Skip to main content

View Diary: Long Island Power: poor Sandy response - Bipartisan failure? (47 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What about the lack of action on last year's audit (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Van Buren

    I don't think the NY state government's response was out of norm for a typical state government. But a report on CNN said that an audit was conducted last year. And there was no action taken in the ensuing year to act on those red flags. No action was taken to strengthen leadership at the utlity.

    •  Like anything serious could be done in a year (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nupstateny, RJDixon74135

      Don't tell me about outdated maps--that isn't important when the power is out everywhere.

      You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

      by Rich in PA on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 06:00:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Has the power company done anything to (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pravin

        inform/educate property owners about the things that they might need to do BEFORE power can be turned back on? I'm just wondering whether, on top of everything else, there's a communication problem.

        Eliminate tax breaks that stimulate the offshoring of jobs.

        by RJDixon74135 on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 09:28:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The red flag to me (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JeffW

      is that you're basing your claim on what CNN reports.

      How do you know nothing was done to correct anything that the report cited?  Obviously the response to Sandy was a reflection of the lessons learned.


      The religious fanatics didn't buy the republican party because it was virtuous, they bought it because it was for sale

      by nupstateny on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 06:15:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well if you have something better, let us know (0+ / 0-)

        Seriously, if CNN was reporting the same way on a republican, would you have been as skeptical? I have seen numerous diaries on DKos which cite a CNN report and then use that as a basis to attcak a republican. All of a sudden, I am being held to a different standard on what I research? I am just relaying what I see and asking why we should not be concerned. I was pretty open up what I knew and didn't know.

        What concerns me is the overly defensiveness for reports that would have been eagerly lapped up if it were attacking some other party. Let's be consistent. This is not a stupid  freeper site.

        •  Flawed Arguments (0+ / 0-)

          You seem to be brushing aside the legitimate responses of posters who suggest that your questions may be somewhat flawed in themselves. First of all, a focus on how to apportion blame to entire political parties is premature, at least part because information about preparation efforts and disaster response/recovery is currently incomplete. To me, it makes sense to defer such questions until we know more about who "dropped the ball," and how and where the ball was dropped. As numerous posters have pointed out, in many ways preparation and recovery efforts were successful.

          You’ve responded to some of these posts by claiming that if you had been focusing on Republicans rather than Democrats, the majority of the comments on your diary  would be enthusiastically supportive. I think that assumption is unwarranted, because I haven’t seen anybody on this thread blaming the Republican Party for perceived failings in preparation and response to Sandy. Further, the claim that “If x had been y, you would have done z” relies upon an unobserved counterfactual, and hence, in this case, constitutes a specious argument. It also implies that those who disagree with you are hypocrites, which is entirely uncalled for.

          In my opinion.

          Thanks to denial, I'm immortal. -- Philip J. Fry

          by IamGumby on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:30:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site