believe it. I have nothing to hide, but I value my privacy all the same. I intend to keep it. We don’t need no stinking police state.

I was arguing with someone and she pulled the “do no wrong, nothing to hide” chestnut. She of course declined my request to empty her purse contents onto the table.

[rjung]

@elucidator

So where does the buck stop?

Why, Hillary Clinton and Michael Moore, of course.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

Since the title of this thread doesn’t specify George Bush, how about this one from Barbara Bush:

Former first lady Barbara Bush donated an undisclosed amount of money to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund with specific instructions that the money be spent with an educational software company owned by her son Neil.

Even charitable contributions with these fuckers are self-serving. Goddamn - at least it’s clear where W. gets his ethics.

[UncleBeer]

@Hentor the Barbarian

Since the title of this thread doesn’t specify George Bush, how about this one from Barbara Bush:Even charitable contributions with these fuckers are self-serving. Goddamn - at least it’s clear where W. gets his ethics.

Man, that is pathetic.

[rjung]

@UncleBeer

Man, that is pathetic.

Hey, it’s the Bushes; whaddaya expect?