I have a non-combative curiosity about the topic. Question is really for Craigd....
....If a large national, or even worldwide project has a champion at the highest level within our government, and they participate in the birthing of , a great big thing. Could have been NASA, the Internet, the highway system, nuclear bombs, whatever, is it OK for the person who pushed for that to say they built it? Even if they never touched a shovel?
Does pushing the funding required (essential for it to happen at all, whether we agree on the merits or not) allow the sponsor to say they built anything?
You have mentioned that you may be a key developer, project manager of significant automotive projects? What if an engineer under you, came to a meeting and started beating around the bush, and made all manner of justifications for something that stretches the truth a bit. Wouldn't you just say, that person was wasting meeting time, come back to the next meeting, get to the point, and there better be a point?
We, I hope, can agree that algore may not have been the brains and purse strings behind the shovel, but he was certainly a politician? From my point of view, it's interesting how loyal some are, and it really seems to be nibbling at hypocrisies, rather than civil discussion that pushes some to double down? Biggov has built many things, maybe they did build the climate narrative? Does Jimmy know what politicians do, or is there some blind faith?
My question remains the same as it's always been, where is the "we" part in building anything, or more particularly, the custom clays gun, that's a micro niche part of bigger anti2a agendas, which I choose to recognize goes hand in hand with all other social agendas? If someone shares, of their own free will that they vote, don't we know that their algores, will gladly fund and take credit for taking fine wood and rust blued guns away?
