[at-l] Another point of view

[spiriteagle99 at hotmail.com (Jim and/or Ginny Owen)]

~ spooky wrote:

>I'm still waiting for the right to blame all of this on Clinton...

Nope - not ALL of it.  But he gets as big a piece of the blame as Bush - or 
Carter or Bush 1 or Reagan or ---- any other administration for the last 70 
years.  You don't wanta go there.

Ah, hell - as long as I'm here - for Marty and a few others -

I've noticed --- that whenever someone comes up with something like this on 
at-l, there are those whose immediate reaction is to attack the credibility 
of the source --- and ignore the facts.  Don't let it worry you - what it 
means is that they have no reasonable, valid or viable rebuttal to the facts 
so they dismiss them as invalid based on the source.  That doesn't make the 
facts invalid.  It just makes their response --- uh, there's a word for it 
-- lessee - well, maybe I don't wanta go there either.  But it does get 
really laughable sometimes when the only response you get is either silence 
or misdirection.

For Dawg and JimB - for anyone who understands the system, TJ's article 
makes it perfectly clear that the communications problem isn't the Feds, but 
rather the state and local gubmints.  Blanco wants control - and has already 
proved that she can't handle the job.  Nagin wants control and has already 
proved he can't handle the job.  Nagin, for example, failed to follow any 
part of his own hurricane emergency plan and both of them had to be begged 
by Bush to order an evacuation in the first place.  And they're both 
ignorant as to how to deal with the Feds/FEMA.  Does FEMA have problems?  
Maybe so - but FEMA is also constrained by law from providing help that's 
not asked for by the local authorities.  OTOH - there were troops inserted 
on Friday - meaning it took just 3 days from the time the levees broke - NOT 
the week that the media has sometimes bounced around.  If there's confusion 
about who controls those troops, then the blame falls squarely on Blanco 
because while she "may" control the LA Guard, once she asks for National 
Guard troops from other states she has no authority whatever over those 
troops - only the Feds get that authority - by law.  And if she hasn't given 
up control of the LA National Guard to the Feds, then she's causing a lot of 
confusion in the command structure.  And in this situation, that leads to 
more deaths.  It's a "control issue" that has nothing to do with Bush.

Keep in mind that the LA National Guard totals 11,500 troops with 3500 of 
them presently in Iraq.  So where did the other 40,000 troops come from?  
The (Federal) military and other states, of course - and by law, neither 
Nagin nor Blanco have any legal authority or control over them.  Tell me 
again - whose problem is it?

Facts --- don't get them confused with opinion.

Walk softly,
Jim








http://www.spiriteaglehome.com/