Comments

Tom,

You must not have noticed that not Bush but Karl Rove -- a political operative with no management experience of any kind and the subject of a criminal investigation -- is in charge of reconstruction.

Posted by Ted at September 16, 2005 8:31 AM

Sadly Tom, I did not see the speech but I do have an answer for the more difficult question you pose. The results of my Google search: :-)

'proof of the pudding, the'

'Results are what count, as in Let's see if this ad actually helps sales — the proof of the pudding, you know. The full expression of this proverb, dating from about 1600, is The proof of the pudding is in the eating, but it has become so well known that it is often abbreviated.'

Have a great weekend :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 16, 2005 8:43 AM

Tom / Trevor - I think it was originated by Miguel de Cervantes in, "Don Quixote" : "The proof of the pudding is in the eating. By a small sample we may judge of the whole piece."

Posted by Mark JF at September 16, 2005 9:02 AM

Amazing Mark - thank you

Dont you just love this exchange of top notch academia.These are the important things in life my friend :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 16, 2005 9:06 AM

Actually, I prefer "proof of the pizza". And instead of "that's the icing on the cake", I prefer "that's the barbecue sauce on the hamburger." I love being a carnivore . . .

Okay, now on to more serious stuff. How are "we" going to pay for the Gulf States initiative? I also didn't see the speech. But the first thing that comes to my mind is, "we" are already paying for it. Over $1B has been given to relief agencies to help the victims. The private sector is stepping up to get things fixed, and get N'awlins back to abnormal.

But I think I know what you mean. How is the public sector - e.g., government - going to pay for it? I think people who have been reading only my posts know my answer already: Keep the &$%@ politicians out of it! Congresspeople of both parties are wasting the tax money they confiscate from us, and think nothing of running up trillion-dollar debts that cannot be repaid in this lifetime. Methinks it's time once again to "throw the bums out", and who cares about incumbency and seniority.

As for Iraq, I wouldn't call removing Saddam from power, holding a free election, finishing a constitution, and training a homegrown military so that Americans can leave, as being a "quagmire" a la Vietnam. MacNamara didn't plan for us to win there, and we didn't. Rumsfeld plans for us to win, and help establish a democracy, and we are. Pbbbbb.

Posted by Ron at September 16, 2005 9:10 AM

Tom,
I thought the speech was very good and delivered very well. It was the speech of a leader who stepped out of the Washington setting and into real life. I even liked the fact that the speech was delivered out of Washington, out of the banquet halls and on "street level".

Don't know if you saw ABC afterward. Very interesting to hear the comments from evacuees from the Astrodome. They seemed very grateful for the words from the President.

Posted by Jim Martin at September 16, 2005 9:30 AM

"The proof is in the pudding" is shorthand for "The proof OF the pudding is in the TASTING". In this context, the proof of the speech is in the on the street outcomes.

We shall see. I just hope that they do not turn this into another excuse to consolidate executive (and therefore bureaucratic) power. We need accountability for the mistakes this is true but we also need to assure accountability for the quality and content of the "fixes". Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease!!

Again, we shall see.

BT

Posted by BT Hathaway at September 16, 2005 9:49 AM

tom

I listened to the speech on radio, but didn't see W give the speech.

the speech was clear and encouraging, and had the administration been more credible and their performance substantiative in terms of "real" results (in the past 6 years), instead of politically astute and "on message", i might believe him.

I don't. I'm skeptical. perhaps this is a turning point, where the administration will truly walk it's talk, call me a doubting "thomas" "we'll see"

reconstruction will occur however.

Holland levis are built to withstand extreme events, from an engineering perspective, it's possible to protect land residing below sea level. without, some sort of "scientific" and "engineering" approach, it will be simply a "economic" optimization for contractors, officials and suppliers.

The administration exhibits disdain for science, and congress in general is statistically poorly educated or informed on matters scientific. thus I expect congress to continue doing the "same ole" stuff, what's familiar, and I expect little true commitment to ensure a pragmatic, wholesome engineering solution will be implemented in New Orleans.

also, I don't hear Bush being accountable, as others remark. it's necessary culpability and nothing more. Not blame mind you, but I'm the head of this government, i'm accountable... I just don't hear that. I hear Karl Rove saying
"good enough chief".

an independent commission ought to investigate why the administration, transferred funds destined for the levi's elsewhere the past 2 years. an approximately 80% budget cut is .. pretty severe, and in hindsight is pocket change compared to the billions in damage, and millions of affected lives.

i just find myself thinking, I don't believe you W.

Posted by kurt at September 16, 2005 10:05 AM

I'm a bit surprised by Tom's glowing accolades. The speech came off to me as a collection of crafted talking points, albeit lofty and idealistic ones. I say talking points because I'm not sure how Mr. Bush intends to implement what sounds like a societal/cultural shift for the area. I suppose I also land in the "proof is in the pudding" camp.

If we've learned anything about Bush from the Iraq situation, it's that once he gets an idea in his head, he plows forward full speed. If he is indeed committed to the redevelopment of the Katrina area, rather than crafting a PR response to recent criticism, I would expect to see some swift, concrete plans for his initatives leading to quantifiable results.

Posted by Dean at September 16, 2005 10:20 AM

Tom,

I didn't hear the speech, but I am glad that you may have heard a new voice from the President. As a Canadian who generally looks south with respect, the President's word crafters have taken America in a direction that may appeal to those inside the camp, but from the outside, they often don't represent a great world power as the stewards they should be.

"If you are not with us, you are with the terrorists."

How about, "if you harbour, support or cheer the efforts of terrorists, you are against us."

"America is the greatest country in the world."

How about, "one of the greatest."

These may sound like minor items, but as I am sure you understand, our global village stills gets the message in their own language.

Posted by Glenn Davies at September 16, 2005 10:56 AM

I can really tell that Karen Hughes is back in the fold. I personally do not believe Bush has what it takes to make reconstruction happen in a meaningful way for the poor. Plus, I just don't think he genuinely cares. I believe he only cares about his legacy.

For me, it goes back to Bush's credibility. He just has none with me.

Posted by Nancy R. at September 16, 2005 11:24 AM

I am not excited about his call that "...a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces -- the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment's notice"

Why would we want incompetent people like this to have the power to impose martial law "on a moment's notice?" Perhaps to lock out the media so that the bad news can't travel?

And why is his cheif political operative running the reconstruction? More croynism at work - the $$$ will flow to the family friends without regard for performance or cost.

Posted by Michael J. at September 16, 2005 11:27 AM

Tom - I, too, thought it was one of his best speeches. However, I also thought Karen Hughes must be back. The complexities of this future project of the Gulf Coast and New Orleans is mind boggling. I know that Bush substituted poverty for race during the speech..and yet race and class figure so prominently in this mess in New Orleans. I guess we will have to wait for the social scientists to figure out the solution to that problem - I'd like to hear what Cornel West has to say at Princeton...I noticed that most of the elected black officials were light skinned blacks and most of the blacks stuck in this mess were none to happy with local officials. Back to where the money is coming from? In one of my posts on the leadership issue, I mentioned how corrupt the local officials were around New Orleans and Louisiana so it will be interesting to see how that money gets funneled in and distributed and who rebuilds - The paperwork alone to find these people who were relocated and get them their checks from the jobs they were employed by to paperwork for new jobs and federal assistance and housing in new places..it's mind boggling and then to have Karl Rove a part of the reconstruction is just plain scary - if I were Bush I would have put Colin Powell in charge but who can relate to Karl Rove - talk about a perpetual smirk..So much work has to be done...and that is just to get ready for the next terrorist attack or nature's wrath...I know that the military is the only group that can take on the rescue of a scope of New Orleans in the future but I also worry about military law and now have to study up on that and the comment that Michael J brings up is very thought provoking - I think the fact that the media was there in this crisis allowed for some real hard questions to be asked and for action and I would hate to think that an administration could impose martial law and lock out the media from an event such as we have all experienced.

Posted by suzanne g. at September 16, 2005 12:39 PM

tom :"how the hell do we pay for our bold initiatives " -- yeah just how the hell will americans pay for it eh ??

8% of Gross GDP is Suadi Oil monie
23$ of gross GDP comes from China !!

thats a whoopping 31% .. what happens if they place sanctions against america and/or just pull the plug and wnat their $$ back eh ??

The whole country will be "refugee status" mode !!

Posted by /pd at September 16, 2005 12:51 PM

I found that my friends who hate Bush found the speech bad and punched holes in it. My friends who love Bush thought it was brilliant. But most of those who are in the middle on their opinion of the president and are open minded had the same reaction you did....That it was they type of talk you would want from a leader in a time of crisis.

I heard it on the radio and thought it was fine.

Now we need to not forget what happened and make sure as a people we stay focused on helping the people of the region. Too often we get some time under the belt and the average joe no longer thinks about things gone by. This will take years to get the Gulf Coast booming.

I still love how your blog handles the political issues along side the business ones.

Posted by Thom Singer at September 16, 2005 2:06 PM

No idea what the speech was about, I can assure it was pretty good because it moved a Tom Peters the way that his post destiles optimism and positiveness. It is good for Mr. Peters; should be perfectly good to me too.

Re. the pudding, I love it, the perfection is on the mixture: shaking it well and that's it. A little bit more of pudding mentality for the ones dealing with the Gulf war please.

Re. the situation of New Orleans and the Gulf, well, if one has a big infection declared in the body will be kind of idiotic going here and there for attending others, help yourself first. It would look honourable enough but it wouldn't be smart nor constructive: once death won't be of any help to anyone. This is metaphorical, please handle it with some level of poetry if you can, I think Cathy commented about it in a previous post.

Posted by Omara at September 16, 2005 4:52 PM viagra online in florida

I guess one man's smile is another man's smirk, Tom. My wife, sister-in-law, and I all got the same impression that he was still smirking, as though he was saying the words for their political capital, but didn't really mean them.

I do have to agree that the words, which I heard first on radio, were powerful and direct and effective. Then later, when I saw the replay on TV, I had to switch off after only 10 minutes. It was a whole different experience.

Posted by Bob Watkins at September 16, 2005 6:45 PM

I came here to comment in high dudgeon, but Trevor Gay and Mark JF beat me to it. Yes, "The proof of the pudding is in the eating," not "The proof is in the pudding." That DRIVES ME CRAZY. I always confront people who say the latter: "What the HECK do you mean? Listen to yourself." And I correct them.

Ah, the joys of achieving a certain age.

Posted by D T Nelson at September 16, 2005 8:40 PM

Tom,

The gas ran out on the generators 15 minutes after the speech. What does that tell you?

Posted by tom at September 16, 2005 9:39 PM

Say what you will. I choose optimism.

Posted by Troy Worman at September 16, 2005 11:12 PM

Blah, blah, blah..... when he actually DOES something that hints at compassion or competence- Ill be impressed. Until then, its the same old spin & bs.

Posted by ajhoge at September 17, 2005 8:58 AM

generic viagra prescription online

Luckily we are not Canada! 70% of USA residents now OWN their homes - close to a world record.

Tom the tone of your comments seem to be contrary to past blogs about "people taking care of themselves" in these Islam terror times [and Katrina and Tsunami and HIV and Avian Flu radical what's next times]. Intelligent design thinning out the Earth load?

Must we always look to government as black culture tends to do with their 90% support for your liberal socialist Democratic party - which is now lead by quite radical liberals of Kerry, Clinton, Kennedy, Biden, Edwards and the wacko one - mean [I have a scream] Howard Dean?

Seems like this administration which inherited the moral crisis of Clinton [elected because 3rd party Perot pulled vast numbers of moderate and conservative votes] "governance", the Clinton recession and stock market crash, soldier tasks to perform in Afghanistan and Iraq [perhaps due to Clinton doveish acts while sidetracked with his impeachment and other crimes], incredible Homeland costs, plus a rapidly changing world economy - where the black poor of USA and elsewhere shall now and forever more have their lunch eaten by India & China's poor due to their advanced work and education ethic?

The prosecution rests for now - unlike the braindead Aruba LE which has always been asleep.

Posted by Sean at September 17, 2005 9:28 AM

Sean, we're really glad you aren't Canadian, thanks for that.

Posted by Dave at September 17, 2005 5:06 PM

Thanks for the thanks Dave - just a bit of a dig to "Canadian" Peter Dawson and his consistent anti USA bias.

Posted by Sean at September 18, 2005 9:35 AM

I must say that it was a good speech, but the fact is it was an expertly prepared, staged and rehearsed speech. Even if it was true, without the brilliant minds behind Bush's speech writing he would be fumbling around trying to find an authentic and true voice. All of his off-the-cuff, in-the-moment remarks from the previous 10 days or so are more of a reflection to me of how Bush thinks and processes the situation. It was not until he was corralled and “prepared” did he come off well. It makes me uncomfortable that our leader needs to be propped up so. I wish him the best and send my hope and thoughts to the citizens of the Gulf Coast destroyed by Katrina.

Posted by James Clark at September 18, 2005 11:34 PM

Tom,

I think that you hit the nail on the head with your final comment. How the hell are we going to pay for this grand vision? A grand vision, mind you, intended to outspend its way to an image of compassion. If utopia could be bought for a few hundered billion, or even a trillian dollars, doesn't anybody think it would have been done already? We are dozens of trillians of dollars in debt. One would think that we should have bought even a small corner of that Utopia by now. The only sign that the America that inspires me is still alive and kicking, is the hundereds of millions of dollars in private donations and the massive influx of private volunteers headed south. It's the lunatics jumping in their trucks loaded with supplies heading down to help out that makes me think this country isn't completely lost. NOT a pack of politicians in D.C. writing checks, and NOT a so-called conservative increasing the dollar amount with every negative sound bite or op-ed piece. Bring on the lunatics willing to drop everything to help in any way that they can...even when tomorrow those that were helped will say that it was not enough.

Posted by Robert at September 19, 2005 5:01 AM

Speaking of leadership: When's the last time we had a true leader presiding from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?

Bush 43 is polarizing; the Bush loyalists worship him, the conservatives are leery of him, and the progressives HATE him. Clinton split the country down the center, pitting those who never left Woodstock against those who are responsible for themselves. Bush 41 was a yawner. Carter was a joke. Ford who? I better stop there.

Notice I didn't mention Reagan. The world changed for the better, and the USA is still living off the economic benefits of the 80s, as a result of his leadership.

I'm just waiting for a WOW-type leader to run for President. But then, these people probably look at what goes into the job, and getting elected to the job, and probably want nothing to do with it. Thereby proving Mark Twain's comment: "Now suppose you were an idiot. Or suppose you were politician. But I repeat myself."

Now on to a more substantive issue: I wonder how Jerry Seinfeld would handle the "The Proof Is In The Pudding" comment . . .
"What proof is in the pudding? I was arguing with someone in Central Park yesterday, and looked in my pudding for proof - nope, nothing there. Or maybe they're talking about alcohol . . . is pudding 70 proof? 80 proof? How about 100 proof? 'Hey Kramer, let's go over to the pub and have some pudding!' Just don't drive when you leave. And no arguing about it, no trying to support your position - you don't need to, because the Proof Is In The Pudding!"

Posted by Ron at September 19, 2005 11:10 AM

The point of the reconstruction is not to do anything for the poor. The end result will be the second Great Depression and the elimination of all social welfare programs. In the end, we will become a country without a middle.

Irresponsible financing has been at the core of the surplus give back, the tax cuts, and now this grandeous scheme.

Posted by David Locke at September 25, 2005 10:27 PM