Libs Blame Bush For Bridge Collapse

[red states rule]

On the main thread about the MN bridge collapse, I mentioned how long it would take before the kook left would blame Pres Bush for the disaster


Well, it took less them 24 hours



Ed Shultz blames Bush for Bridge Collapse
Say Anything ^ | 08/02/07 | Rob


Posted on 08/02/2007 11:35:50 AM PDT by ljco


No, I’m not kidding. Here’s a paraphrase of what he said:

...the only reason Bush is talking about fatalities is because he didn’t give MN enough money to maintain the bridge.

Right, Ed. Because it’s the President, and not Congress, who appropriates highway funds for roads and bridges.

What’s more, have we really departed so far from our federalist roots that we’re now blaming the President of the United States for not properly maintaining a bridge in Minneapolis (if that is indeed why the bridge went down)? What about local city officials? County road inspectors? State highway department people? The governor?

But hey, I guess this is what you get from a paid mouthpiece for the Democrat party.

Of course, Schultz isn’t the only liberal driven to stupidity by the bridge collapse in Minnesota. Others are saying that the bridge collapsed because, get this, we aren’t paying enough in taxes. Again, I’m not sure why the bridge in Minnesota collapsed (hasn’t anyone been inspecting it?), but if more funding was needed to maintain it Congress could have cut back on the number of million dollar bus stops and bridges to nowhere they’ve been building with our highway money.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1875355/posts





Leftist dementia: Blaming Bush & GOP for Minneapolis Bridge Collapse
Peter Barry Chowka
When I heard the news late Wednesday afternoon PT about the Minnesota Interstate 35W bridge collapse, after the initial shock and sadness for the victims, one of my first thoughts was that the Left would try to score points and blame the tragedy on President Bush and the Republicans.


Sure enough, within four minutes of the news breaking nationally at 7:32 pm ET on the Fox News Channel, the initial discussion thread about it at Daily Kos was already collecting comments like the following ones which are representative of hundreds of messages that soon appeared there (the first two below, by the way, were the first two to be posted):
We spend billions in Iraq


While we fall apart at home.



We have been warned


by engineers that our nation's infrastructure is in dire need of repair and upgrade.


Who needs terrorism when the inept GOP runs our nation into the ground. The "terrorists" can just sit back and watch as our nation falls apart.


Mission Accomplished.



No one has the balls to take this on


Every week there's a new national tragedy...tainted food, nutcases with automatic weapons, structural damage to cities, hospital patients dropped on the streets, dysfuctional transportation system, poorly cared for vets, trashed education system, national disasters from global warming. I am waiting for a national figure with the balls to call these warning signs what they are: Republican disdain for and neglect of government oversight,venality, insensitivity to human suffering, tax breaks for rich folks, blatant government incompetence, dirty politics, and bleeding our resources in an immoral f-----k war.



God damn right


you want services, you have to PAY FOR THEM.


That includes roads, electric grid, public transportation, airports, air traffic control, police, firemen, schools, colleges, and last AND least, military.


NO corporation is going to do those things. THERE'S NO PROFIT IN IT. And there SHOULDN'T be.


You can't run a 21st century country with a 19th century infrastructure. Or tax structure. Or 19th century thinking.


Scratch that - 16th century thinking.



It is a terrorist attack by Republican budget


cutters



I'm watching this now on Olbermann


I can't help thinking that the Bush tax cuts and corruption has contributed to this. Our country is falling apart, but Bush doesn't care as long as he cronies get to make money.
And from another popular Kos thread about the incident:
More Republican 'Family Values'?


Move along, nothing to see here folks.


Just another case of people paying with their lives, so the rich can keep "their hard earned money".


Just move along.
Some of the Kos messages mentioned the fact that the 2008 Republican National Convention will take place in Minneapolis. "Netroots" activists on the Left feel that linking the bridge collapse with Republicans can score points with voters and perhaps disparage or spoil the lead up to next year's convention.


Over at MinneaPolitics.com, in an August 1 article "Live From Minneapolis: Our Dirty Laundry," Bretton Jones writes,
"I'm feeling a little down about our bridge collapsing with many of my fellow humans on it, and I can't help but feel the desire to go straight for the money that should have been used on my cities' federally funded, interstate highway infrastructure by re-appropriating it directly from Blackwater and Haliburton."
Jones concludes with "IMPEACH BUSH RECALL PAWLENTY." (Tim Pawlenty is the second term Republican governor of Minnesota.)


Jones also has a blog at Kos, where someone posted this comment in response to his article:
This is what happens when militarists run things


The Military and all it's attendant fraud and waste soaks up the lion's share of the federal government's money.


Next to nothing is left for the civilian infrastructure and it's maintenance.
Point of fact: In 2005, according to the Office of Management and Budget, the Federal Government spent $2,479 billion. The amount appropriated to the Department of Defense that year was $400 billion, or less than 1/6th of the total. According to the Congressional Budget Office, military spending, as a percentage of both the GDP and the federal budget, has been shrinking significantly since the 1960s. According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, of the 2006 U.S. federal budget, the "lion's share" - 54% - went to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other entitlement programs.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1875215/posts

[red states rule]

Bridge Collapse Provides Cafferty with Fresh Angle to Stigmatize Iraq War
By Brent Baker | August 2, 2007 - 19:42 ET
CNN's Jack Cafferty on Thursday afternoon managed to use the Minneapolis bridge collapse tragedy to take another shot at the Iraq war as he pointed out how the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost $600 billion and featured an e-mailer who complained spending on infrastructure is “a drop in the bucket compared to $450 billion wasted in Iraq.” At the end of the 4pm EDT hour of The Situation Room, Wolf Blitzer interviewed Senators Chris Dodd and Chuck Hagel, who pointed out it's difficult to find the “hundreds of billions of dollars” needed to repair infrastructure. Blitzer then went to Cafferty for the e-mail replies to his “Cafferty File” question of the hour, but Cafferty first interjected: “I think the number of dollars that we have spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is right at $600 billion.”

Cafferty's question: “In light of the fact that proper maintenance of our roads and bridges has been neglected for years, how do we get our government to do the right thing?” Amongst the answers Cafferty chose to highlight: A woman who described $200 billion, apparently the amount spent in some time period on infrastructure, as “a drop in the bucket compared to $450 billion wasted in Iraq” -- Cafferty suggested “I think it's actually more than that” -- and a man who proposed that “the solution is simple. Revive Roosevelt's National Recovery Act. Begin putting people to work rebuilding our country.”

Cafferty at 4:59pm EDT with the replies to his August 2 question for the 4pm hour:


I'm not a mathematician, but I think the number of dollars that we have spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is right at $600 billion. The question, in light of the fact that proper maintenance of our roads and bridges has been neglected for years is: How do we get our government to do the right thing? Now, there's something to get your arms around.

Nina writes: "Jack, we haven't invested in infrastructure in this country since Lyndon Johnson's time, actually. Then, it was guns and butter. Now it's just guns, no butter. The butter seen as fat is our bridges, roads, and rails."

Karen in Indiana: "Bush and our Congress fiddle, while our infrastructure fails us. $200 billion, a drop in the bucket, compared to $450 billion wasted in Iraq" -- I think it's actually more than that -- "some of it on their infrastructure. Vote for anybody, except the ones currently in office."

James in Tennessee: "In the early '90s, I sat on the Highway Users Federation board. One of our missions was to get the feds to release funds slated for the maintenance of the federal highway and bridge system. I retired before anything positive happened in that respect. And I have been out of the loop ever since. You might look into how much unreleased funding is presently available and what it's being used for, if it's not being used for the purposes intended."

Stan in Hays, Kansas: "Congress is spending billions each month to rebuild infrastructure in Iraq. Can't they find a few bucks for the folks in Minnesota and the rest of this country that's falling apart?

Jim in California: "The solution is simple. Revive Roosevelt's National Recovery Act, begin putting people to work rebuilding our country. So many of the infrastructure elements in this country were developed in the '30s and '40s under Roosevelt, and then left to rot in front of our smoke-filled eyes. The country is 80 years behind the curve."

And Jeanne writes my favorite letter: "On this question and almost every question you have asked in the longest while, there is but one answer. Vote out and each and every elected official each and every election year. You need to run this e-mail daily on your show until we start thinking about it. If we would do that, the officials in government would begin to listen to us."

Jeanne, I think you might be on to something.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2007/08/02/bridge-collapse-provides-cafferty-fresh-angle-stigmatize-iraq-war

[red states rule]

The liberal media shows their true concern - will it help their beloved Dem party


Anyone still think there is no liberal media bias?????


On Bridge Tragedy, Hardball's Mike Barnicle Wonders: 'Does This Help Democrats?'
By Geoffrey Dickens | August 2, 2007 - 18:42 ET
On tonight's Hardball, Mike Barnicle, substitute-hosting for Chris Matthews, used the tragedy of the bridge collapse in Minneapolis to call for bigger government and wondered, "Does this help the Democrats?" All throughout tonight's show, Barnicle repeatedlypressed his guests to call for an increase in the size of government and at one point even demanded: "Government's gotta get bigger!"

First up Barnicle asked the liberal Barney Frank where he would find the money to pay for bridge repair. After Frank responded that he would "end the war in Iraq" and raise taxes to improve America's infrastructure, Barnicle took the Congressman's cue to advance the tax hike/big government theme for the entirety of the show.

The following are just some of the exchanges as they occured on the August 2, edition of MSNBC's Hardball:

Mike Barnicle: "Welcome back to Hardball. Minnesota's tragic bridge collapse is raising new questions about our country's infrastructure and how much we're investing to keep it safe. Democratic Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts is the chairman of the Financial Services committee. Congressman, every city in this country or nearly every city in this country, people go to work, they use the subways, they drive along highways that have been built, been there for 40, 50, 60 years. Bridges that have been there, perhaps longer. The Golden Gate, San Francisco, Verrazano-Narrows, the Brooklyn Bridge, the Tobin Bridge in Boston, Massachusetts. Where are we gonna get the money that everyone is talking about, today, to repair this infrastructure?"

Rep. Barney Frank: "Well we're gonna get it from taxation and one way we can do that, frankly, in my judgment, is end the war in Iraq. I, when I proposed spending more on some of these things, people say to me, where am I gonna get the money? I was in Congress on September 10th, 2001 and I know, factually, there was no money in the, in the budget at that time for the war in Iraq and since then we've found $500 billion. So, sometimes, I think I should go find the guy who found that $500 billion and ask him if he can find some of that for us here. I mean we're a very wealthy country. We can afford it as a country. The question is, how do we allocate it? And we've got this odd view that some people have been holding, which is that any time you cut government it's a good thing. And I have colleagues who say, ‘It's the taxpayers' money not the government's money. Let the taxpayer keep the money.' Well, of course it's the taxpayers' money. Sensible taxpayers know they have two sets of needs. Some are best done individually but some we have to pool our resources. I can give you the biggest tax cut in the world, you can't fix a bridge."

Barnicle: "Yeah but you know Congressman, you say sensible taxpayers and I agree with you, there are, there are huge numbers of sensible taxpayers out there in this country and yet we are already, not even on the edge of a presidential campaign, we're into a presidential campaign and in state after state, primary after primary, each and every candidate, each and every campaign is forced to respond to this litmus test of 'No New Taxes.' How are we gonna get taxes passed when you can't get anything done in the Congress it seems?"

...

Barnicle: "So, I mean to stick with the political, on this evening when nearly everyone in America is preoccupied with, with the natural disaster in, in Minneapolis, does this help the Democrats? Does it help you? This sort of a disaster? I mean people at, at street-level, at side-walk level, no matter what they think about the growth of government, whether they want to restrain it, reduce it, get it to grow, they know that volunteerism isn't gonna rebuild this bridge or any other bridge in this country."

[5:26pm]

Barnicle to Tom Ridge: "So I mean you're a Republican and yet your old pal, the President's father became famous or infamous at the convention in 1988, 'Read my lips, no new taxes.' How are we gonna pay for this stuff?"

[5:29pm]

Barnicle, again to Ridge: "Government's gotta get bigger to help, to help governors in, in various states."

[5:39pm]

Barnicle to Sen Chris Dodd: "So Senator Dodd, let me ask you now, you're gonna introduce this bill, it's gonna go on to the Senate floor and what do say on the Senate floor and on talk shows all across this country when you are confronted with people who say, 'No, no, no. Government's too big. We gotta keep government out of our lives. We need smaller government.'"


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2007/08/02/hardballs-response-bridge-tragedy-raise-taxes

[red states rule]

Bridge to Bias: In 1989, S.F. Bridge Collapse After Earthquake Blamed on Conservatives
By Tim Graham | August 2, 2007 - 18:07 ET

If anyone in the media blames the Minnesota bridge collapse on "cheap Republicans" who like tax cuts, it would not be the first time. In 1989, after a memorable San Francisco earthquake, an interstate highway bridge collapsed and killed hundreds. Media figures demanded new taxes, and some even suggested the Proposition 13 ballot initiative may have caused unnecessary deaths. We reported in the November 1989 MediaWatch:

As aftershocks rumbled through the San Francisco Bay area, media figures began calling for more taxes. On the October 18 Nightline, Ted Koppel asked an agreeable Democratic politician from California: "We all remember a few years ago Proposition 13 which rolled back taxes. And at the same time the point was made you roll back the taxes, that's fine, but that means there are going to be fewer funds available for necessary projects. Any instances where the money that was not spent because of the rollback of Proposition 13 where money would have made a difference?"

The Wall Street Journal took time to study the facts. An October 24 editorial noted: "California's roads and bridges aren't funded by property taxes but by state and federal gasoline taxes. Both have been raised at least 30 percent in recent years, even while the price of gasoline has fallen. Dragging Prop. 13 into this story is a pretty long stretch."

Insomniacs watching Nightwatch on CBS were treated to Jack Nelson, Washington Bureau Chief of the Los Angeles Times, in the wee hours of October 24: "One of the things it definitely means politically is that you're going to have to do something in California about Prop. 13, which put a cap on real estate taxes, and you're going to have to do something about the Gann limit that put a limit on spending in California. There's no question but you're going to have to do that. And I think you're going to have to do something about taxes. My guess is...that you're going to have a real momentum now for a gasoline tax increase, and maybe not just in California, but I would think at the federal level."

CBS had beaten the drum over the weekend with an October 22 Evening News salvo from reporter Norman Robinson. "The Democrats say what they have already learned about the damage is enough to warrant tacking on a user tax to shore up the nation's roads and bridges, a large number of them said to be in serious disrepair." Robinson wrapped up the CBS story: "The administration today stressed that the President can find the money to pay for damages from existing revenue, and that he can keep his promise of no new taxes. Democrats are warning that in the face of a mounting deficit problem, that may not be realistic."


Then there was this exchange on CNN's Crossfire from the October 30 edition of Notable Quotables:

Michael Kinsley: "If they had spent the money, which they are now planning to spend to fix the Bay Bridge, beforehand, which they didn't, in part because of Proposition 13 and other Republican budget-cutting programs, that bridge wouldn't have collapsed, there would be people alive today."
Pat Buchanan: "The California budget is about two and a half times what it was in 1978. What are you talking about?...Why don't you blame it on Reagan? That would be consistent."
Kinsley: "I'm blaming it on Reagan, you, and all the other cheap Republicans who don't understand the good things government does."
-- Exchange on CNN's Crossfire, October 18, 1989.


Blaming conservatives for natural disasters? It seems like an ancient version of the old Hurricane Katrina spin, that Bush caused the hurricane deaths. Heckuva job, Kinsley.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2007/08/02/bridge-bias-1989-s-f-bridge-collapse-after-earthquake-blamed-conservativ

[waterrescuedude2000]

Come on the libs also thought that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault cause he could control the weather....

[nevadamedic]

On the main thread about the MN bridge collapse, I mentioned how long it would take before the kook left would blame Pres Bush for the disaster


Well, it took less them 24 hours



Ed Shultz blames Bush for Bridge Collapse
Say Anything ^ | 08/02/07 | Rob


Posted on 08/02/2007 11:35:50 AM PDT by ljco


No, I’m not kidding. Here’s a paraphrase of what he said:

...the only reason Bush is talking about fatalities is because he didn’t give MN enough money to maintain the bridge.

Right, Ed. Because it’s the President, and not Congress, who appropriates highway funds for roads and bridges.

What’s more, have we really departed so far from our federalist roots that we’re now blaming the President of the United States for not properly maintaining a bridge in Minneapolis (if that is indeed why the bridge went down)? What about local city officials? County road inspectors? State highway department people? The governor?

But hey, I guess this is what you get from a paid mouthpiece for the Democrat party.

Of course, Schultz isn’t the only liberal driven to stupidity by the bridge collapse in Minnesota. Others are saying that the bridge collapsed because, get this, we aren’t paying enough in taxes. Again, I’m not sure why the bridge in Minnesota collapsed (hasn’t anyone been inspecting it?), but if more funding was needed to maintain it Congress could have cut back on the number of million dollar bus stops and bridges to nowhere they’ve been building with our highway money.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1875355/posts





Leftist dementia: Blaming Bush & GOP for Minneapolis Bridge Collapse
Peter Barry Chowka
When I heard the news late Wednesday afternoon PT about the Minnesota Interstate 35W bridge collapse, after the initial shock and sadness for the victims, one of my first thoughts was that the Left would try to score points and blame the tragedy on President Bush and the Republicans.


Sure enough, within four minutes of the news breaking nationally at 7:32 pm ET on the Fox News Channel, the initial discussion thread about it at Daily Kos was already collecting comments like the following ones which are representative of hundreds of messages that soon appeared there (the first two below, by the way, were the first two to be posted):
We spend billions in Iraq


While we fall apart at home.



We have been warned


by engineers that our nation's infrastructure is in dire need of repair and upgrade.


Who needs terrorism when the inept GOP runs our nation into the ground. The "terrorists" can just sit back and watch as our nation falls apart.


Mission Accomplished.



No one has the balls to take this on


Every week there's a new national tragedy...tainted food, nutcases with automatic weapons, structural damage to cities, hospital patients dropped on the streets, dysfuctional transportation system, poorly cared for vets, trashed education system, national disasters from global warming. I am waiting for a national figure with the balls to call these warning signs what they are: Republican disdain for and neglect of government oversight,venality, insensitivity to human suffering, tax breaks for rich folks, blatant government incompetence, dirty politics, and bleeding our resources in an immoral f-----k war.



God damn right


you want services, you have to PAY FOR THEM.


That includes roads, electric grid, public transportation, airports, air traffic control, police, firemen, schools, colleges, and last AND least, military.


NO corporation is going to do those things. THERE'S NO PROFIT IN IT. And there SHOULDN'T be.


You can't run a 21st century country with a 19th century infrastructure. Or tax structure. Or 19th century thinking.


Scratch that - 16th century thinking.



It is a terrorist attack by Republican budget


cutters



I'm watching this now on Olbermann


I can't help thinking that the Bush tax cuts and corruption has contributed to this. Our country is falling apart, but Bush doesn't care as long as he cronies get to make money.
And from another popular Kos thread about the incident:
More Republican 'Family Values'?


Move along, nothing to see here folks.


Just another case of people paying with their lives, so the rich can keep "their hard earned money".


Just move along.
Some of the Kos messages mentioned the fact that the 2008 Republican National Convention will take place in Minneapolis. "Netroots" activists on the Left feel that linking the bridge collapse with Republicans can score points with voters and perhaps disparage or spoil the lead up to next year's convention.


Over at MinneaPolitics.com, in an August 1 article "Live From Minneapolis: Our Dirty Laundry," Bretton Jones writes,
"I'm feeling a little down about our bridge collapsing with many of my fellow humans on it, and I can't help but feel the desire to go straight for the money that should have been used on my cities' federally funded, interstate highway infrastructure by re-appropriating it directly from Blackwater and Haliburton."
Jones concludes with "IMPEACH BUSH RECALL PAWLENTY." (Tim Pawlenty is the second term Republican governor of Minnesota.)


Jones also has a blog at Kos, where someone posted this comment in response to his article:
This is what happens when militarists run things


The Military and all it's attendant fraud and waste soaks up the lion's share of the federal government's money.


Next to nothing is left for the civilian infrastructure and it's maintenance.
Point of fact: In 2005, according to the Office of Management and Budget, the Federal Government spent $2,479 billion. The amount appropriated to the Department of Defense that year was $400 billion, or less than 1/6th of the total. According to the Congressional Budget Office, military spending, as a percentage of both the GDP and the federal budget, has been shrinking significantly since the 1960s. According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, of the 2006 U.S. federal budget, the "lion's share" - 54% - went to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other entitlement programs.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1875215/posts

You didn't know that the President has to goto every Bridge in the country and personally inspect them?

[nevadamedic]

Come on the libs also thought that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault cause he could control the weather....

Clinton's BJ was also President Bush's fault.............

[actsnoblemartin]

:clap

:laugh:


Clinton's BJ was also President Bush's fault.............

[red states rule]

Come on the libs also thought that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault cause he could control the weather....

Actually, they thought Karl Rove operated the Hallburton built weather machine - and sent the hurricane to the black populated city

[red states rule]

Couric Presumes Taxes Must Be Raised to Repair Infrastructure
By Brent Baker | August 2, 2007 - 21:43 ET
Neglecting any thought about cutting spending anywhere within the federal budget, for instance some of the soaring entitlement spending, CBS's Katie Couric on Thursday night wondered if taxpayers are “ready to spend” the “trillions” needed to repair the nation's infrastructure. Just the night before, Couric's newscast illustrated why entitlement spending keeps rising faster than inflation and population growth, as she aired a sympathetic look at “getting medical coverage for the millions of American children who don't have it,” a relatively (compared to total entitlement spending) small plan which would hike spending by $50 billion over five years.

Couric's assumption about higher taxes came as she introduced an August 2 CBS Evening News story from Nancy Cordes on the estimate by the American Society of Civil Engineers, a group obviously in favor of additional public works project spending, that it will cost $1.6 trillion to address infrastructure needs. Live from Minneapolis, Couric asked: “Experts have been warning for years that this country's infrastructure is crumbling. But are taxpayers ready to spend the billions, maybe trillions, it would take to fix all the pipelines, tunnels and bridges?” (Comparative budget numbers below)

To put the $1.6 trillion in some perspective, in 2006 the federal government distributed $1.4 trillion in entitlements, up approximately 60 percent from 1990 in inflation-adjusted dollars. In just the one single year of 2006 that means entitlement spending consumed about 50 percent of the $2.6 trillion total budget which included $227 billion in interest and $248 billion as the deficit, leaving about $1 trillion for everything else (PDF of a Heritage Foundation package of budget tables). And a June Heritage analysis estimated that the Senate immigration reform bill would cost taxpayers $2.6 trillion:


“Although it is difficult to provide a precise estimate, it seems likely that if 10 million adult illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. were granted amnesty, the net retirement cost to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.6 trillion.”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2007/08/02/couric-presumes-taxes-must-be-raised-repair-infrastructure

[red states rule]

You didn't know that the President has to goto every Bridge in the country and personally inspect them?

If the President is a Republican, libs say yes

[red states rule]

Not to be left out, White Flag Harry Reid jons the voices from the kook left to attack Pres Bush for the bridge collapse

Reid: Bridge collapse is ‘wake-up call'

By: Martin Kady II
Aug 2, 2007 04:38 PM EST

It took less than a day for the disastrous bridge collapse in Minneapolis to turn into a political uproar on Capitol Hill.

As Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) opened the Thursday session of the Senate, he warned that the bridge disaster was a “wake-up call” regarding infrastructure investment across the country.

Later, Reid and other Democratic leaders went a step further, bashing Republicans for failing to pass a water resources and development act, known as WRDA on Capitol Hill, for seven years, saying that the bill was essential to investing in American infrastructure.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who chairs the appropriations subcommittee that funds transportation programs, slammed President Bush for threatening to veto the transportation bill because it exceeds his initial budget request.

“This is what I worry about every day. The lack of investment in infrastructure is frightening,” Murray said. “This is what [Bush] is threatening to veto -- investment in infrastructure for [roads] we go to work on every day.”

Reid even suggested that Bush has been too distracted by the Iraq war and post-Sept. 11 national security needs to focus on the country’s water, sewer and transportation infrastructure.

“Since 9/11, we have taken our eye off the ball,” Reid said.

At the White House, press secretary Tony Snow acknowledged “there will be lots of 'Who's responsible?' 'Who could have done what?’” in the aftermath of the bridge collapse. But, he said, “the fact is, if anybody has knowledge that something like this can happen, they're going to act on it."

Later, a White House spokesman rebuked Senate Democrats, saying the nation should focus on the victims and the recovery in Minneapolis.

“It’s unfortunate and unconscionable that Democratic leaders in Congress are trying to use this horrific event as an opportunity to launch attacks,” said spokesman Scott Stanzel, pointing out that Bush’s veto threat of the transportation appropriations bill is not related to highway funding. Bush issued the veto warning because of “excessive spending in other areas,” including Amtrak and Housing and Urban Development spending, Stanzel said.

Also on Thursday, Reid used the opportunity to promote a bill he has previously introduced, known as the “American Marshall Plan,” which invests in deteriorating infrastructure across the country.

The bridge collapse may indeed give Democrats a chance to pass the long-stalled water resources development bill, which Senate leaders promised to clear next month. The White House, though, opposes the bill because of its $15 billion cost.

“In terms of infrastructure, where has the Republican Congress been on the WRDA bill for the past seven years?” asked Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.).

Democratic leaders have not yet put a price tag on what the federal government plans to spend to help Minnesota rebuild the Interstate 35 Bridge, but the Minnesota delegation has asked for $250 million in federal funds.

Minnesota’s two senators, Republican Norm Coleman and Democrat Amy Klobuchar, returned to Washington Thursday after visiting the scene of the bridge disaster and introduced legislation that would lift current caps on Department of Transportation spending and authorize $250 million to rebuild the bridge. And congressional leaders were moving quickly to approve the legislation before leaving for the August recess.

At least one Republican appropriator, though, agrees the bridge collapse should not be treated as an isolated problem that can be handled as an earmark.

“Infrastructure in this country is underfunded at both the local, state and federal levels,” said Rep. David Hobson (R-Ohio), who is the top Republican on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development. “The problem is there is no overall vision -- we end up attacking it with earmarks.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0807/5228.html

[red states rule]

One Bridge Down, Hundreds to Go
With all the destruction man has wrought on the environment since he first crawled out of his primordial goo, it's nice to see Mother Nature even the score every once in a while. When that infernal bridge collapsed yesterday, it was as if the Mighty Mississippi had finally cast off the steel shackles that had enslaved her and was at last free to flow unobstructed by man's technological wizardry. It was a shame that so many innocents had to die for the river to gain her freedom, but the blame for their tragic deaths lies solely on Bush's shoulders.

It seems that when the neocons built the bridge as a way to encourage driving and thus line the pockets of their Big Oil buddies, they failed to notice that there was a river passing beneath it - a healthy, vibrant river thriving with thousands of teeny tiny fishies, each as alive and as deserving of human rights as the river itself. Now, all those innocent fishies are dead, buried under tons of concrete, steel, and human bodies.

We must not let Bush's slaughter of these poor fishies go unpunished. A congressional investigation must be launched immediately to determine how long there was a fish-murdering bridge on the river, and why Bush never did anything to stop it. His personal physician, his proctologist, and his 4th grade teacher must all be called to testify before Congress as to their involvement in Bush's twisted scheme. The Shrub will probably cry "executive privilege", but this may be the only way we can ever get answers as to why their was a bridge on this particular river in the first place, and if there are other bridges out there lurking in the shadows, patiently waiting for another chance to strike
http://blamebush.typepad.com/blamebush/2007/08/one-bridge-down.html

[red states rule]

Come on the libs also thought that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault cause he could control the weather....

Remember the Bush tax cuts drained neded money from the government



CBS: 'Cash-Starved' Governments Must 'Collect...More Tax Dollars' for Infrastructure
By Brent Baker | August 3, 2007 - 21:25 ET
A night after CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric, without any consideration for cutting other spending, presumed taxes must be hiked to pay for infrastructure repair, CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson ludicrously described federal and state governments as “cash-starved” as she relayed the expert view of just one person, a Democratic Congressman, whom she said blames the lack of courage to “collect” more taxes. A nice euphemism for raising taxes. On Thursday night, Couric had asked: “Are taxpayers ready to spend the billions, maybe trillions, it would take to fix all the pipelines, tunnels and bridges?” (My NB item)

On Friday night, Attkisson noted that out “of the $2.7 trillion federal budget, it's estimated only around $50 billion a year goes for infrastructure” while “experts say what's needed is $210 billion a year for five years.” After citing a couple of examples of misguided pork barrel spending for road projects when repair work goes wanting, Attkisson pointed out how “Congress only funds about 25 percent of the nation's infrastructure.” She then absurdly asserted that states and local governments which “pick up the rest of the tab” are “cash-starved too.” For her only expert assessment, Attkisson turned to Democratic Congressman Jim Oberstar, Chairman of the very committee which funnels the pork spending, described as “Congress's leading authority on infrastructure” who “says both Congress and the White House have traditionally had trouble making the tough decision to collect and spend more tax dollars on infrastructure.”

Neither Attkisson, nor the on-screen chyron for Oberstar, identified him as a Democrat.

Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Oberstar represents northeastern Minnesota.

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video for the August 3 CBS Evening News story:


KATIE COURIC: Well, in Washington late today the House approved an emergency bill authorizing $250 million to rebuild the 35W bridge. The Senate is expected to follow suit, but it's really just a drop in a very huge bucket when it comes to fixing all of America's bridges and highways and pipelines. As Sharyl Attkisson reports, for years Congress has had other things on its agenda.

SHARYL ATTKISSON: Funding the nation's infrastructure is all a matter of priorities. Out of the $2.7 trillion federal budget, it's estimated only around $50 billion a year goes for infrastructure, just a tiny slice of the pie. Experts say what's needed is $210 billion a year for five years just for upkeep. And the need is felt in all 50 states. Coast to coast there have been sewage leaks, killer chunks of falling concrete, broken pipes in the Midwest, contaminated water in Washington D.C., and New Jersey loses an astonishing 20 million gallons of drinking water a day from leaky pipes.

But when it comes to spending federal dollars, sometimes priorities seem out of whack. In Alaska a third of the bridges are awaiting repair, but Alaska's members of Congress wanted to put $450 million toward pet projects for two new bridges that would only serve a combined population of about 100. In Colorado the highways are corroded and rusting, but the state's members of Congress still saw fit to put a half million dollars toward a future wildlife overpass. That's right, a bridge for wild animals to cross the highway.

But Congress only funds about 25 percent of the nation's infrastructure. States and local governments pick up the rest of the tab, and they're cash-starved too. Congressman Jim Oberstar from Minnesota heads the House Transportation Committee and is Congress's leading authority on infrastructure.

Rep. JAMES OBERSTAR, (D-MN): We need to do far better, and we all know that.

ATTKISSON: He says both Congress and the White House have traditionally had trouble making the tough decision to collect and spend more tax dollars on infrastructure.

OBERSTAR: We have to make those investments, and they don't come like manna from the sky, you have to pay for it. And you either pay now or you pay a whole lot later.

ATTKISSON: The Minnesota bridge collapse may be the catalyst that pushes Congress into making better plans and a bigger investment in the critical facilities that keep the nation running. Sharyl Attkisson, CBS News, Capitol Hill.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2007/08/03/cbs-cash-starved-governments-must-collect-more-tax-dollars-infrastructu

[red states rule]

Democrats Exploit Bridge Collapse, Blame Bush, Tax Cuts, War in Iraq

Working on three hours sleep last night, ladies and gentlemen, so that portends well for the -- (laughing) -- the usual flippancy and giddiness. You probably are talked-out or listened-out or watched-out by now on the bridge collapse up in Minneapolis. But I, ladies and gentlemen, haven't said a word about it publicly because I have not had a chance to do so. I was at home on Wednesday night getting ready to leave for my super-secret meeting when the bridge collapse happened. I was getting ready to leave for my super-secret meeting at a far-away place, and I did not have the television on. I got a flash e-mail, "Boy, you ought to see what happened in Minneapolis." So I turned on the TV, and I saw the pictures. And like everybody, I was stunned. Then you know what I did? I went to kook Democrat websites. For the real story, if you want to find out what really happened and what is really behind all this, that's where you have to go.

I'm sure the bridge collapse happened a little bit before I found out about it. But four minutes after I was told, I went to the Daily Kos. They're having their convention, by the way, these netroots people are in Chicago. They want to unionize. (Laughing) I don't care. These posts were just incredible. "We spend billions in Iraq while we fall apart at home." "We've been warned by engineers our nation's infrastructure is in dire need of repair and upgrade. Who needs terrorism when the inept GOP runs our nation into the ground?" "No one has the guts to take this on. Every week there's a new national tragedy. Tainted food, nutcases with whatever," it goes on to talk about this is what you get with militarists and corporate people. It's predictable, and it really is a little sad that a disaster like this becomes immediately partisan. But that's the nature of our society and culture today. Thursday morning, Tony Snow had to go out and say, (paraphrasing) "Look, it's a state project here, all these investigations, that bridge had been investigated, got 50 out of 120," you know all this. The White House had to go out and try to diffuse some of this. I'm glad that they did. First lady is there today. The president's going there tomorrow. He didn't want to go today because they already have a traffic mess. That's a major artery. When the president goes in someplace, everything gets shut down even more so, so he's going to go in there tomorrow.

This is one of these classic events that is custom-made for the Drive-By Media. "The country is falling apart. Bush spending too much in Iraq. Not paying enough attention to what's happening at home." Meanwhile, all these people complaining about the defense budget taking away money. Do you know that Minnesota was running, it's either this year or last, a $2.1 billion surplus? These states are running surpluses. Most of these states are awash in money. As I have told you countless times, they have more money than they know what to do with, and they still want to raise your taxes, federal government, too. The state of Minnesota is building a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings, rather than fix the bridges. How is that the fault of our being in Iraq? It's not. The Drive-By Media had hardly taken a breath before they turned the cars around to blame Bush and Republicans in general for the bridge collapse. Senator Patty Murray said that Bush has not supported Democrat efforts to increase spending on critical infrastructure. So they immediately turn this into a "let's increase taxes" issue. This has to stop. They have enough money. It's the same thing in New Orleans.

I could get partisan, if I wanted to, but I don't think there's anything partisan about this, but I could do a tit-for-tat. I could say, "Have you ever noticed that the infrastructure failures in this country are happening in cities run by liberal Democrats?" New Orleans, Minnesota. I could say that. Well, I guess I just did say that, didn't I? I could say, "Why are they not paying attention to their infrastructure? What is it that they're not doing?" We know the circumstances in Katrina, the graft down there, the levees not getting fixed and so forth. The Democrats, ladies and gentlemen, are the only people that care about roads and bridges. The rest of us, we never have to drive on those roads and bridges. It's only liberal Democrats have to ride on the bridges. By the way, 600,000 bridges in this country, one of them goes down, "Country's falling apart because we're in Iraq." It's absurd, but it's a perfect template and a perfect action line for our buddies in the Drive-By Media. In 2005, for all these people saying that we spend too much in the military, the federal budget in 2005 was 2.47 trillion. The defense budget that year was 400 billion. Over 60% of the federal budget is spent on entitlement programs. Good old Soc. Security, good old Medicare, good old Medicaid, good old SCHIP program, with a P. They ought to change it, get the health care for the little children out there. Defense spending as a percentage of the total federal budget has been declining since the 1960s.


Here's the thing. You can see this in states all over the country. Lots and lots of instances of Democrats screaming for infrastructure spending. All it is, folks, is a bold attempt to divert money to construction unions and developers and others in the trades as payoffs and thank yous for election donations. They scream for it because they've spent the money that should have gone on to fix this kind of thing that caused the bridge collapse. Democrat Party politics is all about paying off the people that donate to you, raise money for you, vote for you, and so forth. So when the Democrats are out there demanding all this new investment in infrastructure, they just want to raise taxes so they can pay off their buds in the unions. Now, Nick Coleman at the Minneapolis Star Tribune, and I got the story here, says that this collapse of the bridge would never have happened if it wasn't for the governor, Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, and his refusal to raise taxes. This is in the Minneapolis paper, Star Tribune. The reason this bridge collapsed is because he wouldn't raise taxes.

Here's a quote from the story. "For half a dozen years, the motto of state government and particularly that of Gov. Tim Pawlenty has been No New Taxes. It's been popular with a lot of voters and it has mostly prevailed. So much so that Pawlenty vetoed a 5-cent gas tax increase - the first in 20 years - last spring and millions were lost that might have gone to road repair. And yes, it would have fallen..." Stick with me on this, folks. "Yes, it would have fallen even if the gas tax had gone through, because we are years behind a dangerous curve when it comes to the replacement of infrastructure that everyone but wingnuts in coonskin caps agree is one of the basic duties of government." What Nick Coleman, the brilliant Nick Coleman fails to point out here that there was no need for a tax increase when Pawlenty vetoed the gas tax increase. At the time, when Tim Pawlenty vetoed this five-cent gas tax increase, the state of Minnesota had a $2.1 billion budget surplus. The surplus comes from what? It certainly doesn't come from government not spending. The surplus comes from overtaxation. That's the case in almost, not all, but almost every state out there. They've got gobs of money, folks.

North Carolina was running a surplus, the Democrats there raised taxes by 9%." So what's happening here, the political agenda is taking over with the collapse of the bridge. The Democrats and the Drive-Bys are trying to scare us into believing that more taxes would have saved these people on that bridge at that moment, and it's all a GOP governor's fault for refusing to increase those taxes. The fact of the matter is that the problem was not low taxes. The problem was fiscal irresponsibility. The Democrats spend money like a teenager that gets hold of your gold card, with abandon and little thought to the consequences or effectiveness. I have a list here of pork in just the state of Minnesota. There is a book that lists this stuff for every state. In fact, I think I have it here as a pdf file. I might upload it to the website, if it's the same thing I've got here, but it mirrors what is happening in many, many states. They spend millions for animal exhibits at the zoo, millions for stupid art projects. Every county has a stupid art project, state funds in a number of states. They spend money on so many things, if you stop to think about it -- try this. The state bailout of the Minnesota teachers retirement fund, which puts state taxpayers on the hook for $972 million in unfunded liabilities.

This is just a list of pork in Minnesota. A new $776 million Twins stadium to be paid for with a Hennepin County sales tax increase approved by state legislators with no voter referendum, $97.5 million for the North Star commuter rail line, $34 million in subsidies to ethanol producers that have seen a 300% increase in profits in the last year, and yet they're still being subsidized, $30 million for bear exhibits at the Minnesota and Como zoos, $12 million to renovate the Schubert Theater in downtown Minneapolis, one million for a replica Vikings ship in Morehead. Other states are building drag racing museums. They run around and say they don't have enough money to fix the bridges. They don't have enough money to deal with the infrastructure. The thing is with liberals they'll never have enough money, no matter how much they raise, no matter how much they increase taxes.

We put together some video to illustrate what I was just saying. I'm sure you've watched it, I'm sure you've seen it, but you haven't heard it until you hear it as we present it. We have a montage here, we have Craig Crawford of PMSNBC; we have Joe Scarborough; we have reporter from CNN Greg Hunter; we have Lou Dobbs; we have Barney My Boy Lollipop Frank. We have Jack Cafferty of CNN; we got Bill Tucker at CNN; and we got Senator Amy Klobuchar. This is a montage on how the Iraq war caused the bridge collapse. Now, before we play it I have to tell you, four minutes after I heard the story, for the real story, I went these fruitcake websites, MoveOn.org, Democrat Underground, and I'm telling you, they were blaming being in Iraq. Now, I don't know who's giving marching orders to who, but I wouldn't be surprised if these people in the Drive-Bys -- because they're going nuts. All these presidential candidates are at one of these kook websites' conventions in Chicago. So they may be taking the lead, or else they all think alike and they don't need a leader. Whatever, listen to this montage of what is responsible for the bridge collapse in Minneapolis.

CRAWFORD: I've looked up what it would take to fix the nation's infrastructure. It's about $532 billion a year. It just so happens to be about what we're spending in Iraq.

SCARBOROUGH: Certainly American voters would probably decide it would be wiser to invest in our own aging infrastructure than continuing to throw good money after bad in Iraq.

HUNTER: We're spending billions of dollars every month in Iraq.

DODD: This administration is trying to convince us to spend $500 billion in Iraq.

FRANK: If we did not have the war in Iraq, with hundreds of billions of dollars, we would be able to do a great deal more.

CAFFERTY: How could the US better spend the $2 billion a week that we're pouring into Iraq here at home?

TUCKER: We're spending about a trillion dollars in infrastructure in Iraq.

DOBBS: We're not even succeeding in rebuilding the infrastructure and creating new infrastructure in Iraq.

KLOBUCHAR: Priorities in our country have been out of whack the last few years. We've spent like almost $500 billion in Iraq.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_080307/content/01125106.guest.html

[red states rule]

Come on the libs also thought that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault cause he could control the weather....

Olbermann Blames Iraq War Spending for Bridge Collapse
By Brad Wilmouth | August 4, 2007 - 16:34 ET
On Friday's Countdown, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann charged that the "endless war and endless spending" had "crippled our ability to repair or just check our infrastructure," as he hosted Air America's Rachel Maddow in a discussion blaming the Minneapolis bridge collapse on Iraq war spending and unwillingness by conservatives to raise taxes. Olbermann quoted Minnesota Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar's charge of "messed up priorities" and New York Democratic Congresswoman Louise Slaughter's labeling of bridge collapse victims as "almost victims of war" because "perpetual war depletes the funds available to maintain our infrastructure." Maddow charged that America is "paying this incredible deadly price for a brand of American conservatism that hates and demeans government." (Transcript follows)

Olbermann teased the August 3 show: "The bridges of every county: How the endless war and endless spending crippled our ability to repair or just check our infrastructure."

About 8:20 p.m., after relaying to viewers that Minnesota Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty had reversed his opposition to raising the gas tax to fund infrastructure projects, Olbermann cited charges by Democrats that Iraq war spending was repsonsible for a lack of bridge repairs. Olbermann: "Earlier today, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar referred to the, quote, 'messed up priorities' by spending half a trillion dollars in Iraq while bridges crumble at home. New York Congresswoman Louise Slaughter joined the connection even tighter, calling the bridge victims, quote, 'almost victims of war' because our, quote, 'perpetual war depletes the funds available to maintain our infrastructure.'"

Ignoring the massive amounts of non-war government spending that could be diverted to pay for infrastructure repairs, Olbermann pressed for tax increases to yield the required funding as he implied that conservative views on taxes are not "sane" and "reasoned." Olbermann: "Republicans, including Governor Pawlenty, President Bush, have demonized taxes, demonized any Democrat who ever said tax hike could improve our lives, save our lives at home. Does the governor's reversal tonight suggest maybe somebody is going to start having sane, reasoned discussions about taxes and when they're needed?"

During her response, Maddow charged that America is "paying a deadly price" for anti-government conservatism, even invoking Ronald Reagan. Maddow: "We're a country that, as a whole, is paying this incredible deadly price for a brand of American conservatism that hates and demeans government, and that has defined any sort of spending on anything for the common good as something that's soft-headed and suspect. And it's a brand of conservatism that goes back to, you know, Reagan's first inaugural where he defined government as the problem and to Barry Goldwater before him, and the Republican party right now defines itself as uncritical inheritors of that legacy. And while they may be benefitting from it politically, we're all paying the price for it in terms of a country that's just falling apart. It's a national disgrace."

Below is a transcript of the segment from the Friday August 3 Countdown on MSNBC:

KEITH OLBERMANN, in opening teaser: The bridges of every county: How the endless war and endless spending crippled our ability to repair or just check our infrastructure.
...

OLBERMANN: But comfort is not all that the city of Minneapolis seeks right now. In addition to the bodies to be found, there is the undiscovered truth, the explanation for how this happened. Tonight, the U.S. Transportation Department announced it will investigate the Federal Highway Administration, the agency which inspected the I-35 W bridge. Questions investigators will consider: whether the agency followed recommendations last year to improve oversight on deficient bridges and the federal funding for them.

OLBERMANN: Governor Tim Pawlenty has called this an engineering issue. We do not know whether his engineers felt constrained by his budgets. But just tonight, a spokesman for the governor announced he will consider raising the state's 20-cent-per-gallon gas tax, an increase he vetoed before, even though the money would have gone to state infrastructure. Earlier today, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar referred to the, quote, "messed up priorities" by spending half a trillion dollars in Iraq while bridges crumble at home. New York Congresswoman Louise Slaughter joined the connection even tighter, calling the bridge victims, quote, "almost victims of war" because our, quote, "perpetual war depletes the funds available to maintain our infrastructure." By some estimates, bringing all of America's bridges up to satisfactory condition would take nearly $190 billion. The Iraq war now estimated at costing about half a trillion. It almost takes a Rhodes Scholar to analyze all this. Fortunately, Rachel Maddow is that, and more, including host of her own show every week night on Air America radio. Rachel, great thanks for your time.

RACHEL MADDOW: Hi, Keith.

OLBERMANN: Republicans, including Governor Pawlenty, President Bush, have demonized taxes, demonized any Democrat who ever said tax hike could improve our lives, save our lives at home. Does the governor's reversal tonight suggest maybe somebody is going to start having sane, reasoned discussions about taxes and when they're needed?

MADDOW: I hope so. I really do. But I have to tell you I'm just so steamed about this, and everybody who I've talked to about it this week in my personal life and on the radio, everybody that I know who I've talked to about this is steamed as well because there aren't Republican bridges and there aren't Democratic bridges and there aren't Republican sewers and Democratic levees. We're a country that, as a whole, is paying this incredible deadly price for a brand of American conservatism that hates and demeans government, and that has defined any sort of spending on anything for the common good as something that's soft-headed and suspect. And it's a brand of conservatism that goes back to, you know, Reagan's first inaugural where he defined government as the problem and to Barry Goldwater before him, and the Republican party right now defines itself as uncritical inheritors of that legacy. And while they may be benefitting from it politically, we're all paying the price for it in terms of a country that's just falling apart. It's a national disgrace. And I hope the governor's change of heart is a sign of a change in it, but the fact that the President this week still used an anti-tax, anti-government piece of rhetoric to explain why he's going to veto kids' health insurance and why he's going to veto waste water infrastructure bills doesn't make me feel like it's going to change any time soon in that party.

OLBERMANN: Yeah, that was a privately owned bridge now, in which the owners were threatening to move the bridge to another state. They'd be able to get the tax money under those circumstances.

MADDOW: Sure.

OLBERMANN: But is it fair, is it premature to blame spending shortfalls for this when the state rates so well on its bridges in Minnesota? And we have no evidence at this point that anyone, any organization warned that the 35W was in anything resembling imminent trouble or needed more money than it was getting for upkeep.

MADDOW: Well, that's the single scariest thing about that, is that Minnesota fares so well compared to the rest of the country in terms of its infrastructure and its upkeep. That's the scariest thing. The fact that a major bridge like this carrying between 140 and 180,000 cars a day can be rated at 50 percent structurally sufficient, and that doesn't slate it for replacement or major repairs, because compared to what else we've got going on in the country, that actually means it's looking pretty good. That's the scariest element of all of this. If you only look, if you only look at bridges that carry 190,000 cars a day, there are at least 20 that rate worse than that bridge that collapsed in terms of their structural sufficiency. Minnesota is actually looking good. They're trying to define this as an anomaly. It's the scariest part of all of it.

OLBERMANN: Right. You're right. If this is the leadership state and its bridge has fallen down, what happens to the 50th ranked state?

MADDOW: Exactly.

OLBERMANN: But now the White House wants all the states to shoulder as much of the burden of government and governance as possible. Is that some sort of variety or mutation of a push for small government, the original principled idea, or an attempt to disperse accountability so that, you know, corporations and contractors and such can get to the public trough more easily? What is it?

MADDOW: Well, I think it's a way to deflect accountability for this specific crisis on one hand. But it also denies the historical truth in the United States that 80 percent of highway money comes from the federal government, and this government would like it to seem like this is some sort of state problem. The initial response immediately from the White House was, well, the state's responsibility was to maintain that bridge, and they should have known about it, and it was their responsibility to act. No. The federal government is 80 percent responsible historically for highway funding in this country. And to have an anti-government demeaning government, demeaning of any spending on the public good, bit of rhetoric coming out from the White House on the very week that this interstate collapsed tells me that all they're planning on doing is deflecting, deflecting, deflecting the responsibility.


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2007/08/04/olbermann-blames-iraq-war-spending-bridge-collapse

[Angel Heart]

Clinton's BJ was also President Bush's fault.............

Hey, I got a zit on my nose... Isn't that Bush's fault as well.

[red states rule]

Hey, I got a zit on my nose... Isn't that Bush's fault as well.

If you are a Bush hater - you would find a way to balme him

It is a shame. The bodies are not buried yet - nor are all of the bodies out of the water - and the moonbats are blaming Pres Bush for a construction flaw