Power Grab
Sep 16th, 2005 at 12:17 pm by Susie
Josh has a great post-speech post:
Then there’s the president’s great line from the speech: “It is now clear that a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces.”
No, it’s not. Actually, every actual fact that’s surfaced in the last two weeks points to just the opposite conclusion. There was no lack of federal authority to handle the situation. There was faulty organization, poor coordination and incompetence.
Show me the instance where the federal government was prevented from doing anything that needed to be done because it lacked the requisite authority.
This is like what we were talking about a few days ago. This is how repressive governments operate — mixing inefficiency with authoritarian tendencies.
You don’t repair disorganized or incompetent government by granting it more power. You fix it by making it more organized and more competent. If conservatism can’t grasp that point, what is it good for?
As for the military, same difference. The Army clearly has an important role to play in major domestic disasters. And they’ve been playing it in this case. But what broader role was required exactly?
As I’ve been saying, repressive governments mix adminsitrative clumsiness and inefficiency with authoritarian tendencies. That’s almost always the pattern. The direction the president wants to go in is one in which, in emergencies, the federal government will have trouble moving water into or enabling transportation out of the disaster zone but will be well-equipped to declare martial law on a moment’s notice.
Another pack of lies. Right in front of everyone.
Here’s a project.
Who will be the first and who will be the last to broach the subject of whether the president’s chief political operative should be in charge of the largest domestic reconstruction effort since the Civil War.
Let’s list off some of the worthies … Russert, Brian Williams, Times editorial page, Post editorial page, Stephanopoulos, Schiefer, Hume, Matthews, Wallace, Juan Williams, Will, Mitchell.
We’ll make a list and put it up on a separate page. Let us know who broaches the subject and when. And we’ll see who’s the last one standing.
Just watch Uncle Karl use the neo-reconstruction of the south to hack into FDR’s New Deal.
I bet he’s rubbing his hands with glee.
Jeff
We are heading for another civil war.
This cannot continue, the sheeple will eventually wake up.
Karl Rove, for god’s sake, these guys got big brass balls.
If we allow Bush to set the standard response to civic disasters to “call out the Army,” then he’s all set to define protesters marching in the streets of their own city as a civic disturbance.
Bait and switch.
And people will stand around wondering how the Army got involved. “They were only meant for hurricanes!”
Short version of speech -
We screwed up, so give us complete control next time!
Josh Marshall is the next Paul Krigman now that the NYT has put up the firewall.
Ah…. “Paul Krugman” Oh yeah! KARL “Fucking” Rove????? How do I emigrate to a country with a REAL gummint?
Who will be the first and who will be the last to broach the subject of whether the president’s chief political operative should be in charge of the largest domestic reconstruction effort since the Civil War.
My money’s on David Gregory. He’s been on a roll lately.
What Anita said sounds like the missing link here.