IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New You can make it come out any way you want:
As usual - you want to dumb down the possibilities to some either/or as panders to the absurd idea that, increasing the power of an inept group - can somehow make up for their demonstrated overall incompetence. Brilliant, that.

Ya wants a recipe, eh? [I'll bet you do..]

Among choices are:
A) The reasonably sane (and AFAIK - extant) rules - that the Fed already Can take over *anytime* it perceives a chaotic situation and declares a National Emergency. BUT: this power is NOT a substitute for Government's duty to provide coordinated assistance, competently organized and expedititiously applied. Obv The Army et al - Must be Fed controlled - should their at-home service be needed.
(Help-service not bayonet-service.)

(B thru n) Rewrite a bunch of laws making the Fed the Official, not emergency organizer of All Things, henceforth. About as fine an idea as [FEMA + Fatherland Security] - all run by party hacks with no experience or cred.


Now, given the record of this Admin - its paranoid secrecy beyond that of any predecessors
(commencing with the silencing of Previous Presidential writings on Day 1);
its virtually sole motive for making every decision:
(that we've yet become aware of)
perceived political gain, including - every possible step to assure One-party permanence in power.
(~~ P.R.I. de Mexico) --

Given all that - methinks B thru n represent a much greater likelihood of additional threats to Constitutional law in the US than would:

simply, some clarification of A) and steps to edjakate the Managers / replace with Pros, all the remaining political hacks with patronage positions (a ploy used by cabals who don't really Want a functioning government.)

Making the C+C+C structure actually function! - would go a long way to obviating any need for further arrogation of Power to the likes of these (or any megalomaniacal successors): we are supposed to Learn from past naivete and mistakes, even if their perpetrators "never make any".


Oh, and -
I suspect that A) shall not actually work:
these people are incapable of creating and executing any viable plans - yet. Wouldn't it be foolish to expect Objectively Infallible folk to - change?
That would require Admitting Error. Zealots are incapable of such heresy.



Oh, yes too -
..hold the mayo, hold the onions - hold the Faith-based addena, in this process - Please.

edit typoo


Even if it is doomed(?) Let it/them fuck-up without making (their or Someone's) God a scapegoat: again.
OK? Governments are responsible for dealing with the physical world. Period.
Collapse Edited by Ashton Sept. 29, 2005, 02:12:16 AM EDT
You can make it come out any way you want:
As usual - you want to dumb down the possibilities to some either/or as panders to the absurd idea that, increasing the power of an inept group - can somehow make up for their demonstrated overall incompetence. Brilliant, that.

Ya wants a recipe, eh? [I'll bet you do..]

Among choices are:
A) The reasonably sane (and AFAIK - extant) rules - that the Fed already Can take over *anytime* it perceives a chaotic situation and declares a National Emergency. BUT: this power is NOT a substitute for Government's duty to provide coordinated assistance, competently organized and expedititiously applied. Obv The Army et al - Must be Fed controlled - ahould their at-home service be needed.
(Help-service not bayonet-service.)

(B thru n) Rewrite a bunch of laws making the Fed the Official, not emergency organizer of All Things, henceforth. About as fine an idea as [FEMA + Fatherland Security] - all run by party hacks with no experience or cred.


Now, given the record of this Admin - its paranoid secrecy beyond that of any predecessors
(commencing with the silencing of Previous Presidential wrotings on Day 1);
its virtually sole motive for making every decision
(that we've yet become aware of):
perceived political gain, including - every possible step to assure One-party permanence in power.
(~~ P.R.I. de Mexico) --

Given all that - methinks B thru n represent a much greater likelihood of additional threats to Constitutional law in the US than would:

simply, some clarification of A) and steps to edjakate the Managers / replace with Pros, all the remaining political hacks with patronage positions (a ploy used by cabals who don't really Want a functioning government.)

Making the C+C+C structure actually function! - would go a long way to obviating any need for further arrogation of Power to the likes of these (or any megalomaniacal successors): we are supposed to Learn from past naivete and mistakes, even if their perpetrators "never make any".


Oh, and -
I suspect that A) shall not actually work:
these people are incapable of creating and executing any viable plans - yet. Wouldn't it be foolish to expect Objectively Infallible folk to - change?
That would require Admitting Error. Zealots are incapable of such heresy.



Oh, yes too -
..hold the mayo, hold the onions - hold the Faith-based addena, in this process - Please.





Even if it is doomed(?) Let it/them fuck-up without making (their or Someone's) God a scapegoat: again.
OK? Governments are responsible for dealing with the physical world. Period.
     Bush plans power grab based on Katrina - (JayMehaffey) - (99)
         Once again - (tuberculosis) - (1)
             "Everything would be so much easier under a dictator... - (jb4)
         Do I have to do it? Really? - (bepatient)
         Just as I said he would - (Arkadiy) - (95)
             Right, Ark - (Ashton) - (94)
                 Ignore the reality all you want - (bepatient) - (93)
                     Bull - (tuberculosis) - (4)
                         You still ignore the rules. - (bepatient) - (3)
                             Whose hue? Whose cry? - (jb4)
                             Which Armed Forces? - (tuberculosis)
                             Do you need me to get my cousin's contact info? - (ben_tilly)
                     You can make it come out any way you want: - (Ashton)
                     You have lost me - (JayMehaffey) - (65)
                         "Where was the federal government?" - (drewk) - (2)
                             Re: "Where was the federal government?" - (GBert) - (1)
                                 Good point - (drewk)
                         Little things... - (bepatient) - (61)
                             >/dev/null -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                 And what was inaccurate? - (bepatient)
                             Well, Homeland Security - (imric) - (3)
                                 Yup. -NT - (Another Scott)
                                 I know I've said this before, but ... - (drewk) - (1)
                                     It's cheap, easy and photogenic to Pass laws.... - (Another Scott)
                             Your missing the huge redirect here - (JayMehaffey) - (54)
                                 FEMA was NOT the biggest screw up - (Arkadiy) - (53)
                                     What are you smoking? - (Silverlock)
                                     Accountability. - (inthane-chan) - (3)
                                         Well said, but remember that FEMA is tiny. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                             FEMA was gutted - (imric)
                                             Exactly my point. - (inthane-chan)
                                     Re: FEMA was NOT the biggest screw up - (JayMehaffey) - (4)
                                         My personal guess - (jake123) - (3)
                                             Aye. -NT - (imric)
                                             Why else would they have hired him back as a conslutant? - (Yendor) - (1)
                                                 Um... - (Another Scott)
                                     Disagree - (tuberculosis) - (42)
                                         Nor is it his job to know those details - (bepatient) - (41)
                                             I dunno about that analysis - (jake123) - (36)
                                                 I certainly understand that - (bepatient) - (35)
                                                     Source for Nagin on "coaches"? TIA. -NT - (Another Scott) - (34)
                                                         google://nagin coaches - (drewk) - (31)
                                                             Thanks. OTOH... - (Another Scott) - (30)
                                                                 My only issue with that statement... - (Simon_Jester) - (27)
                                                                     When? - (Another Scott) - (26)
                                                                         As soon as evac notice was declared - (bepatient) - (25)
                                                                             Then why was anyone at the Superdome? - (Another Scott) - (24)
                                                                                 Good question - (bepatient) - (23)
                                                                                     Well, let's just throw in another contingency - while we're - (Ashton)
                                                                                     Unlikely. - (Another Scott) - (21)
                                                                                         Did you not read your own post? - (bepatient) - (20)
                                                                                             It was late, but yes, I read it. :-) - (Another Scott) - (19)
                                                                                                 Re: It was late, but yes, I read it. :-) - (bepatient) - (18)
                                                                                                     That's not quite what the Times-Picayune story said. - (Another Scott) - (17)
                                                                                                         Talk about semantics - (bepatient) - (16)
                                                                                                             Then cut to the chase - - (Ashton) - (3)
                                                                                                                 Another non-seq post - (bepatient) - (2)
                                                                                                                     'Course Beep: competence Is irrelevant. cha cha -NT - (Ashton) - (1)
                                                                                                                         Has nothing to do with competence - (bepatient)
                                                                                                             Disagree. But back to the buses... - (Another Scott) - (11)
                                                                                                                 So - (bepatient) - (10)
                                                                                                                     How long are yall gonna beat this dead horse? - (imqwerky) - (9)
                                                                                                                         Normally, a comparison w/ 'Nazi' ends a thread, by __'s Law - (Ashton) - (5)
                                                                                                                             Surprise, surprise - (bepatient) - (4)
                                                                                                                                 You've selected your own MO - (Ashton) - (3)
                                                                                                                                     You're right - (bepatient)
                                                                                                                                     ahem, spanish american war started with less evidence? hmm? - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                                                                                         Well, didn't want to go back tothe free blankets for Indians -NT - (Ashton)
                                                                                                                         For approximately as long as they are amused - (hnick) - (2)
                                                                                                                             Nah, pretty much done. -NT - (bepatient)
                                                                                                                             Good one, hnick! - (imqwerky)
                                                                 Nit - (bepatient) - (1)
                                                                     Seems a dead-on conclusion - (Ashton)
                                                         CNN link - (SpiceWare) - (1)
                                                             Thanks. -NT - (Another Scott)
                                             Vehemently disagree - (tuberculosis) - (3)
                                                 Your prerogative - (bepatient) - (2)
                                                     Too far - (tuberculosis) - (1)
                                                         :-) Well said. -NT - (Another Scott)
                     Reductio ab BeePium - (jb4)
                     OK, I get it now - (tuberculosis) - (17)
                         No. Wrong. - (bepatient) - (16)
                             Shorter BP... - (Simon_Jester) - (15)
                                 But I don't see those conservative arguments or pundits... - (bepatient) - (14)
                                     Of course there would have been finger-pointing in any case - (Ashton) - (13)
                                         Re: Of course there would have been finger-pointing - (bepatient) - (12)
                                             Absolutely correct. - (hnick) - (5)
                                                 Close... - (Simon_Jester) - (3)
                                                     Yup. I don't think Bush's been accused of murder and rape... -NT - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                                         yet -NT - (bepatient)
                                                         He's been accused of causing it to happen to many though -NT - (ben_tilly)
                                                 ICLRPD - (jb4)
                                             That's not true - (tuberculosis)
                                             He had a chance - (imric) - (4)
                                                 Maybe with you. - (bepatient) - (3)
                                                     Re: Other admins vs this one - (hnick)
                                                     Key difference I see - (tuberculosis)
                                                     Now that I agree with... - (Simon_Jester)
                     I don't mind it a bit.... - (Simon_Jester) - (1)
                         Good to see that someone is thinking ahead. :-) -NT - (Another Scott)

Boogity, boogity, boogity, amen!
112 ms