On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:44:15 -0400, Robert Munn  wrote:
> Stop already, the President had his performance review last November.
> 
I wouldn't consider it a performance review.  I would consider a case
of promotion for time spent on the job.

> As for the Clarke memo, five days after the inauguration this guy sends the 
> memo. So a new administration is supposed to drop everything because a 
> holdover appointee from the previous administration writes a memo? It's 
> tragic in hindsight, but it just isn't realistic to expect a new President 
> and the staff to be doing normal daily business right after the inauguration.

You're right, but then again, they didn't have the requested meeting
until 9/4/2001.  How many Missile defense meetings did they have
between 1/25/2001 and 9/4/2001.  I bet a lot more than terrorist
defense meetings.

> 
reason, IMO, why the President was re-elected. The country does not
want the government distracted by a change of power.
> 
I don't doubt that one bit.  I think it's a screwed up line of
thought, but I don't doubt that.


> When a new administration comes in, they have their own ideas, their own 
> agenda, and that change of focus creates vulnerabilities. This isn't a 
> Democrat or Republican problem- it is a structural weakness of our system, 
> one that the terrorists exploited very effectively.
> 

Correct.  Maybe then they shouldn't let their egos get in the way of
what's right for the country.  It wouldn't take much for *any* new
administration to pay heed to the exiting administration.  You may be
right about it being both a Dem and Rep fault, but the issue is,
*something* happened on his watch.

> 
> > Marlon wrote:
> >
> >I was listening to the Diane Rheam show today with the weekly review
> >and this was brought up.  It really just pisses me off that during
> >that time we were concentrating on Missile Defense(which still doesn't
> >work) and tax cuts (which still piss me off too).  I really believe
> >that the president failed this country.  I also found it amusing that
> >he'd like to turn government entities to be more like businesses.
> >He's starting with the pentagon where performance will be rewarded
> >more than time served.  If that's the case, shouldn't he be fired?
> >
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble 
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:147054
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to