Dick Armey Blasts the Aministration over Y2K

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

This may have been posted before (couldn't find it).

This is the harshest criticism to date that I have seen from a House member.

freedom.house.gov/y2k/news/s990331.asp ********************************************************************************** Administration's Rose-Colored Glasses Make Y2K Readiness Look Better than it Is

March 31, 1999

House Majority Leader Dick Armey made the following statement after the Administration congratulated itself on the federal government's critical computer systems being 92 percent Year 2000 compliant:

"Today the administration is redefining success by patting themselves on the back for being 92% Y2K compliant. The reality is, the Administration has failed to meet its own deadline.

"The administration is fooling itself and luring the American public into a false sense of security.

"The Office of Management and Budget recently reported FAA, HCFA, and the State Department are 'not making adequate progress' in updating their major computer systems. And that's just the systems that the Administration has defined as critical.

"The Administration's definition of 'compliant' just isn't good enough. Although a federal department might claim to be Year 2000 'compliant' - the claim hasn't been independently tested. That's like children being able to grade their own tests -- and everyone getting a perfect score.

"Equally disturbing, there hasn't been any end to end testing to ensure that critical systems work well together. Just because the Social Security Administration can announce that its critical systems are compliant, doesn't mean our parents and grandparents are guaranteed to get their checks on time. It doesn't mean that the Social Security Administration's critical systems have been tested with the Treasury Department system that prints out the checks or with the private banking systems that deposit the checks in seniors' accounts.

"If our federal government isn't ready on January 1, the ramifications through the many sectors of our economy -- health care, transportation, and our financial systems, to name a few -- could be devastating.

"The truth is, that the Administration is looking at the problem through rose colored-glasses -- and that won't make it go away."

Only 249 days left to prepare for the Year 2000.

-- Roland (nottelling@nowhere.com), April 26, 1999

Answers

yep,I wish I had more money,I'd buy more guns........ . .

"Most people would rather die than think; in fact, they do so." (Bertrand Russell)

-- zoobie (zoob@aol.com), April 26, 1999.


No, Zoobie, if you have more money you should buy more ammo.

-- Blue Himalayan (bh@k2.y), April 26, 1999.

Ah, I guess Dick's daily Focus Polling has shown that the members of his district are concerned about Y2K. As a result, you have one clueless politician scolding another clueless politician.

Now THERE'S a novelty.

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), April 26, 1999.


Just how many weapons can you fire at one time?

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), April 26, 1999.


Mr. Poole, that is a pretty lame observation given the fact that the CIA and the NSA have given congress several classified briefings on Y2K, and they are privvy to information no one else has.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), April 26, 1999.


"The administration is fooling itself and luring the American public into a false sense of security."

I wonder if Dick Armey has been hanging out here? I think I may have finally found a politician that I like! <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), April 26, 1999.


How many weapons you can fire at one time is dependent on how large a collective you have assembled and the total number of firearms in their posession. Unless you're planning to go it alone that is.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), April 26, 1999.

Mr. Poole, that is a pretty lame observation given the fact that the CIA and the NSA have given congress several classified briefings on Y2K, and they are privvy to information no one else has.

Sure, Nikoli.

The same CIA and NSA that utterly failed to predict the invasion of Kuwait until it was too late, who failed to predict the breakup of the Soviet Union until it was already happening, and -- you get the point.

Further, these agencies are testifying to a Congress which, in the past at various and sundry times, has relied on such luminaries as Meryl Streep and Jane Fonda to inform them about subjects like Alar on apples.

But I'm not a cynic; I have high hopes that Washington will get a clue. Any day now.

I'll say it again: I am amused that many of the same people who formerly wouldn't believe a WORD uttered by Washington now believe anything they say about Y2K (provided it's BAD news, that is [g]).

http://www.wwjd.net/smpoole

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), April 26, 1999.


Stephen, it's 'cause anybody who agrees with me is obviously a genius. :-)

(Just kidding. I don't "believe" him. I just agree with him.)

PJ in TX

-- PJ Gaenir (fire@firedocs.com), April 26, 1999.


Mr. Poole, ouch that one hit dead center. I had it coming too, that's the worst part. :)

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), April 26, 1999.


PJ: "I don't believe him, I just agree with him."

OK. That one is acceptable. [g]

(Actually I like Dick Armey; he's my Flat Tax hero.)

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), April 27, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ