What Are Bush's True Motives in Putting Rove "In Charge of NOLA Reconstruction"? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

host · 09-16-2005, 01:23 AM

I have changed the thread title and the introductory comments because of the reaction of those who subsequently posted on this thread.

I am motivated to post at TFP Politics primarily because of a passion that is fueled by outrage at what I observe happening to my country at the hands of a malicious and irresponsible group of elected federal politicians, their appointees, and their supporters.

My contempt for defenders of and apologists for the current political status quo, grows greater as I learn more about the harm I perceive these federal office holders have already done, and are planning to do to in the future.

I will endeavor to suppress the effects of my outrage in comments that I make about my opinions of those who voted for these politicians and who support their agenda. I will try to post here in a way that is more in keeping with the brief, unreferenced and undocumented style favored by the majority of participants on this forum.

Is Karl Rove as "pointman" for reconstruction, beneficial to NOLA's citizenry?

I believe that Rove's mission will be to emphasize appearance over substance in any NOLA reconstruction that he is in charge of, to favorable poll numbers for Bush, while he sees to it that the primary financial beneficiaries are corporations with ties to this administration, the same companies who have been financially favored in post invasion Iraq. Do you think that a reconstruction effort overseen by Rove will benefit the people who actually do the rebuilding work, or who attempt to re-inhabit a "reconstructed" NOLA ?

Quote:

http://magic-city-news.com/article_4625.shtml
Bush: Just Another Looter
By Charles Cutter ( www.cuttersway.com )
Sep 15, 2005, 21:58

George W. Bush may have taken a public relations hit from Hurricane Katrina, but one can rest assured that our

American president is up to the task of managing the storm�s aftermath.

The first item on the agenda? Assign an overseer with the proper credentials for managing the post-storm efforts -

those credentials beginning and ending with loyalty to Mr. Bush. To that end, "Republicans said Karl Rove, the

White House deputy chief of staff and Mr. Bush�s chief political adviser, was in charge of the reconstruction

effort�" (New York Times, 9/15/05).

Second, it will be necessary to create layers of protection between Mr. Bush and criticism of his crisis management

abilities. On Wednesday, the U.S. Senate rejected Hillary Clinton�s (D-NY) proposed independent, bipartisan

committee - using the 9/11 Commission as a template - to investigate the disastrously poor response from the

government in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. As reported by the Associated Press, "Clinton got only 44 votes,

all from Democrats and independent Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont. Fifty-four Republicans all voted

no."............

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/15/na...5cnd-bush.html
Bush to Say U.S. Cannot Do Without New Orleans

By ELISABETH BUMILLER
and RICHARD W. STEVENSON
Published: September 15, 2005

........Republicans said Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff and Mr. Bush's chief political adviser,

was in charge of the reconstruction effort, which reaches across many agencies of government and includes the

direct involvement of Alphonso R. Jackson, secretary of housing and urban development........

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091601488.html
Bush Says Spending Cuts Will Be Needed
Tax Increase Not Part Of His Gulf Relief Plan

By Michael A. Fletcher and Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, September 17, 2005; Page A01

..........Bush has refused to put a price tag on the reconstruction plan, which he outlined in a prime-time speech Thursday night, although members of Congress and others have predicted that it could cost as much as $200 billion. The plan was assembled by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove and Claude Allen, Bush's top domestic policy adviser............

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...601488_pf.html
washingtonpost.com
Bush Says Spending Cuts Will Be Needed
Tax Increase Not Part Of His Gulf Relief Plan

By Michael A. Fletcher and Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, September 17, 2005; A01

......White House aides confirmed that Rove, in his capacity as deputy chief of staff, is helping to lead the Katrina recovery effort. With Rove's name a rallying point for Bush foes, especially after revelations of his role in the unmasking of a CIA operative, Democrats sought to denigrate his involvement........

Lebell · 09-16-2005, 08:34 AM

Two housekeeping issues:

First, this link http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=53236
does not link to the text you have.

Second, this link: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...investigation/
gives the LA Times piece without having to go into the LA Times archive and pay for it.
Also, the LA Times piece you quote has a few extra paragraphs that are not in the Boston Globe piece I found. Perhaps it is just that they are different papers, but otherwise the text matches perfectly.

As to the rest, if you want a concession that politics involves layer upon layer of machinations, then I fully concure. But after reading through every article, I find your premise of some deep connection between Bush and Abramoff to be weak. The strongest arguement, that he replaced the temporary council on Guam is your strongest, but it was done the day after; hardly time to call it a planned response. Also, both parties have close ties to their favorite lobbyists, so the "Close ties" article didn't impress me much.

I think the only thing I've gotten out of that after an hour's worth of reading is that Abramoff is probably a crook.

You certainly haven't supported your inflammatory thread title.

ubertuber · 09-16-2005, 09:13 AM

Host, lest you think people are ignoring you, I'll reply. Your thread title and 1st sentence don't encourage anyone to say anything about your content unless they REALLY agree with you or REALLY disagree with you (meaning they have already made their minds up regardless of what you or others say). You aren't really giving people in the center much room to consider your ideas without first being subjected to seemingly unreasonable judgement and rhetoric.

Frankly, I'm afraid to even fan the flames by writing my thoughts about your articles. I think the fact that before me you had 40 views and 1 reply (between a quarter and eighth of the forum average) indicates that I'm not the only one that feels this way.

Of course, you'll get some people to respond later who won't listen to you, which will work out ok since the people inclined to agree with you in your language choice won't listen to them either. Not much room for disussion there, I'm afraid.

host · 09-16-2005, 11:02 AM

Since the thread opener was "revamped", this post is edited to remove comments and content more relevant to original thread opener and followup comments posted by other members.

pig · 09-16-2005, 11:30 AM

host,

I'm not going to check back on this thread much, so you can reply to this or not. It's essentially irrelevant to me. However, I'd like for you to consider the following. You spend a large amount of time preparing your posts, or at least finding the information and linking it to this forum. I can only assume that in some way you wish to affect a change of consciousness and awareness of what you perceive to be a vast problem of corruption in our government, starting with the people who regularly post to these boards. I tend to agree with some of your positions, although I sometimes feel you reach a bit. That's not important. What is important is the following:

As ubertuber points out, you essentially start out by insulting anyone who reads the post by calling them an intellectually stunted, spineless bastard. You then ask them to read an amount of material equivalent to the first volume of the Encylopedia Brittanica in verbosity. They do this so that you can tell them that they are stupid after they reply. It seems to me that you are highly unlikely to affect any change in awareness when you start off from this point of departure. Depending on your goals for posting these articles to the board, I would like to ask you to reflect on the way in which you present your material. I think it is very important that people think about our government, and question our government's actions and motivations. That said, I hate to see someone with the level of interest you display to essentially place themselves on the sidelines by adopting an approach that is inherently guarranteed to fail in effecting any real positive change.

Best Regards

pan6467 · 09-16-2005, 12:31 PM

All I can say is Bush calls for the country to act together, yet he keeps driving partisanship into the heart, and destroys any chance of working together in a "best for the country" scenario.

Instead he propogates a totally one-sided view and expects everyone to get along with only his way. It's wrong, it's divisive and it's far more destructive than constructive.

A great example is if Rove is put in charge of rebuilding N.O. Excuse me but is there anyone more partisan in this country, more divisive, more one-sided?

Another curious thing is that Bush doesn't explain how we are going to pay for this. $200 Billion but where is the money coming from? We are in a war, he is cutting taxes for the rich, while the middle class people pay more and see wages shrink (due to the price of gas and utilities).

So in the end, Bush does exactly what the supposed conservatives and Neo-Cons say they hate about the Dems. He throws sick amounts of money at the problem. The difference is however, as we saw with Clinton, the Dems may tax a bit more, but we were on the road to balanced budgets and a lower deficit.

With Bush, we have a rich minority paying less of their net worth, a huge majority paying theirs, and a defiict that is growing into deadly territory that people and countries who do not like us are buying up faster and faster. Bush's deficit spending will someday come due and we'll be paying for this in ways that we can't imagine today.

What N.O. needs and what we all need as a country is fairness and a bipartisan, independant study of how to effectively clean this tragedy up, in the best but least expensive ways. The jobs will be there, the economy will boom in that area.... so the local and state taxes should increase and thus eventually take more of the burden on the nation as a whole. However, when the president is throwing figures out already and in government "proposed" spending figures are almost always lower and true spending is more costlier.

Another point of interest will be who gets the jobs. Will they all have GOP connections, will it be open bidding, closed bidding, will unionized labor be allowed, quota companies, minimums on minority employee %ages etc.?

I am not trying to turn this into partisanship or even ploitical.... neither belongs in this, however, how can anyone who is political not be partisan when the president himslef, is making this extremely partisan and thumbing his nose at half the country, by his actions?

stevo · 09-16-2005, 12:41 PM

pan, Tax tevenues were UP last year. What, how can tax revenues go up when taxes are cut? The sky must be falling.

Host, *yawn*

have a nice weekend y'all. I'll be fishing.

Lebell · 09-16-2005, 01:52 PM

Host,

Here is the link for the first article.

http://onlinejournal.com/Special_Rep...05leopold.html

Honestly, I don't have the time you obviously have to spend another hour or so sifting through the relevence of the information you have posted.

The truth is you put a lot of time and energy into your posts...but none into the TFP community. Perhaps if I felt you actually cared about TFP instead of making TFP your soapbox, I would listen more to you.

Have a good day.

Marvelous Marv · 09-18-2005, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo

pan, Tax tevenues were UP last year. What, how can tax revenues go up when taxes are cut? The sky must be falling.

Host, *yawn*

have a nice weekend y'all. I'll be fishing.

Here's where I was:

And here's where my ball wound up once. (It was Bush's fault.)

I wouldn't normally do the above, but I don't foresee a lengthy run for this thread. Funny how starting one by insulting the intended audience can have that effect.

analog · 09-19-2005, 04:44 PM

**Mod Note: Yeah... I can see this getting locked in about 3 more posts' time... Now, the waiting game begins...

Also, I'd normally remove something like what marvelous marv posted, but seems pretty on-par (pun intended) for the thread.**

pan6467 · 09-19-2005, 11:45 PM

Were the last 2 sarcastic and very childish comments truly necessary in a dead but truly good debate thread?

pig · 09-20-2005, 06:48 AM

host,

I like the new opening. I personally think you should express your contempt for the government openly and freely - I just think you're not going to get much response from other TFP members when you also express open contempt for them. I don't think the majority of people in the United States, or on this board, are out to "ruin America," as I think you would posit that their actions / beliefs naturally imply. What I find interesting in these threads is how people with obstensibly the same fundamental goals (if you asked them - life, liberty, etc would come up) can come to such divergent positions. That said...

I don't think it's any surprise that Rove is involved in this, although I am a little surprised that the Administration would make that public - given the recent issues surrounding the credentials of Brown. I personally think that it can be guarranteed that large corporations will make good money off this reconstruction effort, if you have a government in place that believes in a version of deficit spending / trickle down economics. I also believe that you can bet that there will be a large amount of superficial clean up, which isn't limited to this administration but I think has become a fundamental part of our culture. Lack of craftsmanship - throw away culture, etc. In this case, you'd better believe that the administration will be using some of this for damage control. If nothing else, mid-term elections are coming up.

In short, yes I'm sure that the administration will take advantage of this situation as much as they can, and recover as much damage control as possible. Professional politicians will be professional politicians.

edit a last note host, I don't think anyone is taking umbrage with the amount of sources you post. Well, I know that people have taken it up, but I don't think the majority of the responses here about your original posting style were keying on that aspect. I think it was more your tone in the OP.

host · 09-21-2005, 01:32 AM

As I feared.....but at least it's already being reported. Fascinating "twist" that the Bush white house insider, David Safavian, who is under indictment is married to the "chief counsel for oversight and investigations on the House Government Reform Committee, which is responsible for overseeing government procurement and is, among other things, expected to conduct the Congressional investigation into missteps after Hurricane Katrina.""

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...000753_pf.html
Scandal Visits the White House

By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonopost.com
Tuesday, September 20, 2005; 12:24 PM

The Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal reached into the White House yesterday, picking off President Bush's top procurement official -- who just barely had time to resign before being arrested.

The federal charges against David Safavian stem from his tenure as chief of staff of the General Services Administration, predating his arrival at the White House a year ago. But his arrest nonetheless draws renewed attention to the ongoing corruption and influence-peddling inquiry swirling around Abramoff, a lobbyist well known for his connections to conservative Republicans in the White House and Congress.

And for a White House so desperate to build public confidence in its ability to respond to the Gulf Coast disaster, it doesn't exactly help that the man who up until Friday was overseeing contracting policy for the multi-billion dollar relief effort has now been charged with lying and obstructing a criminal investigation.

R. Jeffrey Smith and Susan Schmidt write in The Washington Post: "The Bush administration's top federal procurement official resigned Friday and was arrested yesterday, accused of lying and obstructing a criminal investigation into Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff's dealings with the federal government. It was the first criminal complaint filed against a government official in the ongoing corruption probe related to Abramoff's activities in Washington.

"The complaint, filed by the FBI, alleges that David H. Safavian, 38, a White House procurement official involved until last week in Hurricane Katrina relief efforts, made repeated false statements to government officials and investigators about a golf trip with Abramoff to Scotland in 2002."

Philip Shenon and Anne E. Kornblut write in the New York Times: "The White House said in a statement that Mr. Safavian had resigned on Friday and that 'we, of course, will cooperate fully with the Justice Department in this investigation.' A spokesman said the White House would have no further comment on the arrest. . . .

"His wife, Jennifer Safavian, is chief counsel for oversight and investigations on the House Government Reform Committee, which is responsible for overseeing government procurement and is, among other things, expected to conduct the Congressional investigation into missteps after Hurricane Katrina."

Shenon and Kornblut note: "The Justice Department did not reveal details of Mr. Safavian's arrest, including where it occurred. The department also did not say why the criminal charges were brought directly by prosecutors, rather than by the Washington grand jury investigating Mr. Abramoff. The Justice Department often bypasses a grand jury when a criminal case is brought together hurriedly or when there is fear that a defendant may try to flee."

Just recently, Safavian was the administration's point man when it came to one of the controversial measures in the White House's recent $51.8 billion supplemental aid request: The boosting from $15,000 to $250,000 of the upper limit for purchases made with government-issued credit cards. Critics said the change will allow card holders to circumvent important measures to curb fraud and cronyism............

raveneye · 09-21-2005, 04:36 AM

Safavian -- nice example of why we need to have an unbiased judiciary.

n0nsensical · 09-21-2005, 06:31 AM

What's the over/under on how long it takes for host to get banned these days?

Anyway, I'm sure Bush's motives are to "do what's right for 'Merica and pray that God will rebuild this fine city" or something or other.

Lebell · 09-21-2005, 07:02 AM

The arrest was announced by the person leading the investigation into Safavian. That person is the assistant AG Alice S. Fisher, who is a Bush recess appointee.

It sounds to me like the system is working.

ubertuber · 09-21-2005, 07:52 AM

The new original post - aren't the two washington post articles the same, except the second one has no pictures?

I find it most curious that despite Rove's presence there hasn't been more talk about his role. Other than Host's articles which basically state in the middle paragraphs that Rove will be helping to oversee reconstruction, I haven't seen much mention of his role. Frankly, I found the talk in the first article of a "reconstruction czar" more compelling - and wondered what it could mean in light of Rove's current role.

Finally, from the Washington Post article Host posted, your moment of zen:

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Washington Post

"There's no shortage of places where the federal government can tighten its belt to pay the cost of the hurricane recovery effort," said Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.). "Let's face it, after years of uninterrupted growth, the federal government is bloated." Other Republicans have contradicted that assertion, including House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), who has said "there is no appreciable fat in the federal budget."

host · 09-27-2005, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lebell

Two housekeeping issues:

First, this link http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=53236
does not link to the text you have.

Second, this link: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...investigation/
gives the LA Times piece without having to go into the LA Times archive and pay for it.
Also, the LA Times piece you quote has a few extra paragraphs that are not in the Boston Globe piece I found. Perhaps it is just that they are different papers, but otherwise the text matches perfectly.

As to the rest, if you want a concession that politics involves layer upon layer of machinations, then I fully concure. But after reading through every article, I find your premise of some deep connection between Bush and Abramoff to be weak. The strongest arguement, that he replaced the temporary council on Guam is your strongest, but it was done the day after; hardly time to call it a planned response. Also, both parties have close ties to their favorite lobbyists, so the "Close ties" article didn't impress me much.

I think the only thing I've gotten out of that after an hour's worth of reading is that Abramoff is probably a crook.

You certainly haven't supported your inflammatory thread title.

These two nwo reports are not good news for Abramoff, and perhaps for Delay, Bush, Rove, Abramoff, or Norquist, either.....

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...700980_pf.html
washingtonpost.com
Arrests Made in Case Connected to Abramoff
Three Men Allegedly Killed 'Gus' Boulis, Who Sold A Casino Cruise Line to the Embattled Washington Lobbyist

By James V. Grimaldi and Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, September 27, 2005; 2:57 PM

Fort Lauderdale police have arrested three men on murder and conspiracy charges in the 2001 gangland-style killing of a South Florida businessman who sold a casino cruise line to Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff, authorities said today.

Police picked up Anthony Moscatiello, 67, Anthony Ferrari, 48, and James Fiorillo, 28, last night and this morning in connection with the ambush slaying of Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis, who was killed in Fort Lauderdale on Feb. 6, 2001.

Boulis had sold SunCruz Casinos to Abramoff and a partner, Adam Kidan, in 2000 at a time when Abramoff was one of Washington's most powerful lobbyists. Abramoff and Kidan were indicted last month on charges of wire fraud in connection with the purchase of the company. Moscatiello, known to police as a bookkeeper to New York's Gambino crime family, was brought in as consultant by Kidan when he and Abramoff took control of SunCruz. Ferrari is a business associate of Moscatiello.

Abramoff is at the center of a federal investigation into lobbying for Indian tribes and influence-peddling in Washington. Abramoff used contacts with Republican Reps. Tom DeLay (Tex.) and Robert W. Ney (Ohio) and members of their staffs as he worked to land the SunCruz deal, interviews and court records show.

Ney twice placed comments in the Congressional Record at key points while Abramoff and Kidan were wrangling with Boulis over the purchase and control of the company. Ney first sharply criticized Boulis and later praised the new ownership under Kidan. Ney later said he was duped into making the comments by an Abramoff aide.

Also during the negotiations, Abramoff brought a lender he was trying to impress to hobnob with DeLay in Abramoff's FedEx Field skybox at a Redskins-Cowboys game. DeLay has said he did not remember meeting the lender.

Fort Lauderdale homicide detectives say they have been interested in interviewing Abramoff for years, but he has repeatedly begged off, citing scheduling difficulties..........

The report above involves the same players who Abramoff was indicted with
on Aug. 12.....

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/27/politics/27lobby.html
Demotion of a Prosecutor Is Investigated

By PHILIP SHENON
Published: September 27, 2005

WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 - The Justice Department's inspector general and the F.B.I. are looking into the demotion of a veteran federal prosecutor whose reassignment nearly three years ago shut down a criminal investigation of the Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff, current and former department officials report.

They said investigators had questioned whether the demotion of the prosecutor, Frederick A. Black, in November 2002 was related to his alert to Justice Department officials days earlier that he was investigating Mr. Abramoff. The lobbyist is a major Republican Party fund-raiser and a close friend of several Congressional leaders.

Colleagues said the demotion of Mr. Black, the acting United States attorney in Guam, and a subsequent order barring him from pursuing public corruption cases brought an end to his inquiry into Mr. Abramoff's lobbying work for some Guam judges.

Colleagues of Mr. Black, who had run the federal prosecutor's office in Guam for 12 years, spoke on condition of anonymity because of Justice Department rules that bar employees from talking to reporters. They said F.B.I. agents questioned several people in Guam and Washington this summer about whether Mr. Abramoff or his friends in the Bush administration had pushed for Mr. Black's removal. Mr. Abramoff's internal e-mail messages show that he boasted to clients about what he described as his close ties to John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, and others at the department..........

........The Los Angeles Times and news organizations in Guam have reported on questions about the circumstances of Mr. Black's demotion. The recent inquiries by the F.B.I. and by the Justice Department's inspector general had not been previously reported; nor had Mr. Black's contacts in November 2002 with the department's public integrity section about his investigation of Mr. Abramoff........

.......Colleagues said they recalled that Mr. Black was distressed when he was notified by the department in November 2002 that he was being replaced.

The announcement came only days after Mr. Black had notified the department's public integrity division in Washington, by telephone and e-mail communication, that he had opened a criminal investigation into Mr. Abramoff's lobbying activities for the Guam judges, the colleague said. The judges had sought Mr. Abramoff's help in blocking a bill in Congress to restructure the island's courts.

The colleagues said that Mr. Black was also surprised when his newly arrived bosses in Guam blocked him from involvement in public corruption cases in 2003. Justice Department officials said Mr. Black was asked instead to focus on terrorism investigations, which had taken on new emphasis after the Sept. 11 attacks.

"Whatever the motivation in replacing Fred, his demotion meant that the investigation of Abramoff died," said a former colleague in Guam.

The Justice Department's public integrity section is responsible for cases involving government corruption. It is now overseeing the larger investigation of Mr. Abramoff in Washington...........

As Texas Governor, in 1997, Bush wrote a letter on Abramoff's behalf to the government of the Marianas, in support of a school vouchers program.

powerclown · 09-27-2005, 12:52 PM

You'll like this one, host.

--

Today, the editors at the NYT are "appending" one of their articles detailing how lucrative Katrina rebuilding contracts are going to Bush cronies.

This was the original article, which had this to say about Bush Crony, Joe Allbaugh:

Quote:

Already, questions have been raised about the political connections of two major contractors - the Shaw Group and Kellogg, Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton - that have been represented by the lobbyist Joe M. Allbaugh, President Bush's former campaign manager and a former leader of FEMA.

Here is their backpedaling, updated "revision" of their above article:

Quote:

A front-page article yesterday reported on the awarding of billions of dollars in federal contracts to help rebuild the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina. The article said many contracts had been awarded without bidding or with limited competition, and it cited two major contractors whose political connections have already raised questions among government officials about the potential for favoritism or abuse.

In naming these contractors - the Shaw Group and Kellogg, Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton - the article noted that they have been represented by the lobbyist Joe M. Allbaugh, President Bush's former campaign manager and a former leader of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The article should have carried a response from Mr. Allbaugh, or restated a position he expressed in an earlier article in The Times: that he does not help any of his clients secure federal contracts, and has not done so in this case for Shaw or Kellogg.

So, Bravo to the NYT for calling out Allbaugh as a Bush crony. Job well done.

But wait! What is this?

The Head of the Shaw Group is who? Jim Bernard?
You mean, the same Jim Bernard who is, in fact, the Chairman of the Louisiana Democratic Party?

Democratic Cronyism. Who knew?

host · 09-27-2005, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

You'll like this one, host.

--

Today, the editors at the NYT are "appending" one of their articles detailing how lucrative Katrina rebuilding contracts are going to Bush cronies.

This was the original article, which had this to say about Bush Crony, Joe Allbaugh:Here is their backpedaling, updated "revision" of their above article:

So, Bravo to the NYT for calling out Allbaugh as a Bush crony. Job well done.

But wait! What is this?

The Head of the Shaw Group is who? Jim Bernard?
You mean, the same Jim Bernard who is, in fact, the Chairman of the Louisiana Democratic Party?

Democratic Cronyism. Who knew?

Sorry, powerclown, that "Democratic Cronyism. Who knew?", 'dog"....won't hunt. Republicans control the federal executive branch, both houses of congress, and are responsible for all of the regulatory agency and cabinet level political appointments, and for the awarding of FEMA and Iraq "reconstruction" contracts, and there is this......

Quote:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/pr...106310,00.html
Sunday, Sep. 18, 2005
How to Spend (Almost) $1 Billion A Day
The President promises a massive rebuilding effort with no concrete numbers--and no tax cuts. While Congress grumbles about how to pay for it, the issue on the ground is: Who gets the cash?
By DANIEL EISENBERG

.........Most of the major Katrina contracts doled out so far have been for temporary housing, and they have gone, by and large, to companies with strong ties to the Bush Administration, including Bechtel, Fluor and the Shaw Group, which recently built a helicopter pad for Vice President Dick Cheney's home in Washington. A $3 billion engineering-and-consulting behemoth that has equally close connections to the Louisiana Democratic Party, the Shaw Group, based in Baton Rouge, La., counts former Bush campaign manager Joe Allbaugh as one of its lobbyists in Washington and has scored two separate $100 million Katrina-related contracts--one to help the Army Corps of Engineers pump water out of New Orleans and another to help FEMA provide temporary housing. Soon after the deals were announced, Shaw's struggling stock soared from $16 to $24 a share.................

"Allbaugh and the companies deny he had anything to do with their contracts. "Anyone who says otherwise is making it up," Allbaugh told NEWSWEEK. (Allbaugh does, though, admit to contacting White House chief of staff Andrew Card to offer Katrina aid and to advising Shaw on how to set up its hurricane response team.) "

Quote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9379239/
Cash and 'Cat 5' Chaos
The gold rush: Contractors and prospectors are flooding the Gulf Coast to grab their piece of the biggest reconstruction ever. If only FEMA could stop fumbling.

By Keith Naughton and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek

Sept. 26, 2005 issue

............After the deluge, the Gulf Coast is being overwhelmed again. But this time it's with waves of contractors, prospectors and speculators looking to cash in on what President Bush calls "one of the largest reconstruction efforts the world has ever seen." The tsunami of spending, already budgeted at $62 billion, could top $200 billion—what the U.S. has spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. And then as now, those mopping up first are the politically well connected: Fluor, Bechtel and the Shaw Group, which each scored $100 million no-bid contracts before the flood waters began to recede. (Halliburton is benefiting from an existing $500 million contract to repair naval bases.) That has Democrats and Republicans howling over potential abuse. Even the president acknowledged the possibility of financial evil-doing when he dispatched inspectors to the Gulf Coast to monitor the money. That gesture, however, hasn't prevented accusations of cronyism, especially given that the president's former campaign manager Joe Allbaugh is a paid consultant to Shaw and Halliburton. Allbaugh and the companies deny he had anything to do with their contracts. "Anyone who says otherwise is making it up," Allbaugh told NEWSWEEK. (Allbaugh does, though, admit to contacting White House chief of staff Andrew Card to offer Katrina aid and to advising Shaw on how to set up its hurricane response team.) Adding to the controversy: The SEC is investigating Shaw for possible accounting irregularities, NEWSWEEK has learned. "Shaw has fully cooperated with the SEC," said company spokesman Chris Sammons. "There is no reason to believe that the informal inquiry will go further."....................

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...702385_pf.html
washingtonpost.com
Former FEMA Chief Is at Work on Gulf Coast
Lobbyist Allbaugh Gives Clients Help

By Thomas B. Edsall
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 8, 2005; A27

During his two years as director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency during President Bush's first term, Joe M. Allbaugh traveled to Louisiana for a series of disasters, from tropical storms Allison and Isidore to Hurricane Lili.

Yesterday, Allbaugh, now head of his own Washington lobbying and consulting firm, was in Baton Rouge, La., helping his clients get business from perhaps the worst natural disaster in the nation's history.

Allbaugh said he was there "just trying to lend my shoulder to the wheel, trying to coordinate some private-sector support that the government always asks for." In the case of one client, UltraStrip Systems Inc., a Florida company, Allbaugh said he persuaded "them down here" to present the case for a water filtration system.

"I'll tell them, 'Here are the list of entities [that might buy the system] that are in town, here is where they are -- go to it.' "

Allbaugh said he advises clients on how to present their product or service to government agencies. "I tell them how to best craft their pitch, to craft their technical expertise so everybody knows exactly what they do."

He does not personally approach any government agencies about contracts, he said. "I don't do government contracts," Allbaugh asserted in a telephone interview.

After leaving FEMA in March 2003, Allbaugh, who managed the 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign, founded Allbaugh Co., a lobbying-consulting firm with many clients in the disaster-relief business.

Among those clients are: the KBR division of Haliburton; TruePosition, a manufacturer of wireless location products, services and devices; the Shaw Group, a provider of engineering, design, construction, and maintenance services to government and the private sector; and UltraStrip, which is marketing the first water filtration system approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.

The firm's Web site quotes Allbaugh: "I carry pictures of close friends who died in the September 11th terrorist attacks as a constant reminder of what we lost that day. It's my personal commitment to always honor their memory by working to protect this nation. I'm dedicated to helping private industry meet the homeland security challenge."

The company, according to the Web site, "develops integrated business management campaigns that create new opportunities, expand competitive advantage and guide our clients through the federal procurement process."

In Baton Rouge, Allbaugh may run into another former FEMA director, James Lee Witt, who served in the Clinton administration and has been hired by Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D) as a consultant.

In 2001, Witt founded James Lee Witt Associates, a crisis- and emergency-management consulting firm in Washington. Its clients include Nextel Communications, Whelen Engineering Co. Inc., and the Harris Corp.

"Being able to arrange an audience with influential decision makers at the highest levels is the stock in trade in Washington and a privilege James Lee Witt and his team are proud to have and one not taken for granted," the Witt firm boasts on its Web site.

Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and the creation of the Homeland Security Department, disaster relief has become big business in Washington. On the U.S. Senate lobby-registration site, there are roughly 240 businesses and lobbyists seeking to influence contracting and policies related to disaster relief. Few of them, however, have Allbaugh's experience or can advertise their close connections to Bush..............

powerclown, aren't you wavering in your support of Bush and his administration's policies and performance, even a little, at this point? This time, it is different....the deficit spending, the pre-emptive war that has tanked Bush's approval ratings, the hubris...lack of accountability due to the intentional lapse of the special prosecutor statute, that used to be the legal mechanism to "hound" Nixon, Reagan, and lastly, Clinton......no ability by any federal democratic party affiliated legislator to hold an investigative hearing without permission....which definitely won't be forthcoiming, from any republican congressional or senate committee or sub-committee chariman. Your president has got it all, powerclown, from the standpoint of political power, and observe what he has done with it, with us, with our financial security, with the people of NOLA, with the people of Iraq, with career CIA staffers, and perhaps, saddest, with and two our own troops. Lindie England got a three year prison sentence today, and we just passed 1900 dead troops in Iraq.

I work hard here to seem like I know what I'm talking about, powerclown. You keep me "on my toes" with your posts. I just want to know if any development or political poll result ever causes your support of Bush and his republican legislative majority leaders, to waiver.

powerclown · 09-28-2005, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

powerclown, aren't you wavering in your support of Bush and his administration's policies and performance, even a little, at this point?

No, sir. Bush still has my support. I still believe invading Iraq was the right thing to do. Hussein's Iraq stood as a beacon of Arab radicalism towards the US, not to mention how he destroyed the country and the hopes of everyone in it. He was hostile to neighboring countries, and was a main source of instability throughout this important part of the world. The entire Middle East is in desperate need of reform and stability, as you must know, and Hussein was standing in the way of progress. I believe in the reformation/democratization of Iraq; the ramifications are exciting, and I credit Bush with staying the course through the firestorm. People call him a warmonger, but I don't believe this is accurate. There are important geo-political issues at stake, and I agree with the way he is handling them.

I'm not as enthusiastic about his associations with the extremely conservative religious groups here in the States. Yet, for all his public support of them, I think it is more an issue of political expediency over religious kinship. This is just a feeling I have, probably not provable in any objective way, although having Karl Rove in his corner might have something to do with this perception.

Bush has his faults, but I think that in the end, he's doing whats best for the country, long-term.

stevo · 09-29-2005, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

No, sir. Bush still has my support. I still believe invading Iraq was the right thing to do. Hussein's Iraq stood as a beacon of Arab radicalism towards the US, not to mention how he destroyed the country and the hopes of everyone in it. He was hostile to neighboring countries, and was a main source of instability throughout this important part of the world. The entire Middle East is in desperate need of reform and stability, as you must know, and Hussein was standing in the way of progress. I believe in the reformation/democratization of Iraq; the ramifications are exciting, and I credit Bush with staying the course through the firestorm. People call him a warmonger, but I don't believe this is accurate. There are important geo-political issues at stake, and I agree with the way he is handling them.

I'm not as enthusiastic about his associations with the extremely conservative religious groups here in the States. Yet, for all his public support of them, I think it is more an issue of political expediency over religious kinship. This is just a feeling I have, probably not provable in any objective way, although having Karl Rove in his corner might have something to do with this perception.

Bush has his faults, but I think that in the end, he's doing whats best for the country, long-term.

But you don't have any articles to back up your position. Don't you know your opinions are unsubstantiated unless you can find a piece that echoes your views? - but make sure it doesn't remotely sound like the talking points memo you get on your doorstep each morning or you will be ridiculed.

Gatorade Frost · 09-29-2005, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo

But you don't have any articles to back up your position. Don't you know your opinions are unsubstantiated unless you can find a piece that echoes your views? - but make sure it doesn't remotely sound like the talking points memo you get on your doorstep each morning or you will be ridiculed.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not?

roachboy · 09-29-2005, 09:01 AM

i assume that stevo's remark fits into a long stream of such remarks from him directed at host--it is clear that he, like most of the conservatives who float about here, would prefer that host go away--but since he, again like most of the conservatives who float about here, in the main has nothing of substance to say to counter the content of host's arguments---but would nonetheless prefer that host go away---derision seems the logical alternative.
it helps to keep the elementary school playground feel to this place going.
the idea that "debate" here involving this particular type of conservative is carried on at the level of idiot children is of course the most attractive feature of the politics forum.
it has been really helping me think alot about the implications of the phrase "waste of time" with reference to it.

smooth · 09-29-2005, 10:00 AM

I wondered how long it would take you to shift away from your previous style of commentary.

powerclown · 09-29-2005, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo

But you don't have any articles to back up your position. Don't you know your opinions are unsubstantiated unless you can find a piece that echoes your views? - but make sure it doesn't remotely sound like the talking points memo you get on your doorstep each morning or you will be ridiculed.

Hehe, yes these are just my own opinions, not trying to prove anything...no reference necessary I hope.

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Sorry, powerclown, that "Democratic Cronyism. Who knew?", 'dog"....won't hunt. Republicans control the federal executive branch, both houses of congress, and are responsible for all of the regulatory agency and cabinet level political appointments, and for the awarding of FEMA and Iraq "reconstruction" contracts, and there is this......

There's a word for this. My thoughts turn to a certain river that runs though Egypt. Rhymes with "trial".

stevo · 09-29-2005, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

i assume that stevo's remark fits into a long stream of such remarks from him directed at host--it is clear that he, like most of the conservatives who float about here, would prefer that host go away--but since he, again like most of the conservatives who float about here, in the main has nothing of substance to say to counter the content of host's arguments---but would nonetheless prefer that host go away---derision seems the logical alternative.
it helps to keep the elementary school playground feel to this place going.
the idea that "debate" here involving this particular type of conservative is carried on at the level of idiot children is of course the most attractive feature of the politics forum.
it has been really helping me think alot about the implications of the phrase "waste of time" with reference to it.

Nah, I don't prefer that host go away. I've grown accustomed to his posts and the debates that ensue - whether I contribute or not. Plus its a big help as I waste my time.

Elphaba · 09-29-2005, 07:30 PM

Host asked an honest question, and PowerClown answered honestly. I appreciate both the question and the answer. The rest? Eh, not much. If there is still a topic to be discussed here, I would like to get back to it.

09-16-2005, 08:34 AM	#2 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Two housekeeping issues: First, this link http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=53236 does not link to the text you have. Second, this link: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...investigation/ gives the LA Times piece without having to go into the LA Times archive and pay for it. Also, the LA Times piece you quote has a few extra paragraphs that are not in the Boston Globe piece I found. Perhaps it is just that they are different papers, but otherwise the text matches perfectly. As to the rest, if you want a concession that politics involves layer upon layer of machinations, then I fully concure. But after reading through every article, I find your premise of some deep connection between Bush and Abramoff to be weak. The strongest arguement, that he replaced the temporary council on Guam is your strongest, but it was done the day after; hardly time to call it a planned response. Also, both parties have close ties to their favorite lobbyists, so the "Close ties" article didn't impress me much. I think the only thing I've gotten out of that after an hour's worth of reading is that Abramoff is probably a crook. You certainly haven't supported your inflammatory thread title. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

09-16-2005, 09:13 AM	#3 (permalink)
ubertuber spudly Location: Ellay	Host, lest you think people are ignoring you, I'll reply. Your thread title and 1st sentence don't encourage anyone to say anything about your content unless they REALLY agree with you or REALLY disagree with you (meaning they have already made their minds up regardless of what you or others say). You aren't really giving people in the center much room to consider your ideas without first being subjected to seemingly unreasonable judgement and rhetoric. Frankly, I'm afraid to even fan the flames by writing my thoughts about your articles. I think the fact that before me you had 40 views and 1 reply (between a quarter and eighth of the forum average) indicates that I'm not the only one that feels this way. Of course, you'll get some people to respond later who won't listen to you, which will work out ok since the people inclined to agree with you in your language choice won't listen to them either. Not much room for disussion there, I'm afraid. __________________ Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

09-16-2005, 11:02 AM	#4 (permalink)
host Banned	Since the thread opener was "revamped", this post is edited to remove comments and content more relevant to original thread opener and followup comments posted by other members. Last edited by host; 09-19-2005 at 09:35 PM..

09-16-2005, 11:30 AM	#5 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	host, I'm not going to check back on this thread much, so you can reply to this or not. It's essentially irrelevant to me. However, I'd like for you to consider the following. You spend a large amount of time preparing your posts, or at least finding the information and linking it to this forum. I can only assume that in some way you wish to affect a change of consciousness and awareness of what you perceive to be a vast problem of corruption in our government, starting with the people who regularly post to these boards. I tend to agree with some of your positions, although I sometimes feel you reach a bit. That's not important. What is important is the following: As ubertuber points out, you essentially start out by insulting anyone who reads the post by calling them an intellectually stunted, spineless bastard. You then ask them to read an amount of material equivalent to the first volume of the Encylopedia Brittanica in verbosity. They do this so that you can tell them that they are stupid after they reply. It seems to me that you are highly unlikely to affect any change in awareness when you start off from this point of departure. Depending on your goals for posting these articles to the board, I would like to ask you to reflect on the way in which you present your material. I think it is very important that people think about our government, and question our government's actions and motivations. That said, I hate to see someone with the level of interest you display to essentially place themselves on the sidelines by adopting an approach that is inherently guarranteed to fail in effecting any real positive change. Best Regards __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

09-16-2005, 12:31 PM	#6 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	All I can say is Bush calls for the country to act together, yet he keeps driving partisanship into the heart, and destroys any chance of working together in a "best for the country" scenario. Instead he propogates a totally one-sided view and expects everyone to get along with only his way. It's wrong, it's divisive and it's far more destructive than constructive. A great example is if Rove is put in charge of rebuilding N.O. Excuse me but is there anyone more partisan in this country, more divisive, more one-sided? Another curious thing is that Bush doesn't explain how we are going to pay for this. $200 Billion but where is the money coming from? We are in a war, he is cutting taxes for the rich, while the middle class people pay more and see wages shrink (due to the price of gas and utilities). So in the end, Bush does exactly what the supposed conservatives and Neo-Cons say they hate about the Dems. He throws sick amounts of money at the problem. The difference is however, as we saw with Clinton, the Dems may tax a bit more, but we were on the road to balanced budgets and a lower deficit. With Bush, we have a rich minority paying less of their net worth, a huge majority paying theirs, and a defiict that is growing into deadly territory that people and countries who do not like us are buying up faster and faster. Bush's deficit spending will someday come due and we'll be paying for this in ways that we can't imagine today. What N.O. needs and what we all need as a country is fairness and a bipartisan, independant study of how to effectively clean this tragedy up, in the best but least expensive ways. The jobs will be there, the economy will boom in that area.... so the local and state taxes should increase and thus eventually take more of the burden on the nation as a whole. However, when the president is throwing figures out already and in government "proposed" spending figures are almost always lower and true spending is more costlier. Another point of interest will be who gets the jobs. Will they all have GOP connections, will it be open bidding, closed bidding, will unionized labor be allowed, quota companies, minimums on minority employee %ages etc.? I am not trying to turn this into partisanship or even ploitical.... neither belongs in this, however, how can anyone who is political not be partisan when the president himslef, is making this extremely partisan and thumbing his nose at half the country, by his actions? __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

09-16-2005, 12:41 PM	#7 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	pan, Tax tevenues were UP last year. What, how can tax revenues go up when taxes are cut? The sky must be falling. Host, yawn have a nice weekend y'all. I'll be fishing. __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

09-16-2005, 01:52 PM	#8 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Host, Here is the link for the first article. http://onlinejournal.com/Special_Rep...05leopold.html Honestly, I don't have the time you obviously have to spend another hour or so sifting through the relevence of the information you have posted. The truth is you put a lot of time and energy into your posts...but none into the TFP community. Perhaps if I felt you actually cared about TFP instead of making TFP your soapbox, I would listen more to you. Have a good day. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

09-19-2005, 04:44 PM	#10 (permalink)
analog Banned	Mod Note: Yeah... I can see this getting locked in about 3 more posts' time... Now, the waiting game begins... Also, I'd normally remove something like what marvelous marv posted, but seems pretty on-par (pun intended) for the thread. Last edited by analog; 09-19-2005 at 04:49 PM..

09-19-2005, 11:45 PM	#11 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	Were the last 2 sarcastic and very childish comments truly necessary in a dead but truly good debate thread? __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

09-20-2005, 06:48 AM	#12 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	host, I like the new opening. I personally think you should express your contempt for the government openly and freely - I just think you're not going to get much response from other TFP members when you also express open contempt for them. I don't think the majority of people in the United States, or on this board, are out to "ruin America," as I think you would posit that their actions / beliefs naturally imply. What I find interesting in these threads is how people with obstensibly the same fundamental goals (if you asked them - life, liberty, etc would come up) can come to such divergent positions. That said... I don't think it's any surprise that Rove is involved in this, although I am a little surprised that the Administration would make that public - given the recent issues surrounding the credentials of Brown. I personally think that it can be guarranteed that large corporations will make good money off this reconstruction effort, if you have a government in place that believes in a version of deficit spending / trickle down economics. I also believe that you can bet that there will be a large amount of superficial clean up, which isn't limited to this administration but I think has become a fundamental part of our culture. Lack of craftsmanship - throw away culture, etc. In this case, you'd better believe that the administration will be using some of this for damage control. If nothing else, mid-term elections are coming up. In short, yes I'm sure that the administration will take advantage of this situation as much as they can, and recover as much damage control as possible. Professional politicians will be professional politicians. edit a last note host, I don't think anyone is taking umbrage with the amount of sources you post. Well, I know that people have taken it up, but I don't think the majority of the responses here about your original posting style were keying on that aspect. I think it was more your tone in the OP. __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style Last edited by pig; 09-20-2005 at 07:37 AM..

09-21-2005, 04:36 AM	#14 (permalink)
raveneye Born Against	Safavian -- nice example of why we need to have an unbiased judiciary.

09-21-2005, 06:31 AM	#15 (permalink)
n0nsensical Junkie Location: San Francisco	What's the over/under on how long it takes for host to get banned these days? Anyway, I'm sure Bush's motives are to "do what's right for 'Merica and pray that God will rebuild this fine city" or something or other. __________________ "Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." --Abraham Lincoln

09-21-2005, 07:02 AM	#16 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	The arrest was announced by the person leading the investigation into Safavian. That person is the assistant AG Alice S. Fisher, who is a Bush recess appointee. It sounds to me like the system is working. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

09-29-2005, 09:01 AM	#24 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i assume that stevo's remark fits into a long stream of such remarks from him directed at host--it is clear that he, like most of the conservatives who float about here, would prefer that host go away--but since he, again like most of the conservatives who float about here, in the main has nothing of substance to say to counter the content of host's arguments---but would nonetheless prefer that host go away---derision seems the logical alternative. it helps to keep the elementary school playground feel to this place going. the idea that "debate" here involving this particular type of conservative is carried on at the level of idiot children is of course the most attractive feature of the politics forum. it has been really helping me think alot about the implications of the phrase "waste of time" with reference to it. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 09-29-2005 at 09:03 AM..

09-29-2005, 10:00 AM	#25 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	I wondered how long it would take you to shift away from your previous style of commentary. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

09-29-2005, 07:30 PM	#28 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Host asked an honest question, and PowerClown answered honestly. I appreciate both the question and the answer. The rest? Eh, not much. If there is still a topic to be discussed here, I would like to get back to it.