The Minneapolis brige collapse has been POLITICISED! Yes, the Liberals are up to it again! Minnesota Democrats - who have controled the State for almost 30 years mind you - have balmed President Bush for the lack of funds to keep Minneosta's infrastructure up to date. Let's see if I have this correct:
(1) Democrats have ruled Minnesota for the better part of 30 years, right?
(2) Ten years ago that bridge was inspected and needed some big repairs/improvements then, right? Someone needs to start asking Elwyn Tinklenberg where all that money went.
(3) 9/11 had not happened then, right?
(4) We weren't at war with Iraq then, right?
(5) Bush wasn't President, right?
But yet the bridge collapse is blamed on Bush.
Can someone explain that to me? Or should I just chalk it up to Bush Derangement Syndrome?
2007-08-03
03:33:49
·
19 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Boy your guys are geniuses. I'm politicizing it by pointing out the morons who are politicizing it? You may have a point. Maybe. All I am saying is why use this or any other tragedy and make it political? What is wrong with finding out what happened and try to make sure it doesn't happen again?
My balls itch.
2007-08-03
04:12:44 ·
update #1
I wonder how much money the state has made off their gas tax since 1990? Its probably enough to buy a thousand bridges.
2007-08-03 03:37:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by civil_av8r 7
·
3⤊
2⤋
I think you are just trying to make this political.
Sometimes sh*t just happens.. the bridge was inspected.. found to have problems.. but based on the same standards we have for every other bridge in this nation it was deemed safe to continue use without replacing it yet.
This is the first of it's kind to buckle like this? It's a tragedy.. but you can't say that anyone did anything wrong from ONE collapse.. that would be like saying you should recall an entire set of tires off the market because one guy had a blow-out. They will look into it.. and see how they can better prevent this in the future..
Other than that.. let it go man.
2007-08-03 10:53:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by pip 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I will answer your question this way. If I agree with you, then we're friends. If I say the democrats are to blame, then we will argue.
Here is my true answer to you. Why is it that you can't see that politics is nothing but a big game? When will you see that all this political bickering is designed to get Americans' eyes off the real issue at hand.
Instead of the American public sticking together, we fight with each other saying it has to be the republicans fault or it has to be the democrats fault.
The real fault lies within the American public. We don't hold our leaders accountable and never will.
Instead of pointing fingers at others, remember, it is we (the American public) that is more to blame than anyone else.
Dunie, it sounds like you and I could have an in depth conversation in regards to the "non" Federal Reserve "cabal", er, I mean Bank.
2007-08-03 10:45:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Honey--they will try and blame the bridge collapse on Bush because we're spending all that money that WAS earmarked for infrastructure repairs in Iraq.............oh, wait. The bridge was labelled 'structurally unstable' in 1990--and yet no money was earmarked for replacing it for the past 17 years. Okay then, I know it's been a hot summer in Minneapolis. It probably collapsed due to global warming which MELTED the bridge. Wait. Steel can't melt right (Twin towers collapse). Which brings us back to back to the only 'lib-logical' conclusion. It was a controlled demolition--planned and executed by Bush himself!
2007-08-03 10:49:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Cherie 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
1. Minnesota Governor: Tim Pawlenty (R); Minnesota U.S. Senator: Norm Coleman (R)
2. Tim Pawlenty admitted yesterday that the state is responsible for monitoring, improving, and maintaining the bridge. So, it falls outside of Bush and the Federal jurisdiction.
3. Definitive information has not been released about WHY the bridge fell. So, pointing fingers is stupid at this point.
4. You obviously haven't been paying attention to the news, or have been listening to only 1 or 2 outlets, so you should keep your ignorant points to yourself.
Why am I not surprised by your misspelling of POLITICIZED?
2007-08-03 10:44:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
And the Media will help with this lie. I watched CNN and they were already blaming the failure on the Iraq war, even though it is the states responsibility. Here we go again.
I will be so happy when the libs are back in control so the news media can start telling us how great everything is again. I don't have to make a living any more so high taxes, high unemployment, high interest rates, etc. have little effect on me. As long as the Islamics only bomb the cities I will be alright.
2007-08-03 10:43:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by GABY 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Whenever a distaster is caused by lack of repair/maintenance work, the curent president is usually blamed. In this instance, the diversion of funds toward the Iraq war is the target. Almost always though, the root of the problem is with congress.
2007-08-03 10:41:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by afreshpath_admin 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
George W Bush has gutted and or cut Federal Highway Programs consistantly since 2003
FACT
2007-08-03 10:48:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
That is Bush's job as scapegoat for the power elite who rake off 40 % of all income tax into their private Federal Reserve for money they print from thin air and then charge interest on. That's also the reason for inflation. They always get theirs first before inflation.
http://www.themoneymasters.com/order.htm
edit aiasteve is right, we must take command of the situation after we educate ourselves in its workings.
2007-08-03 10:50:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Hmm, how can you criticize politicization of the bridge collapse, and then turn around and do it yourself?
2007-08-03 10:42:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by Pfo 7
·
0⤊
3⤋