It's been a while...

IT's amazing how work often seems to get in the way of fun--including the fun of blogging. Of course, it doesn't seem to slow down some blogs.

Now, while I haven't been able to keep up with Randi Rhodes--even though I have succombed, and added her podcast to my subscriptions--I still try to make time to go through the blog from the left--the lobby.

I do like their new look. I think it's quite stylish. I do think though that the post about Alito, and then the post about New Orleans, go a bit beyond the pale. It's alright to disagree with the decisions, but the vitriol--well, it's a bit much.

For instance, Let (the main blogger) writes "Alito is a walking constitutional amendment and we all know it. We might as well have put the Religious Right and the head of every corporation up on that court." Interesting, except David Broder, in his commentary last week, esentially argued that the problem with Alito is not his willingness to rewrite the constitution, but his rather literalist reading of it. In fact, it is the "left" justices that have most often been cited as "writing" law rather than interpretting it. Remember the "right to privacy"? Which amendment is that one? Hmmm?

And let's tackle the New Orleans blog entry. "Anyone remember Dubya saying this? '"“I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.' Prior to Hurricane Katrina hitting New Orleans, Homeland Security reportedly knew what was to come, despite claims to the contrary and now there are documents to prove it." (check out the link to the MSNBC site--go to "the lobby" to get the link--and read this blog. Seriously, it is worth it!) I have to agree that the President's statement that no one anticipated it was perhaps hyperbole. But I suspect it was more likely a combination of a failure to brief the President by his staff, and an overwhelming sense of so many that it would never really happen.

I have family from New Orleans, so I as much as anyone know the feelings leading up to the hurricane. My family, being conservative, always expects the worst. However, I have been told that often the sense of the population has been one of complacency. It's not hard to believe that, if the general population didn't think it could really happen, that perhaps that view was shared by the local leadership in Louisiana. Just perhaps...

The Lobby(ists) go on to write "Not only that, but anyone tracking the story has probably read that the Dept of Homeland Security went through an exercise where a mock Hurricane Pam created all types of catastrophic damage. The results of the exercise were eerily similar to the reality Katrina left in Louisiana, Missourri, and Mississippi and this was way back in 2004." Interesting. Should we spend billions of dollars after the DHS or DOD have a "doomsday scenario" exercise? I believe they have also done these for earthquakes, terror attacks, and various other natural and man-made catastrophes. What if the decision had been made to spend the money on the levies but we had actually lost San Francisco to another earthquake--would they have applauded our willingness to be prepared--or continued to attack, this time criticizing the inability to "get it right?"

So what is my point? What is the "golden thread of knowledge" to all this? Let's be critical of the right things. Let's get the stories "right" before we attack from the left.