Quote Originally Posted by dexterferry View Post
bshea, your criticism of tlaib [[it's been going on for months now) is starting to seem partisan. and maybe I missed the part where it is wrong for a politician to be an opponent of a billionaire slumlord who has wreaked havoc in her district for decades. . .

you sure have great faith in a greedy monopolist, bshea. And I don't think it's an ad hominum attack to wonder where that faith came from when, as Detroitnerd pointed out, you seem so enjoy viciously employing those stellar critical thinking skills against Moroun's "opponent" FAR MORE than the man himself.
Tlaib can do as she pleases, and I believe she fully believes she's serving her constituents, or at least some of them [[because more than a few support the DIBC and work for it). That's her job. But when she publishes hypocritical stuff, I'm going to call it out. And the DIBC doesn't make a habit of publishing hyperbolic letters in the big newspapers.

You have no idea where my faith lies. Whatever Moroun's alleged havoc-wreaking might be/been, there's a public value in the Ambassador Bridge. Tlaib thinks it's a "monstrosity" but she's very much in the minority in that [[although I'd guess you're in that foxhole with her). And I'm here to talk about the bridge projects.

Questioning politicians, especially when they raise the specter of cancer and prostitution in this context, is pretty normal, I'd say ... even more so when that politician conveniently leaves out facts. Sounds like playing the very game she accuses the other side of.

I'll wait here while you explain to me how concerns about dirty air and prostitutes are purely a DIBC problem and won't be a DRIC problem. Tlaib implied it, you're obviously related to her, work for her, campaigned for her, paved he driveway, or some nonsense [[because, obviously, you can question something only when you're a vested, partisan party to it, right?), so you can explain that one.

You know what this is akin to? George W. Bush. He's been highly praised in Africa and some circles for his significant committment to fighting AIDS in Africa. That's pretty much agreed upon. But the bridge discussion is like saying the funding to fight AIDS he mandated was bad because he did stuff elsewhere people didn't like. Some people are unable to seperate the issues, and that's a shame.

"Moroun is bad, so everything he does is bad." That about hit the nail on the head for this one?