skippy the bush kangaroo: two legacies

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

two legacies

with the passing of ted kennedy, i reflected for a moment on two family legacies: the kennedys and the bushes. the kennedys were advocates for the weak and helpless, for equality, for justice. the bushes are advocates for the wealthy and powerful, for iinequality, and for the destruction of the government.

how many millions will feel a sense of loss when the bushes pass as millions do now for the kennedys.

posted by DBK at 5:58 PM |

9 Comments:

Well said, Skippy. It's so true. It's even obvious but the American people isn't, too much, paying attention.

I'd love to take a "person on the street" interview and ask say, 100 different people if they know the definition of "noblesse oblige".

I'm betting most would fail the test and not know.

Thanks, Skippy!

Mo Rage
KC Photog Blog

commented by

PFL0W, 7:53 AM PDT

It seems fitting in a very tragic way that Ted Kennedy would give up the ghost right around the time real health care reform itself appears to be clinically dead. He just might have been the last of his kind, too. MOst other politicians these days have more Bush in them than they do Kennedy...

commented by

Jim Yeager, 8:06 AM PDT

how many millions will feel a sense of loss when the bushes pass as millions do now for the kennedys

Millions? People or dollars?

commented by

Carl, 11:02 AM PDT

Not me, homeboy.

commented by

Fixer, 4:29 PM PDT

I am not a believer in redemption in the after because of your actions here...that being said, I do think Ted managed to accquit himself in a fashion that may have brought him some personal peace...
Did he help??? Assuredly so...was it "enough"???
Ask him, ask Mary Jo.
Rest Now Teddy...

Essaress

commented by

Anonymous, 5:37 PM PDT

How did the Bushes want to destroy government?

commented by

John...., 3:34 PM PDT

When you appoint incompetent people to government agencies and cut the budgets of important agencies so that they are unable to fulfill their mandates, you are actually trying to "drown the beast", to quote Grover Norquist. If you're unfamiliar with the neo-con philosphy of shrinking government to prove that it can't work and of deliberately making government not work so you can claim that only private organizations can do its work, you need only study the actions of the Bush administration to understand it. Here's a little lesson: take a look at how FEMA worked under Bill Clinton during the flood crisis in Grand Forks (I think the year was 1997, but I can't recall offhand) versus FEMA during Hurricane Katrina. Also, look at how the agency was operating under Clinton versus Bush. When Clinton was president, he made a serious effort to professionalize FEMA. He spoke about doing that in his autobiography. When Bush became president, he appointed incompetent people to important positions, including the infamous Brownie, and slashing the budget of various agencies (the food inspectors and FEMA are two good examples). FEMA's professional and competent staff started leaving. When Katrina hit, many of the best people in FEMA were gone. When the flooding occurred in Grand Forks, however, years earlier, FEMA was a professional organization. They had people in the area two weeks ahead of the flooding to organize and handle the problem. They had plans for an evacuation of 300,000 people. I can't recall all the details (it's been years since I looked at them), but that's the gist of it and you can look it up. The fact is, Bush and his co-conspirators did what they could to privatize the work of government and to deny funding and professionalism to numerous federal agencies. The result is the mess they left behind and the numerous failures of those agencies.

commented by

DBK, 6:45 AM PDT

DBK: You are quite correct. Bush and the republicons increased domestic spending at only 8% a year. These small increases were deplorable. Such cuts hindered the government on all levels. Fortunately under Obama these cuts have been reversed. Federal domestic spending though really needs larger increases than the paltry 3.4 trillion dollars Obama has allocated. With the efficiency of the Democrats in control these trillions will be wisely spent and allow government to grow to fulfill our needs.

commented by

John...., 8:20 AM PDT

You showed up here and questioned my statement that Bush and his co-conspirators set out to destroy the government. I cited their actions. Your response was a sarcastic tangent. If you have something worth to say that's worth serious consideration, be my guest. You're also welcome to continue being snotty and sarcastic, but then you'll get all the consideration you deserve then, as well.

commented by

DBK, 2:17 PM PDT

Add a comment