Monday, June 18, 2007
Computer Problems
Lost the internet connection at my brother's house when I was dog-sitting for him last week. Part of what I added to last week's Susan Howell post must have been auto-saved before the connection went out. Now my home computer is broken, so the abbreviated addition to the Howell post was just added.
I won't be much do much posting until I get it fixed, but over the weekend, I thought about Howell's farewell interview and somethings that Dambala has said:
and:
Anyone who reads this blog knows that I agree, although I don't think that Nagin's quite as morally bankrupt as Dambala makes him sound. He probably doesn't think he's doing any harm, just getting his piece of that exploding pie.
I'm also not sure that there's nothing we can do about it, but I think it involves demanding more out of the city council. The council can do more, Bruce Eggler was far too kind in last week's paper:
That may be true, but we've never before had a mayor ask for, and receive, so much new funding for his office and for for agencies directly under his control at a time when the budgets of other agencies were being cut.
The city doesn't have to, as Dambala put it, bend over for Nagin, but I'm afraid that the council will for Nagin as long as his reputation for integrity remains unquestioned. So what I want to say to people who want to compliment the mayor on their way out of town is, "Just leave. Don't say nice things about the mayor on your way out, it only makes it that much harder for those of us who've stayed. If you want to leave, just leave, but please don't say nice things about the mayor or the city government on your way out."
I'll go through a detailed list of items that anybody that wants to defend the mayor's integrity needs to explain when I get the the chance, but I will point out the following:
Nagin wrote that on the invitations to a fund raiser held after he was re-elected. I suppose it's possible that an honest mayor might have written on that on the invitations to a fund raiser held before the election, but after the election? I'm not a political scientist like Susan Howell, but it sounds to me like he's selling selling access. I have trouble reconciling it with even the spirit of honesty.
I won't be much do much posting until I get it fixed, but over the weekend, I thought about Howell's farewell interview and somethings that Dambala has said:
"I don't think he cares....I really don't think he cares. I think he's only concerned with his own future and what he can get out of what's left of this city."
and:
Nagin doesn't care about anything but lining his chrony's pockets and setting himself up after he leaves the mayor's office. The sad part is, even knowing what's going to happen, there's probably little we can do to stop it. Bend over Nawlins, we're gonna get it again.
Anyone who reads this blog knows that I agree, although I don't think that Nagin's quite as morally bankrupt as Dambala makes him sound. He probably doesn't think he's doing any harm, just getting his piece of that exploding pie.
I'm also not sure that there's nothing we can do about it, but I think it involves demanding more out of the city council. The council can do more, Bruce Eggler was far too kind in last week's paper:
New Orleans' form of government and political traditions make it hard for any council to do more than complain about a mayor or other officials. The council's ultimate weapons -- refusing to appropriate money for certain programs or dismissing a mayoral appointee for "lack of qualifications, incompetence, neglect of duty . . . or gross misconduct" -- have rarely if ever been used.
That may be true, but we've never before had a mayor ask for, and receive, so much new funding for his office and for for agencies directly under his control at a time when the budgets of other agencies were being cut.
The city doesn't have to, as Dambala put it, bend over for Nagin, but I'm afraid that the council will for Nagin as long as his reputation for integrity remains unquestioned. So what I want to say to people who want to compliment the mayor on their way out of town is, "Just leave. Don't say nice things about the mayor on your way out, it only makes it that much harder for those of us who've stayed. If you want to leave, just leave, but please don't say nice things about the mayor or the city government on your way out."
I'll go through a detailed list of items that anybody that wants to defend the mayor's integrity needs to explain when I get the the chance, but I will point out the following:
"The future of New Orleans is in our hands, The importance of new technology, business opportunities, energy-efficient housing, restoration of our coastline, repairing and improving our infrastructure all offer tremendous opportunities."
Nagin wrote that on the invitations to a fund raiser held after he was re-elected. I suppose it's possible that an honest mayor might have written on that on the invitations to a fund raiser held before the election, but after the election? I'm not a political scientist like Susan Howell, but it sounds to me like he's selling selling access. I have trouble reconciling it with even the spirit of honesty.
