Katrina - Was the Govt alert enough?

[sachin410]

I got this article as a forward this morning. It was wriiten almost a year back.

http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/feature5/

[exaro]

It was just too little too late. Nothing can be done now except help those who were affected. No use playing the blame game.

[Crazy_Rob]

It was just too little too late. Nothing can be done now except help those who were affected. No use playing the blame game.

Well actually there is use in playing the blame game. We need to find out why this happened and hold people accountable.

It's not likely to happen...it never does. But it's the only way to make sure this doesn't happen again.

I would expect resignations and firings as soon as things are stable.

[sachin410]

Quoting from NatGeo's OCT 2004 issues.

"The storm hit Breton Sound with the fury of a nuclear warhead, pushing a deadly storm surge into Lake Pontchartrain. The water crept to the top of the massive berm that holds back the lake and then spilled over. Nearly 80 percent of New Orleans lies below sea level—more than eight feet below in places—so the water poured in. A liquid brown wall washed over the brick ranch homes of Gentilly, over the clapboard houses of the Ninth Ward, over the white-columned porches of the Garden District, until it raced through the bars and strip joints on Bourbon Street like the pale rider of the Apocalypse. As it reached 25 feet (eight meters) over parts of the city, people climbed onto roofs to escape it.

Thousands drowned in the murky brew that was soon contaminated by sewage and industrial waste. Thousands more who survived the flood later perished from dehydration and disease as they waited to be rescued. It took two months to pump the city dry, and by then the Big Easy was buried under a blanket of putrid sediment, a million people were homeless, and 50,000 were dead. It was the worst natural disaster in the history of the United States.

When did this calamity happen? It hasn't—yet. But the doomsday scenario is not far-fetched. The Federal Emergency Management Agency lists a hurricane strike on New Orleans as one of the most dire threats to the nation, up there with a large earthquake in California or a terrorist attack on New York City."

[Hodgedup]

I would expect resignations and firings as soon as things are stable.

That's the key part right there, as soon as things are stable.

I hate how there's a huge witch hunt right now about who's to blame, who's fault is this, why didn't so-and-so do this or that. I mean focus some energy on getting people food, water, and medical attention. After that's done let's find out who's to blame and hold them accountable. Pointing fingers right now is pointless and does more harm thne good.

[Crazy_Rob]

The US Army Corps of Engineers, which maintains the levees, requested $27m this year for hurricane protection around the lake. President Bush tried to cut this to $3.9m, although Congress allowed $5.7m. The President also tried to cut $78m to improve drainage and prevent flooding in the city to $30m, though Congress passed $36.5m. A $14bn longer-term project to restore marshes was cut to $570m.

From here:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article310195.ece

[compar]

From here:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article310195.ece
As Harry Truman use to say "the buck stops here". George Bush can spend billions and billions sending young American to die in Iraq, but when it come to keeping the people at home safe he cuts the hell out of eveything.

Come to think of it I guess his approach is consistent he is sending Americans to their death in both situations. In fact it appears that human life really isn't a concern of his or his administration as long as Haliburton and the other fat cat industrialist are making obscene amounts of money.

[Hodgedup]

Right now there is so much conflicting information being thrown out all over the place. It’s going to take a while to know exactly what is the truth and what isn’t. There is finger-pointing going on everywhere. That’s not to say that I don’t think Bush isn’t to blame for a big part of this. I think the list is a lot bigger.

Here are a couple of other questions that I have though:

1) What else has funding been taken from that seriously needs it that will yield it’s ugly head shortly?

2) A lot of news stories have reported that this and terrorists in NY were 2 of the 3 top emergencies that the government were warned about several years ago. What is the other one? Has anyone read that and what kind of precautions have been put in place?

I mean I thought after 9-11 we had some type of emergency agencies and planning in place. It looks like nothing came out of 9-11 as far as administrative/government planning and implementation.

[sarahk]

It's not my fight but I'd agree that the blame game will happen but far more important is that changes are made for the future.

I can't get out of my head the picture of submerged buses that if they couldn't be used for evacuation (how hard is to drive a bus slowly in a convoy?) or for emergency camps on high ground.

It seems astounding that the local governments from the '40s onwards allowed New Orleans to prosper and grow when it should have been restrained and restricted. $$$ talks however and that's why New Orleans is a big city, with insubstantial levees and an erosion problem that has created a "hurricane corrider" leading straight to it.

America is a big country, surely a city didn't HAVE to be built on a swamp below sea level?

[Crazy_Rob]

I mean I thought after 9-11 we had some type of emergency agencies and planning in place. It looks like nothing came out of 9-11 as far as administrative/government planning and implementation.

That is very scary!

[Will.Spencer]

Here are a few good articles that have shown up in my mailbox on the disaster:

Gov. Blanco is responsible for Katrina aftermath catastrophe (http://www.jonchristianryter.com/News_Folder/Behind.html) -- unlike what the title suggests -- is actually a comprehensive history of the political events leading up to the current disaster response difficulties.

Another interesting article is Why The Katrina Coverage Made Me Switch To Fox News! (http://www.postchronicle.com/commentary/article_212499.shtml) from the Post Chronicle.

Nagin's Failure (http://billhobbs.com/hobbsonline/007188.html) documents the failure of the Mayor of New Orleans to utilize city buses and school buses to evacuate the population.

Ben Franklin Had The Right Idea for New Orleans (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/03/opinion/03tierney.html) shows us how uncommon common sense has become in the era of entitlement government.

An Unnatural Disaster: A Hurricane Exposes the Man-Made Disaster of the Welfare State (http://tiadaily.com/php-bin/news/showArticle.php?id=1026) puts recent events in an economic and historical context.

The State and the Flood (http://www.mises.org/story/1902) documents current events in the context of the welfare state ideology.

[Will.Spencer]

America is a big country, surely a city didn't HAVE to be built on a swamp below sea level?

I can't help it.

This reminded me of a song from Sunday School thirty years ago.

The wise man built his house upon the rock (3x)
And the rain came tumbling down
The rain came down and the floods came up (3x)
And the wise man’s house stood firm
The foolish man built his house upon the sand (3x)
And the rain came tumbling down
The rain came down and the floods came up (3x)
And the foolish man’s house went bang.

This song is based upon Matthew Chapter 7:

7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
7:25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
7:27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
7:28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine.

[Hodgedup]

America is a big country, surely a city didn't HAVE to be built on a swamp below sea level?


The French founded New Orleans almost 300 years ago. It was chosen for its location. It was right on the ocean and the Mississippi River making it a perfect place for trade back when transporting goods was huge expedition. The city just grew from that.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Orleans,_Louisiana
New Orleans was founded in 1718 by the French as La Nouvelle-Orléans, under the direction of Jean-Baptiste Le Moyne de Bienville. The site was selected because it was a rare bit of natural high ground along the flood-prone]] banks of the lower Mississippi, and was adjacent to a Native American trading route and portage between the Mississippi and Lake Pontchartrain via Bayou St. John (known to the natives as Bayou Choupique). A community of French fur trappers and traders had existed along the bayou (in what is now the middle of New Orleans) for at least a decade before the official founding of the city. Nouvelle-Orléans became the capital of French Louisiana in 1722, replacing Biloxi in that role.

[Will.Spencer]

I mean I thought after 9-11 we had some type of emergency agencies and planning in place. It looks like nothing came out of 9-11 as far as administrative/government planning and implementation.

I thought after billions of years of floods and hurricanes, people would be smart enough not to build homes in places that constantly experience floods and hurricanes.

Unfortunately, it seems that people are willing to participate in any sort of foolishness when they can do so with the expectation that the allmighty American taxpayer will bail them out.

[sarahk]

The French founded New Orleans almost 300 years ago. It was chosen for its location. It was right on the ocean and the Mississippi River making it a perfect place for trade back when transporting goods was huge expedition. The city just grew from that.The buildings that we've seen on TV -the superdome, the convention centres, the hotels are all less than 50 years old. As science got better the town planners must have known the city needed a greater than normal % of permeable surface (ie less concrete), needed the focus on building to move from the fashionable areas to a safer place. Where were the environmentalists fighting erosion and warning about the effects of development. So much for the people who shrug and say "Can't stop progress". Maybe the changes would have made New Orleans financially unfeasible but c'est la vie. 300 years ago they didn't know what we knew 50 years ago.

[compar]

2) A lot of news stories have reported that this and terrorists in NY were 2 of the 3 top emergencies that the government were warned about several years ago. What is the other one?
I would bet the third one is a major earth quake in California.

For all you guys who would never have built in New Orleans, would you now like to move all Californians east of the San Andreas Fault?

[sarahk]

I would bet the third one is a major earth quake in California.

For all you guys who would never have built in New Orleans, would you now like to move all Californians east of the San Andreas Fault?Local Government still has a responsiblity to ensure that the density of local population doesn't exceed it's ability to be supported - either in utilities or in the case of an emergency. You would have to assume that the Californian bureaucrats have plans in place and are structuring the city accordingly. Or are you telling me that when a developer buys land to subdivide there is no consultation with local government? That there are no limits to how many people reside in a particular area?

[Will.Spencer]

For all you guys who would never have built in New Orleans, would you now like to move all Californians east of the San Andreas Fault?

They can move if they want. It's not our responsibility to move them.

This is America. This is how we do things in America.

I dunno how y'all do things in Canada. :rolleyes:

[compar]

They can move if they want. It's not our responsibility to move them.

This is America. This is how we do things in America.

I dunno how y'all do things in Canada. :rolleyes:
Let me rephrase the question: For all you guys who would never have built in New Orleans, would you now recommend that all Californians should move east of the San Andreas Fault?

Will,

I read you rant about self sufficiency and private insurance. Funny thing is I didn't see any insurance companies flying helicopers and rescuing people from their roof tops.

I've never read an insurance clause that says in the event of some freak of nature or "act of God" the insurance company will provide you with the necessities of life within 24 to 48 hours and only after we have you safe and sound will we start the insurance claim process.

[Hodgedup]

The buildings that we've seen on TV -the superdome, the convention centres, the hotels are all less than 50 years old. As science got better the town planners must have known the city needed a greater than normal % of permeable surface (ie less concrete), needed the focus on building to move from the fashionable areas to a safer place. Where were the environmentalists fighting erosion and warning about the effects of development. So much for the people who shrug and say "Can't stop progress". Maybe the changes would have made New Orleans financially unfeasible but c'est la vie. 300 years ago they didn't know what we knew 50 years ago.

Everyone knew that it was the coast is susceptible to hurricanes like areas in the west are susceptible to earthquakes and the central US is in hurricane alley. Yeah everyone in the last 50 years has known that certain areas are not safe. It’s not real feasible to say, “Well you should abandon this area and go somewhere safer.”

Auckland is right on the water and in a an area that has had volcanic activity in the past I guess it’s time for everyone to move.

[sarahk]

Auckland is right on the water and in a an area that has had volcanic activity in the past I guess it’s time for everyone to move.Auckland has 30+ volcanos and you can be damn sure that every single one of those has more probes and sensors going down than you'd imagine. We'd have more than 2 days notice (more like months) to evacuate if one of them started hotting up and we wouldn't have to travel far to do so.

Yes, we might lose our investments but you can be sure that that is all factored in.

The process to get resource consent to even build a garage or deck is lengthy and involved. There are limits on non-permeable surfaces, light restrictions, blah blah to ensure that if we get heavy rainfall the water has somewhere to go. Every so often you get dramatic weather with dramatic outcomes but the numbers affected are relatively low and our climate is relatively benign.

Wellington is another story! It's a nasty rocky little town with a large proportion of the housing perched on the side of steep hills and earth quakes are common. Bugger that for a joke. If I lived down there I'd be in Lower Hutt or somewhere - less sulubrius but hey, atleast you're not sliding down a hill to your death.

That doesn't actually happen but given how often it does shake you have to think that the big one will happen. That said, I also KNOW that the systems are in place for when it does. We'll have the vast majority of survivors out/safe in 24 hours and rescuers in even quicker.

[compar]

That doesn't actually happen but given how often it does shake you have to think that the big one will happen. That said, I also KNOW that the systems are in place for when it does. We'll have the vast majority of survivors out/safe in 24 hours and rescuers in even quicker.
That sounds like a hell of a lot of Taxpayers money to me. Will certainly wouldn't ever want to live there.

[Will.Spencer]

Let me rephrase the question: For all you guys who would never have built in New Orleans, would you now recommend that all Californians should move east of the San Andreas Fault?

I recommend to every single Californian I know to move out of that horrible state.

I read you rant about self sufficiency and private insurance. Funny thing is I didn't see any insurance companies flying helicopers and rescuing people from their roof tops.

The insurance company isn't paid for that.

I also wouldn't ask my barber to paint my garage.

If you want helicopter service, pay someone for helicopter service.

Or, you could save money and leave town when you were told to, instead of waiting around for a bloody hurricane like a complete moron.

That's choice. Choice is what America is all about.

[digimania]

With all those refugees stocked at the dome and thousands of people floating on the water, I don't think I Government really prepared for this disaster--or maybe chose not to do the appropriate actions even just to minimize the impact.

[yfs1]

Or, you could save money and leave town when you were told to, instead of waiting around for a bloody hurricane like a complete moron.

Except when you have no means to leave. I don't agree on the morons comment.

Plus how do you "save money" when you have none to begin with

[Hodgedup]

Except when you have no means to leave. I don't agree on the morons comment.

Plus how do you "save money" when you have none to begin with

Yeah if you look at the people in NO right now it doesn't really appear like a whole lot of them had a big stockpile of expendable income.

That's been one of the whole issues.

[yfs1]

Yeah if you look at the people in NO right now it doesn't really appear like a whole lot of them had a big stockpile of expendable income.

That's been one of the whole issues.

They should have all bought helicopters.....morons :rolleyes:

[Crazy_Rob]

Or, you could save money and leave town when you were told to, instead of waiting around for a bloody hurricane like a complete moron.


Thanks for showing your true colors to everyone on the forum!

[compar]

That is the whole thing Will is missing with his "American way". The people who are still in NO are poor innercity blacks who work at Mac Donald and clean the toilets and do all the other menial tasks that keep the city running and makes the profit for the business owners.

They don't make enough money to have the choices that he talks about. And it is the "American way" that makes sure they don't make the money. Will, do you think people live in grinding poverty by choice?

[yfs1]

. Will, do you think people live in grinding poverty by choice?

If they would have saved their money rather then throwing it away on vacations to the south of france, caviar and champagne they could have afforded the transportation to get out of there :cool:


(more sarcasm)

[gworld]

The problem was that government was not prepared or their emergency response program did not include poor people. Look at the American request from Canada, does it look like that they were prepared?

Canada asked to send medical supplies to New Orleans (http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/09/04/medical-supplies-to-New-Orleans0904.html)

Canadian government officials said Sunday that U.S. authorities have asked Canada to send beds, blankets, gloves and other medical supplies.

Howard Njoo of Canada's public health agency said the Americans also requested gowns, batteries, needles, surgical dressings, bandages, tongue depressers, bath towels and cloths. "We're certainly going to be looking at possibly supplying more to them as the situation evolves," Njoo said.

He added that Canada might eventually send a mobile hospital to the affected area. When asked for an example of the amount of suuplies Canada was sending, Njoo gave as an example 7,000 disposable blankets and 6,000 pairs of examination gloves.
...........................
..........................
On Friday, Air Canada sent an aircraft to New Orleans with bottled water and relief supplies. The Air Canada plane will operate shuttle flights to help evacuate people to Texas.

[Dreamshop]

I thought after billions of years of floods and hurricanes, people would be smart enough not to build homes in places that constantly experience floods and hurricanes.


So basically you're saying that the US should simply abandon some of its most valuable resource producing lands?

I mean if were going to include ALL potentially hazardous areas that would mean most places anywhere near the Mississippi River (a watershed for over 1.2 million square miles and includes tributary rivers from 32 states). Let's not forget that the MS river valley also suffers from earthquakes (http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/prepare/factsheets/NewMadrid/).

If we're talking about leaving all dangerous areas that would also include the entire West coast of California (not to mention central CA due to flooding), plus most of Florida, the Gulf Coast, and a lot of the East Coast as well.

Hell, let's just all move to the central Western states (avoiding Tornado alley of course) cause that's about the only place I can see that isn't totally prone to natural disasters. Course I'm not sure how much farming we'll get done in New Mexico, Utah, and Arizona. Maybe that will require everyone living in the desert while more fertile states are reserved for farming only. We'll also have to give up importing goods since we'll be abandoning all our port cities (except maybe New York...but then again, that place was bombed...so we shouldn't be living there either).



Ah hell...I'm just gonna move to New Zealand, at least people are willing to support each other there. :cool:

[sarahk]

So basically you're saying that the US should simply abandon some of its most valuable resource producing lands?Not necessarily, but you ensure that the population density and town planning allows for the "unique" features of the area so that the impact of habitation is minimised. God, I sound like a greenie :rolleyes:

[Dreamshop]

Not necessarily, but you ensure that the population density and town planning allows for the "unique" features of the area so that the impact of habitation is minimised. God, I sound like a greenie :rolleyes:


LOL Sarah...I was really responding to Will's comments, yours are certainly more viable than simply calling people morons. :rolleyes:


My friends sweetie is a writer and was able to get press passes into damaged areas. He's doing a series of articles for Salon.com. He's done some truly touching pieces, this one covers some of the struggle that's still going on just getting people into shelters (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/09/04/bus/index.html).

On Sunday he rode with Jesse Jackson who managed to pick up 150 at the NO airport (mostly women and elderly, some families).

On the way to the airport we see six buses full of people, pulled over at the side of the road. We pass about 150 buses sitting empty on the opposite side of the highway. We see many other buses, also empty, driving in both directions. "You'd think they were full if you were taking pictures from a helicopter," a cameraman says. "All those empty buses moving around."

[Hodgedup]

Ah hell...I'm just gonna move to New Zealand, at least people are willing to support each other there. :cool:

Don't go there. If a volcano erupts you'll be homeless and just like all of those other kiwis.:D

[Liminal]

Not to beat the dead horse again...

I am a strong believer that among several things to blame for what happened is the fact that US govt has nearly depleted its funds in IRAQ and was not ready (neither in terms of funds nor manpower, energy, etc) to deal with the disaster adequately. Besides, most of it could have been avoided in the first place has more attention been spent on improving the levees, evacuation procedures and related measures years ago. But again, the money and energy needed for that has been spent or was allocated elsewhere :mad:

[antonaf]

Just my 2 cents

I think the ball was definitely dropped. It took way to long for anyone to react, especially with advance notice.

The problem with the situation is that if this was an unexpected terrorist attack our response time is to slow...this makes us look vulnerable as a country.

Overall, I think the entire stage has been set to throw blame, moreso for political reasons oppsose to any other reason. I think this is a good chance for the Democrats to make a bigger deal out of the entire situation and exploit this tradegy to make themselves look good. And once again make this a race issue so in 2008 they can have the African-American vote.

Media is playing a big part in all this. Fox News reports are a bit different than CNN News reports.

Please note: I do NOT represent any political party. I'm independent and make decisions on issues not because of a political stance. Just wanted to clear it up for people who may think I'm political, because I'm not.

[ferret77]

you know Will if a mertorite hit your house in colorado, and burned up your credit cards you would crying for help just like everyone else

Will have you spent you whole life sourounded by the middle to upper class?

I am not tyring to take personal shots I am just trying to understand where your view points come from.

Are you one of those people whose mommy and daddy helped them thru college?

Or are someone who comes from a poor background and now hates his roots?

Not everyone is born smart or lucky, some people are born dumb and/or poor in New Orleans, where these people supposed to go, with what money?

If there was 20,000 at the dome right, thats like 250 busloads, where were this buses supposed to take the people?

[mikelbeck]

Today I've been hearing that the federal government "couldn't" step in because the governor of LA is responsible for activating the National Guard, and they didn't. At least, that's what the crazy neo-cons on the radio are saying.

Do they really think that anybody would have been pissed off had the federal government overstepped it's authority and immediately sent National Guardsman or military personnel to assist in the evacuation? Would there be fallout afterwards, calling for the president's head on a platter? No, there would be heaps of praise, everybody being happy that the feds took the initative to save lives for once instead of spending billions of dollars to take them.

Instead, the feds sat on their hands, saying "we can't do anything unless they ask", which all the while people - CHILDREN, elderly, sick and able-bodies alike - were dying in the streets of a major american city and in THEIR OWN HOMES!

And while the president stopped in for a photo op, all air traffic in the area was prohibited. What did that do? Food & water deliveries were stopped, resues stopped, evacuactions stopped. FOR HOURS!

WTF, people?

Would this have happened if a storm like this had wiped out Boston, or East Hampton, or Myrtle Beach? No, of course not.

Here's a nice letter to President Bush from the New Orleans Times-Picayune staff:

http://www.nola.com/newslogs/tporleans/index.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_tporleans/archives/2005_09.html#076771

[ferret77]

I don't how much blame can placed on who, but I bet just like after 911 no loses thier job, they will have some committee, and some other BS. Then nothign will happen , again.

[debunked]

I am curious to know why they had so many empty buses back when they called for an evacuation, but also I haven't heard if they had places to take them set up or not?? And if it was just the one particular dome that was under water itself?

I am more interested in the facts and how to avoid this kind of problem then trying to point the finger. (I don't mind prosecuting any corrupt officials who may have spent the funds that were meant to strengthen the levies, etc.. too.)

[yfs1]

If they would have saved their money rather then throwing it away on vacations to the south of france, caviar and champagne they could have afforded the transportation to get out of there :cool:


(more sarcasm)
Apparently someone took my sarcasm seriously and left a red rep saying I am clueless about the plight of the poor in New Orleans.

Trust me, I'm not clueless. My sarcastic post was meant to show that people didn't have the money to leave, contrary to Wills assertion that they should have "saved some money so they could get out of there"

[mikelbeck]

Apparently someone took my sarcasm seriously and left a red rep saying I am clueless about the plight of the poor in New Orleans.

I've gotten one red and one green from this thread. One asshat reminded me of the Posse Comitatus Act, which says (in part):

it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress

What I said was:

Do they really think that anybody would have been pissed off had the federal government overstepped it's authority and immediately sent National Guardsman or military personnel to assist in the evacuation?

Nowhere did I say anything about "the military enforcing civilian law" (which is
what the comment with the red rep says).

So... Whoever you are who left me the red rep - next time read the thread before passing judgement, knucklehead.

[debunked]

On opinion threads I will red rep someone when they are being a complete jerk towards someone or trying to put words in their mouth by rewording what was stated. Besides that an opinion doesn't deserve a red rep.

- Back on subject so as not to turn this into a YART-

[gworld]

Who cares about red rep, it is usually used by those that can not argue intelligently. I got a red rep with comment :

"this red approved by FEMA" because I quoted from FEMA web site that they were the one who were responsible. :rolleyes:

[Will.Spencer]

contrary to Wills assertion that they should have "saved some money so they could get out of there"

That is actually a mis-quote.

My comment was pointing out that if they had left town when they were told to, it would have been less expensive than rescue helicopters.

[Will.Spencer]

I am a strong believer that among several things to blame for what happened is the fact that US govt has nearly depleted its funds in IRAQ and was not ready (neither in terms of funds nor manpower, energy, etc) to deal with the disaster adequately. Besides, most of it could have been avoided in the first place has more attention been spent on improving the levees, evacuation procedures and related measures years ago. But again, the money and energy needed for that has been spent or was allocated elsewhere :mad:

Except that you are making an enormous logical error.

The money we are spending in Iraq is from the Federal budget.

The money which should be spent on improving local levees in New Orleans is from the city, county, or state budgets.

Sorry, I know that people do not like to be corrected. :(

[gworld]

Except that you are making an enormous logical error.

The money we are spending in Iraq is from the Federal budget.

The money which should be spent on improving local levees in New Orleans is from the city, county, or state budgets.

Sorry, I know that people do not like to be corrected. :(

Will,

I think it will be good that you start to learn about the subject before starting to correct the others. :rolleyes:

"Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars. "

"In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness.

On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us.Also that June, with the 2004 hurricane season starting, the Corps' project manager Al Naomi went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and essentially begged for $2 million for urgent work that Washington was now unable to pay for. From the June 18, 2004 Times-Picayune:

"The system is in great shape, but the levees are sinking. Everything is sinking, and if we don't get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can't stay ahead of the settlement," he said. "The problem that we have isn't that the levee is low, but that the federal funds have dried up so that we can't raise them."

The panel authorized that money, and on July 1, 2004, it had to pony up another $250,000 when it learned that stretches of the levee in Metairie had sunk by four feet. The agency had to pay for the work with higher property taxes. The levee board noted in October 2004 that the feds were also now not paying for a hoped-for $15 million project to better shore up the banks of Lake Pontchartrain."

The 2004 hurricane season was the worst in decades. In spite of that, the federal government came back this spring with the steepest reduction in hurricane and flood-control funding for New Orleans in history. Because of the proposed cuts, the Corps office there imposed a hiring freeze. Officials said that money targeted for the SELA project -- $10.4 million, down from $36.5 million -- was not enough to start any new jobs.

There was, at the same time, a growing recognition that more research was needed to see what New Orleans must do to protect itself from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane. But once again, the money was not there. As the Times-Picayune reported last Sept. 22:

"That second study would take about four years to complete and would cost about $4 million, said Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi. About $300,000 in federal money was proposed for the 2005 fiscal-year budget, and the state had agreed to match that amount. But the cost of the Iraq war forced the Bush administration to order the New Orleans district office not to begin any new studies, and the 2005 budget no longer includes the needed money, he said."


Did New Orleans Catastrophe Have to Happen? (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313)

Nearly 2000 soldiers dead, possibly over 10,000 dead in New Orleans, the question is how many Americans need to die, so few people can make profit?

[Will.Spencer]

you know Will if a mertorite hit your house in colorado, and burned up your credit cards you would crying for help just like everyone else

Yes. To MYSELF and to my INSURANCE COMPANY.

I wouldn't be whining at the Federal government for help, or claiming that GEORGE BUSH DOESN'T LIKE IRISH PEOPLE.


Will have you spent you whole life sourounded by the middle to upper class?

Actually, the exact opposite. I grew up poor enough that we seldom had furniture in the house and I do know from first hand experience what it is like not to eat because you just don't have the money.

What I did have was personal responsibility, which is worth more than all of the money in the world.

And, with that personal responsibility, I built two successful companies and now I am (to borrow a phrase) "middle to upper class".


I am not tyring to take personal shots I am just trying to understand where your view points come from.

No offense taken, as you were so far off the mark you made me chuckle. :D


Are you one of those people whose mommy and daddy helped them thru college?

I never finished high-school. I tried college a few times, but never saw the value in it.

All but a few of my professors seemed as if they would be completely and totally lost in the real world.

Two of those were part-time professionals who only taught one class. The third was an econ professor who was terminated for what I would call "academic excellence".



Or are someone who comes from a poor background and now hates his roots?

Wrong again. I love my roots. They gave me the strength and the determination to get me where I am today.

Being poor is a great place to start and a horrible place to finish.

My Democrats I know are rich mommas boys who have never had to wonder where their next meal would come from. They sympathise with poor people, but they don't understand poor people.

I do understand poor people. I've been one and I've worked with many more. I've spent many hours working with people in homeless shelters and soup kitchens. I've invited homeless people into my home to live until they could get on their feet.

I understand poor people. I do not have an equally good understanding of "dumb people". Perhaps that why I'm not grasping the behavior of a lot of liberals during this storm. :rolleyes:

If I was facing a hurricane, my first thought would not be How will George Bush save me from this storm?

[Will.Spencer]

I think it will be good that you start to learn about the subject before starting to correct the others.

The fact that the politicians in Louisiana have been able to misappropriate Federal taxpayer funds in the past does not in any way make it correct.

In effect, you completely changed topics without realizing it.

Please re-read my post and re-evaluate your hidden assumptions.

If anything, you are proving that what we have done wrong is to give Louisana any Federal funds for their levees in the past, because this led the people of Louisana to believe that their own lives were not their own responsibility but were instead somehow the responsibility of someone in Washington D.C.

[gworld]

If anything, you are proving that what we have done wrong is to give Louisana any Federal funds for their levees in the past, because this led the people of Louisana to believe that their own lives were not their own responsibility but were instead somehow the responsibility of someone in Washington D.C.

It seems government has no problem with collecting federal taxes and using the state resources in the war and the problem only starts when they have to take care of their responsibilities. :rolleyes:
Why do you need FEMA for, just to provide employment for Bush friends who get fired from horse organizations?

[ferret77]

Yes. To MYSELF and to my INSURANCE COMPANY.

but if you are surrounded by water ( or fire in the case of the meteor) with no phone service, you will probably need someone else first,

I do understand poor people. I've been one and I've worked with many more. I've spent many hours working with people in homeless shelters and soup kitchens. I've invited homeless people into my home to live until they could get on their feet.


I don't understand how someone with any grasp of reality can think that all of those people just volunteered to stay

[Will.Spencer]

FEMA has always been a joke. It's just another Federal welfare program.

It doesn't matter who is giving out posts to their friends, Bush, Clinton, LBJ, Nixon, Kennedy -- it's all just a bunch of folks taking money from the pockets of the American taxpayer and using that money to pay off their friends.

Honestly, do you think that politics just started happening when George Bush was elected? Please... it is amazing that the liberal establishment can speak that ignorant rhetoric with a straight face. Their record is even worse than the Republicans!

[Will.Spencer]

but if you are surrounded by water ( or fire in the case of the meteor) with no phone service, you will probably need someone else first,

Yes, and when I look for that helping hand, I'll start by looking at the end of my own arm.




I don't understand how someone with any grasp of reality can think that all of those people just volunteered to stay

And yet, if you look at the facts, that is exactly what happened.

It's not the choice you or I would make, so the logical (and incorrect) assumption is that no one would make that choice.

The trouble with liberals is that they do not understand poor people.

Even if the incompetent New Orleans mayor had not refused to use city buses and school buses to evacuate residents, those people still would not have evacuated when they should have.

[ferret77]

Those people had no money and no where to go, there was no public transportaion, how were they going anywhere, if you have no money, where do they choose to go.

I mean sure people could have sold their possessions or something to get the ride out, but come on ...

Yes, and when I look for that helping hand, I'll start by looking at the end of my own arm.

and if people arn't as self reliant or as smart as you Will then they deserve nothing, right will ....

[Will.Spencer]

Hey ferret77, my garage is dirty. Will you come over and clean it for me? I'm awfully tired and I really can't do it myself.

[ferret77]

yeah I'll bring some homeless people so you can have sleep over and we can all go the the soup kitchen afterwards

[GTech]

Those people had no money and no where to go, there was no public transportaion....

Why there was no public transportation available between Friday and Sunday is a question lots of people are asking. They are asking why the local and state did not execute their disaster plan.

http://www.ohsep.louisiana.gov/plans/EOPSupplement1a.pdf

Louisiana disaster plan, pg 13, para 5 , dated 01/00


The primary means of hurricane evacuation will be personal vehicles. School and municipal buses, government-owned vehicles and vehicles provided by volunteer agencies may be used to provide transportation for individuals who lack transportation and require assistance in evacuating


The school buses referenced: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050901/480/flpc21109012015

Photo only covers the school buses, not the public buses. Approximately 500 buses in total could have been used, but were not. Why?

[GTech]

It seems government has no problem with collecting federal taxes and using the state resources in the war and the problem only starts when they have to take care of their responsibilities. :rolleyes:
Why do you need FEMA for, just to provide employment for Bush friends who get fired from horse organizations?

Who do you suppose is taking action in four states hit by a hurricane? The French?

[ferret77]

Photo only covers the school buses, not the public buses. Approximately 500 buses in total could have been used, but were not. Why?

Maybe all the bus drivers had fled

[Will.Spencer]

GTech:

That is an excellent question.

It forces me to think about two other questions:

1. Why did the buses which were used leave the city half-empty?

2. Why did people refuse to evacuate when ordered to?


I try not to even think about this one:

3. Why were residents firing on the bus drivers?


Which leads me to this one:

4. Why did the Governor of Louisiana refuse National Guard assistance?


And then, of course, I cannot help but wonder about this one:

5. Why do people blame President Bush for the decisions of the Mayor of New Orleans and the Governor of Louisiana?

[sarahk]

Photo only covers the school buses, not the public buses. Approximately 500 buses in total could have been used, but were not. Why?At the very least the buses should have been moved to high ground, parked tightly but in a staircase configuration (so that the front door is exposed) and made available as temporary accommodation.

[ferret77]

where would they have taken the people?

was there even gas left in new orleans?

whenever there is a hurricane arround here the gas is the first stuff to go

[Will.Spencer]

At the very least the buses should have been moved to high ground, parked tightly but in a staircase configuration (so that the front door is exposed) and made available as temporary accommodation.

These are excellent points.

The answer seems to be some sort of weird story where the Mayor of New Orleans felt that the storm was George Bush's problem, not his problem or the problem for the residents of New Orleans.

The Mayor literally did nothing. But that is even better than the Governor, who actually managed to do less than nothing by refusing to allow the National Guard to assist.

[Will.Spencer]

where would they have taken the people?
was there even gas left in new orleans?
whenever there is a hurricane arround here the gas is the first stuff to go

It's not like this thing happened overnight.

It's like the Governor of Louisana and the Mayor of New Orleans don't get the Weather Channel.

[GTech]

Will, good questions. From the liberal's point of view, they are very easy to answer: It was Bush's fault. It doesn't take any rational or thought to utter the words.

From a realistic stand point, they among many other questions that people (even some of the media) are starting to ask.

Sarah, from a timeline perspective, I think the buses could have been used to evacuate people. There was plenty of time. Oddly enough, as I'm listening to the news just now, a reporter said there were some 2000 buses available. Don't know how accurate that is, but it would only compound the question even more.

If we look a the timeline:

6:22 PM Pacific Friday 8/26/05
Blanco declares state of emergency

Saturday August 27, 2005 2:29 Eastern
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:WQdtTYXPcCcJ:news.yahoo.com/news%3Ftmpl%3Dstory%26u%3D/ap/20050827/ap_on_re_us/tropical_weather_37+bush+orders+mayor+to+evacuate+new+Orleans+aug+27&hl=en&client=firefox-a
"This is not a test," New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin said at a news conference. He said he would probably ask people to leave at daybreak Sunday, and said the Superdome could be pressed into use as a shelter of last resort for people who do not have cars.

Sunday August 28, 2005
Waits until Sunday for evacuation, after urging from Bush
(Note, if Bush had not urged them, how much worse would it be?)
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:RGrwXIfpv8UJ:www.cnn.com/rssclick/2005/WEATHER/08/28/hurricane.katrina/%3Fsection%3Dcnn_topstories+bush+orders+mayor+to+evacuate+new+Orleans&hl=en&client=firefox-a

Maybe I just don't understand everything that happened between Friday and Sunday, but two days past (and then on into the day) where these buses could have been used. The amount of people at the Superdome could have been evacuated, possibly even more.

Add to the questions that are mounting:

What is FEMA's response time to disasters?

[ferret77]

I wasn't one of the people blaming GW,

I was one of the people who think the government should help trapped people

there is a difference Will,

[GTech]

where would they have taken the people?

was there even gas left in new orleans?

whenever there is a hurricane arround here the gas is the first stuff to go

1. Out of the city. It's part of their disaster plan.

2. Most cities have their own gasoline services, especially big cities. Public transportation buses do not use the local Shell or Diamond Shamrock.

3. See 2.

[Will.Spencer]

I think that George Bush doesn't like black hats (http://www.blackhatseo.com/).

[mikelbeck]

Who cares about red rep, it is usually used by those that can not argue intelligently. I got a red rep with comment :

"this red approved by FEMA" because I quoted from FEMA web site that they were the one who were responsible. :rolleyes:
I'm not terribly concerned with red rep, most people don't like me anyway. ;-)

I just think it's funny that the green ones I've received are signed while the reds aren't.

/Back to the topic now, sorry for the diversion.

[Will.Spencer]

I don't understand how someone with any grasp of reality can think that all of those people just volunteered to stay

ferret77:

Please check your grasp of reality against the reality reported by the Communist News Network:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/06/katrina.impact/index.html

[Hodgedup]

Yeah there are some people that are refusing to leave and are actually hiding from rescue operations, but they are in the minority.

[Reviews]

It is understandable to some. No body has the true in itself.

[yfs1]

It is understandable to some. No body has the true in itself.
Can you explain what that means :confused: :confused:

[Crazy_Rob]

It means nothing!

[antonaf]

http://www.journalhome.com/uploads/AntOnaf_pic21113.jpg

[debunked]

Looting / finding

That is funny and sad. Question is- was it just 2 seperate reporters writing it there own way or was it the same reporter?

Where did you find these pictures so I can see the source materials?

[Hodgedup]

Here's the story behind that.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/katrina/looters.asp

[compar]

Those two pictures with their captions were also run in one of the major Canadian newspapers. Just a little bit of racial prejudice I believe.

But I guess Will would say that's the American way. They made the decision to be born Black. And that's what America is all about, free choice! So not only did the "morons" choose to live in New Orleans, but hell, the even chose to be born Black. That is really moron to the second power. Dumb fucks! Why would anybody ever want to help them?

P.S. All you cowards who won't sign your red reps enjoy yourself on this one. I don't care if you rep me right out of the forum. Go for it!

[debunked]

Those two pictures with their captions were also run in one of the major Canadian newspapers. Just a little bit of racial prejudice I believe.

But I guess Will would say that's the American way. They made the decision to be born Black. And that's what America is all about, free choice! So not only did the "morons" choose to live in New Orleans, but hell, the even chose to be born Black. That is really moron to the second power. Dumb fucks! Why would anybody ever want to help them?

P.S. All you cowards who won't sign your red reps enjoy yourself on this one. I don't care if you rep me right out of the forum. Go for it!

I didn't work - you don't make Will look racist, but you did make yourself look foolish.

Interesting read if you go to the link the Hodgedup has. Open up your eyes a little instead of just posting to attack certain members.

And I thought you wouldv'e wanted to defend the AP??? Especially the french one?

[toocoolforschool]

P.S. I haven't read any of the previous threads (too long! Me scared!)

But here's my 2 cents:

EVERYONE knew. NO ONE thought it would happen. EVERYONE fooked up when it DID happen.

Nuff said.

[zman]

Another question.

Why is that lib governer still refusing to agree with the mayor to evacuate? We have police officers saying get out and the guard is standing by saying "we have not recieved the order to say get out".

Has she changed her mind yet or is she still on this trip?

[debunked]

Another question.

Why is that lib governer still refusing to agree with the mayor to evacuate? We have police officers saying get out and the guard is standing by saying "we have not recieved the order to say get out".

Has she changed her mind yet or is she still on this trip?

Maybe the equation she sees is - More loss of life = more funds for gov't to spend

Maybe she is too stressed and emotionally can't make decisions.

[compar]

Help from Canada:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0908-02.htm

[zman]

"They were so glad to be here," he said. "They're still here. They are actually going door-to-door looking in the attics" for people to rescue, he said.

Awesome! It's good to have a neigbor jump in and help out. :)

[ferret77]

No matter how much the mayor and governer screwed after a couple days feds should have stepped in.

The head of fema didn't even know there was people trapped at the dome ...

and Will the people choosing to stay now are mostly home and business owners try to protect their house of business , its mostly not the same people as the dome people

of course there are probably some people trying to stay to pursue their new career in looting, but thats a different story

[Dreamshop]

I definitely think the looting thing has been overplayed by the media. I think that any major city dealing with such an enormous disaster is going to have a percentage of citizens preying on others, while some are simply looking for food/shelter/water. I'm not saying that looting isn't bad, but there's certainly a difference between trying to get basic living essentials versus stealing material goods or hurting others.

There needs to be a way of dealing with this without turning it into a spectacle. It obviously caused problems for a huge number of survivors trying to evacuate the city....all of the sudden the horrible acts of a small percentage of the population stains the reputation of the entire city.

It breaks my heart to read personal stories of those who were treated badly (http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-2/556/556_04_RealHeroes.shtml) because peopled started assuming and treating everyone in NOLA as if they were a thief/sniper/rapist.


There was obviously a serious breakdown in protocol from local police and government right on up Federal. What frightens and angers me is that local and state officials and police really don't have the resources or training to deal with disasters of this magnitude. Isn't that what we should have been investing in after 9/11? Do people not think it's important that our country build up defenses and saftey programs here at home?

I'm still waiting for someone (anyone) in a position of power to have the balls to bring this up.

[Will.Spencer]

It breaks my heart to read personal stories of those who were treated badly (http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-2/556/556_04_RealHeroes.shtml) because peopled started assuming and treating everyone in NOLA as if they were a thief/sniper/rapist.

Well, anything you read in "Socialist Worker" should, of course, be taken as 100% propaganda. It would be completely foolish to expect anything else from a source of that nature.

And, of course, it is even more insipid that the authors of that article promote the idea that theft of private property should not only be condoned by the police -- but actually organized by the police.

However, it might also be beneficial to take a moment to think about how government people think. To a government person, you are either one of us or one of them. As a private citizen, you squarely into the them category.

Of course government people are going to mistreat non-government people. That's just the way things are. To a government crony, you are either a government employee or a suspect.

Please do take a moment to remember the millions of farmers who were murdered in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution.


There was obviously a serious breakdown in protocol from local police and government right on up Federal.

Do you know what the protocols are?

What frightens and angers me is that local and state officials and police really don't have the resources or training to deal with disasters of this magnitude.

Please. It's the weather. Weather happens. Weather happens on the gulf coast constantly.

Almost everyone affected dealt with it fine. New Orleans was a huge counter-example because of a mixture of ineffective local and state government and ineffective culture.


Isn't that what we should have been investing in after 9/11? Do people not think it's important that our country build up defenses and saftey programs here at home?

To speak plainly, local levees should be paid for by local taxes.

Some people seem to feel that the American taxpayer can be bled endlessly with no negative consequences. This is not true.


I'm still waiting for someone (anyone) in a position of power to have the balls to bring this up.

In America, it is the individual people who have the power. The awesome might of the Federal government is nothing compared to the power of individual action.

That is the lesson of America. That is why we are different from every country that came before us.

[Will.Spencer]

They made the decision to be born Black.

They made the decision to become looters.

That's a decision.

That is free will.

So tell me, in Canada, are people responsible for their own actions?

[zman]

To speak plainly, local levees should be paid for by local taxes.

Very true. If you chose to live there then that is fine because you are free to chose. However, I would argue that I shouldnt be held financially responsible for any consequences.

I sent money to help out, but I hope we can learn from this moving forward.

[zman]

They made the decision to become looters.

That's a decision.

That is free will.

Good points. Its all about the personal responsibility or lack thereof.

[compar]

Has anyone seen this email message?

http://www.stopcapitalpunishment.org/impeachbush.html

[Will.Spencer]

Has anyone seen this email message?

http://www.stopcapitalpunishment.org/impeachbush.html

Well of course, it's the usual crap you find on the Internet.

This rates somewhere between Viagra spam and child porn.

[compar]

Well of course, it's the usual crap you find on the Internet.

This rates somewhere between Viagra spam and child porn.
You think George Bush rates between Viagra spam and child porn? :) In that case he probably should be impeached.

[Will.Spencer]

I think it's amusing as heck that you are supporting a comical attempt by Saddam Hussein's defense attorney to gain media attention for himself by attacking George Bush.

I mean, how can you do that and expect to be taken seriously?

[compar]

I think it's amusing as heck that you are supporting a comical attempt by Saddam Hussein's defense attorney to gain media attention for himself by attacking George Bush.

I mean, how can you do that and expect to be taken seriously?
Ok so now you hate defense attorneys too. I thought the American justice system mandated that everyone was entitled to a fair trial and to be represented by competent counsel.

I get it. It's a crime to loot but it's fine to lynch. I'm sure everyone will take that very seriously.

[zman]

Ok so now you hate defense attorneys too. I thought the American justice system mandated that everyone was entitled to a fair trial and to be represented by competent counsel.

I believe he has made a confession.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-09-06-saddam-confessions_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA

He's toast. http://www.conservative-talk.com/images/smilies/laugh@saddam.gif

[Dreamshop]

I'm sighing as I write this because it's not my goal to have a big debate. I understand that you don't agree with what I feel.

Simply put, I would much rather see MY tax dollars going to support local (American) resources and training for emergency response systems (whether that's a bombing or natural disaster), then on the war in Iraq. I'm pretty sure there are more than a few people who probably feel the same way.

The whole point of the article I linked too was that there was a lack of support and that if there's a system for providing the essentials then people have time help each other. If the police or National guard can commandeer busses that others paid for, then why can't they do the same with food and supplies? I think it's also pretty obvious that the media was happy to pump up the criminal reports...I do think this in itself caused additional problems.


Maybe you feel that everything was handled as best as it could have been and that there's no possible way we could learn from this, or that the US is as safe as it's ever going to get. I disagree, but you are more than welcome to your opinions.

[GRIM]

For all you guys who would never have built in New Orleans, would you now like to move all Californians east of the San Andreas Fault?
Totally agree, all of these so called 'patriots' exclaiming people are at fault for living there are simply insane. No matter where you live there is some sort of natural or unnautural disaster that can take place. I live in an area prone to both tornado's and drunk driver fatalities that happen more often and have a much higher chance of happening than the flood that took place, does this mean I should move and am stupid for not moving? The facts remain the levies should have been upgraded, funds have been cut from the feds over and over during the Bush years.

Local communities do not have the funds for these type of projects, who gets the vast majority of taxes? States or the feds, much of this money coming form the feds would have been pumped in from the state originally anyways, even if all of it came from outside of the state what's the point of not spending the money being demanded for especially when the disaster was predicted even by sims run for the federal government. I would think republicans would have this view as the prevention would have cost a whole lot less than this disaster is going to run, not only in tax money, but lost industry, higher prices and the body count.

If the pro Bush crowd doesn't care about the people how about the industry destroyed from this?

I'd honestly love to spend more time on this especially some of the absolutely ridiculous and untrue attacks from the right wingers who 'quote' right wings sources but state middle and left ground sources can not be trusted? Wow ok I'll believe that, got a bridge you want to sell me as well?

[zman]

I'm pretty sure there are more than a few people who probably feel the same way.

You are probably right. However, there are probably even more IRAQI CHILDREN AND WOMEN who feel a tad bit angry at Saddam considering that he admitted to killing 100,000's of his own people. Im sure those same women and children are quite thrilled that we did spend our tax dollars because unlike people who live in a disaster zone IRAQI'S DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE.

Be careful with the koolaid. http://www.conservative-talk.com/images/smilies/sheepaid.gif

[zman]

If the pro Bush crowd doesn't care about the people how about the industry destroyed from this?

Careful with the blanketing statements there. I dont really dig Bush, but he was by far the lesser of the two evils. Kerry would still be sitting on his thumb talking about his "plan".

Im not at all pro Bush. I hate a lot of his policies and think he should better explain his long term vision.

That being said we still CHOOSE where we live. I sent money to help. I have family down there. It sucks that this happened but I hope we learn from it. Thats all.

[GRIM]

Careful with the blanketing statements there

Not a blanket statement, meant for those who are so Pro Bush they can not admit any mistake he has ever made. Also not meant for any post of yours I read, even though I may not agree with much of what I read in your posts :)

The real problem with Kerry was he did not have a back bone, if he'd simply of stood his ground and attacked right back I think he could have appeared a better candidate. However since 911 any attack on Bush has been called unamerican at the very least, this is finally changing. Not to mention the Republican spin doctors certainly worked their magic with relative ease.

BTW, not democrat or republican think for the most part both parties are insane.

[zman]

BTW, not democrat or republican think for the most part both parties are insane.

I'll agree with that statement.

The real problem with Kerry was he did not have a back bone,

By the way it is nice to have disagreements and that be ok. That is rare around here.

I think the problem with Kerry is he just didnt have a plan at all. I never really heard him properly answer ANY question.

If he was asked how he would handle illegal immigration he would answer with something like "I think we should implement a plan that is strong and effective". That isnt an answer. That is crap.

[Dreamshop]

BTW, not democrat or republican think for the most part both parties are insane. I think the problem with Kerry is he just didnt have a plan at all. I never really heard him properly answer ANY question.


I will agree with this as well. :rolleyes:

[GRIM]

I think the problem with Kerry is he just didnt have a plan at all. I never really heard him properly answer ANY question.

Guess it depends on what you all watched. Yes his plan speaches did not work the greatest, he hoped people would log on and read his plans via his website which they obviously did not. In the debates especially the first one he did however beat Bush hands down.

It came down to a vast majority of fear to put Bush in office for another 4 years, simple as that. W/O 911 and the catchy phrase 'terror' can anyone honestly say Bush would have been reelected?

[zman]

Bush got beat in that debate no doubt. But I wasnt looking for his answers. I already know how he responds. I already know what his policies are and what he does to pursue them. I cant stand many of them, but I know what they are. I read Kerry's "plan". Hell I had it posted on one of my websites. I still never heard it come out of his mouth. How do I know it wasnt written for him? What was HE thinking? That is what I wanted to hear. Nothing. Just "I have a plan".

WTF? Where are the Democrats from the JFK days?

[Will.Spencer]

I understand that you don't agree with what I feel.

You have hit the crux of the issue right there.

I'm thinking; you're feeling.

We're not likely to ever agree.

But, we can agree to disagree. :)

[Will.Spencer]

Careful with the blanketing statements there. I dont really dig Bush, but he was by far the lesser of the two evils. Kerry would still be sitting on his thumb talking about his "plan".

Im not at all pro Bush. I hate a lot of his policies and think he should better explain his long term vision.

That being said we still CHOOSE where we live. I sent money to help. I have family down there. It sucks that this happened but I hope we learn from it. Thats all.

zman, you are the man.

Or is that redundant? :D

[GRIM]

Bush got beat in that debate no doubt. But I wasnt looking for his answers. I already know how he responds. I already know what his policies are and what he does to pursue them. I cant stand many of them, but I know what they are. I read Kerry's "plan". Hell I had it posted on one of my websites. I still never heard it come out of his mouth. How do I know it wasnt written for him? What was HE thinking? That is what I wanted to hear. Nothing. Just "I have a plan".

I will agree on that, Kerry was a dumb shit and failed miserably to deliver his message. That is not to say the content of the 'plan' wasn't better than Bush's, but he had an extremely hard time trying to connect with people.

Not getting into a bush v kerry issue though :)

[Will.Spencer]

WTF? Where are the Democrats from the JFK days?

Zell Miller, Richard Shelby, Ben Campbell, Norm Coleman...

[Will.Spencer]

Not getting into a bush v kerry issue though :)

Smart move. Wait for 2008. :cool:

[GRIM]

Smart move. Wait for 2008.

Am doing and hoping there will be at least 1 candidate worth supporting, not this same old lesser of 2 evils.

[zman]

Zell Miller, Richard Shelby, Ben Campbell, Norm Coleman...

Good call. Zell Miller says it like it is. I love to hear him speak.

[Dreamshop]

You have hit the crux of the issue right there. I'm thinking; you're feeling.


Gee thanks Will...I'll take that as a complement coming from you. :cool:

[GRIM]

Good call. Zell Miller says it like it is. I love to hear him speak.

Only thing I have to say to that, at the RNC he blasted Kerry for killing weapons programs even though Cheney himself was on record before Kerry made the 'votes' stating they should be killed. If he was to blast Kerry for this should he not also blast Cheney, and others as well?

He may have been telling it as it was in his belief, but not in any factual realm.

[Will.Spencer]

The obvious difference between the two men is that Dick Cheney believes in cancelling ineffective weapons programs in order to focus resources on more effective weapons programs. Dick is a technocrat.

John doesn't believe in spending money to defend American, because he clearly doesn't believe that America is worth defending.

To compare the two is like comparing baseball bats and sleeping bags.

[GRIM]

The obvious difference between the two men is that Dick Cheney believes in cancelling ineffective weapons programs in order to focus resources on more effective weapons programs. Dick is a technocrat.

LOL, and where or how did you come up with this conclusion exactly? I am not supporting Kerry in this, but to blast Kerry for the voting against a program that Cheney himself stated should be cut than to run around the question such as this is amusing. It should either be A both men were wrong, or B both men were right, don't see how there is another way around it.

[Will.Spencer]

hrblcantra:

Please do not confuse "one program" with "many votes on many programs over the course of many years". To do so simplifies the issue until the truth disappears.

[GRIM]

Not confusing one program, it was also multiples and the statement that you decided to answer with a twist and a turn other than head on was it not?

How does kerry voting against weapons programs make it tolerable to trash him for it, while the current vice president stated they should be cut before the votes even came out. What is so hard about responding to this?

Well time for me to go to bed, and as far as the blanket statement I was accused of before, this is the exact reason it was stated from this users posts. I'm willing to agree to disagree, etc but when you can't for some reason face the facts and have to dodge such as this it's just plain tiring.

[Will.Spencer]

I have tried my best to explain this to you.

After reviewing my message, it seems straightforward and not terribly difficult to read.

I have said all that needs to be said on this point.

I feel no burden of responsibility to assist you further. The answers are already there, waiting for you.

[GRIM]

have tried my best to explain this to you.

No actually you dodged the question, refused to answer it and instead went Kerry bashing instead of answering a simple yes or no question.

I'll make it very simple yet again.

If you are to flame Kerry for the cuts of weapons programs such as Zell did, would you not have to flame Cheney and Bush SR among others for recommending the same cuts? Forget about Kerry's other votes, that can be discussed a different time and is not nor was ever the question.

[ferret77]

Zell Miller is one of the most ridiculous crackpots there is, I don't understand how anyone could take that guy seriously, if you take 5 minutes to read about his history you will see what I mean

[mikmik]

I feel no burden of responsibility to assist you further. The answers are already there, waiting for you.

LOL, no, your answers are evasive, and so is that excuse. You feel no burden of responsibility because your cover is blown. Go ahead, point out 'the answers' that you say are there.

How, BTW, do you also arrive at the conclusion that Kerry

John doesn't believe in spending money to defend American, because he clearly doesn't believe that America is worth defending.
[QUOTE]

How do you surmise this? I would like to see your reason(s) for concluding that "he clearly doesn't believe that America is worth defending", so let's have them.

You seem to have this backwards as well: [QUOTE]To do so simplifies the issue until the truth disappears.

No, simplifying things illuminates truth. I am tired of all the dodging and 'complicating' and excuses.

Why is it okay for Cheney, and not Kerry? Why do you say 'he doesn't believe America is worth defending'? I will love to hear this explained.

I now turn your attention to this:
Speech at Republican National Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zell_Miller)
In his keynote convention speech, delivered on September 1, 2004, Miller struck what was regarded by many commentators as the fiercest tone of all the major speakers at the convention. In it, he criticized the current state of the Democratic party. He also criticized John Kerry's Senate voting record, claiming that Kerry's votes against bills for defense and weapon systems indicated support for weakening U.S. military strength. In one widely-quoted line, he asked, referring to Kerry, "This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces? U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?"

Many convention delegates were enthusiastic about the speech. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported afterwards,

"In Georgia's section of the Garden floor, delegates were joined by the state's top Republican leaders, including Gov. Sonny Perdue and U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss. As Miller strode to the podium, the delegates chanted "Zell, Zell, Zell" and waved red, white and blue handkerchiefs.
Carolyn Meadows, a delegate from Cobb County, spoke of what it felt like to finally be able to cheer Georgia's oft-most popular politician.
"As a Republican, we never voted for him or supported him, but we always liked him," she said. "Now we love him."
"We are over the moon about him being here tonight," said Leslie Mattingly, a delegate and the wife of former U.S. Rep. Mac Mattingly, who joined her on the floor.
A commentator for US News and World Report compared the speech to the views and ideology of Andrew Jackson.

Miller's combative reaction to post-speech media interviews received almost as much attention as the speech itself.

First, in an interview with CNN, Miller had a dispute with Judy Woodruff, Wolf Blitzer and Jeff Greenwell when they questioned him on the discrepancies in his speech. Their points included: that some of the weapons and weapon systems he criticized Kerry for not supporting were outdated and years ago planned for termination; that most of the votes Miller cited were cast in peacetime; and that one of his quotes of Kerry was made about the Vietnam War years ago, not recently about defense in general, as Miller suggested.

Second, and most [in]famously, Miller appeared in an interview with Chris Matthews on the MSNBC show Hardball. Here, Miller became visibly angry. Matthews attacked the premise of Miller's assertion that Kerry had actually voted against such defense programs by noting that in voting on appropriations bills, senators often vote against a version of a bill without wishing to oppose every item in that bill. Matthews also asked Miller to compare his hyperbolic assertion that a military under Kerry would be armed with only "spitballs" with rhetoric from Democrats that Republicans "want to starve little kids, they want to get rid of education, they want to kill the old people" and whether such level of rhetoric was constructive. When Miller expressed irritation at this line of questioning, Matthews pressed Miller with the question "Do you believe now — do you believe, Senator, truthfully, that John Kerry wants to defend the country with spitballs?" Miller at first said that he wished the interview had been face-to-face so that he could "get a little closer up into your face" and asked him to "get out of my face." Finally, objecting to Matthews's questioning, Miller said, "I wish we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a duel." (The interview was later parodied on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, Late Night with Conan O'Brien and by Darrell Hammond and Will Forte on Saturday Night Live.)


Yeah, Will, Zell buddy doesn't handle being asked to explain very well either. It is the idea of 'simplifying' the issues in order to see how unreasonable and , IMO, hysterical the guy is.

Hey, Will, your turn :O)

[debunked]

I can't believe mikmik is back again!

Anyways, mikmik, Will did explain something very simply put: Kerry votes against almost all defense spending and that is why that 1 vote does matter, although Zell should have used a few to make the point not just the one. I am not defending zell, because I frankly don't know what he stands for, since I haven't paid to much attention to him.

[GRIM]

Kerry votes against almost all defense spending and that is why that

I'm sorry but this is completely inaccurate, where did you get this information from?

Just a few links that totally disprove this statement.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2096127/
http://www.factcheck.org/article209.html
http://www.factcheck.org/article177.html
http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/weapons.asp
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040225-defense-kerry.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57627-2004Sep2.html


And no I am not intending to list only left, middle or right wing sources. A simple search on google and the top links I recieved all showing the exact opposite of this quote. In fact the only pages I have found that do not state this and try to convey the anti kerry voting message is personal republican bloggers listing many of the same programs Cheney and Bush SR wanted cut, as well as an intelligence cut that was not a cut but a refund for a program that had already been killed to the tune of I believe 1.5 billion dollars.

[zman]

You guys dont even like Zell? Wow you just hate anyone who doesnt hat Bush dont you? :rolleyes:

[GRIM]

I personally don't hate Zell, just stating a fact :)

[zman]

I personally don't hate Zell, just stating a fact

Actually, you are stating what someone elses opinions of the facts are.

[GRIM]

Actually, you are stating what someone elses opinions of the facts are.

How is it an opinion that the cuts Zell bashed Kerry for were also supported to be cut by Bush SR, Cheney and other republicans? This is not an opinion, this is a fact.

[zman]

How is it an opinion that the cuts Zell bashed Kerry for were also supported to be cut by Bush SR, Cheney and other republicans? This is not an opinion, this is a fact.

I dont care about Bush or Cheney, as I have said, I have serious disagreements with the two. I'm just saying that Zell had every right to bash Kerry. Whether or not he chooses to do the same to Bush is a different story. Plus, it has been somewhat explained as to the differences on why Cheney voted the way he did as opposed to why Kerry voted the way he did.

Just seems you will only go after those who disagree with your side of the political isle. I am much more open minded in that I criticise all sides of the political isle.

Bias sucks.

[GRIM]

I'm biased? Oh my god, I've called Kerry an idiot, a loser, a douche bag in many posts. I've even ripped on him on this thread.

So again can't get a simple yes or no responce, had nothing to do with being republican or democratic, supporting one or the other, actually the exact opposite If you're going to blast one side blast both, something I will do, obvious something others will not.

[ferret77]

I don't really hate Zell I just think he is opportunistic fruit, trying to sell books.

He is one of those people who think thats rap music is destroying america and he thinks their should be limits on free speech.

Then he gets caught taking funds

http://www.wsbtv.com/specialassignments/4700488/detail.html

and he is also a big time flip flopper and we all know how bad that is ...

One cause of discussion: in 2004, he was an extreme critic of John Kerry, who Miller said wanted weak national defense and "to fight yesterday's war", but at a dinner in Atlanta in 2001, Miller introduced Kerry as "one of this nation's authentic heroes, one of this party's best-known and greatest leaders - and a good friend," who had "worked to strengthen our military".

Do you know anything about Zell? or do you just know he gave a fiery (if somewhat BS speech)?

There is certain kind of rule in effective propaganda, when someone criticizes something , that sort of goes against their own interest, its more convincing , like when democrat criticizes a democrat, or maybe a police officer criticizes the police department. It rings more true then say if a criminal , or regular citizen criticizes the police department. The people who design campigns know this (hell, I even know this and I read one measly book on propoganda) and that is why it behooves Zell Miller to stay a demeocrat. If he was a republican no one would care about what he has to say.

[zman]

So again can't get a simple yes or no responce, had nothing to do with being republican or democratic, supporting one or the other, actually the exact opposite If you're going to blast one side blast both, something I will do, obvious something others will not.


Sorry, Im getting ready for a flight so Im just skimming here. What is the question that you asked me directly? I didnt see it.

I'll be happy to answer.

[SEbasic]

Oh. Grow. Up.

[GRIM]

Understandable thread is kind of hard to read :)

Was not a direct question to you, I stated

Only thing I have to say to that, at the RNC he blasted Kerry for killing weapons programs even though Cheney himself was on record before Kerry made the 'votes' stating they should be killed. If he was to blast Kerry for this should he not also blast Cheney, and others as well?

He may have been telling it as it was in his belief, but not in any factual realm.

Another poster decided to over and over answer the statement but not actually answer it, using nothing but republican issued responces I've heard a million times and dodge the actual merit of what I said :) Was not posted to you, or in reference to you in the last posts.

BTW I hated Clinton, Was going to vote for McCain, chose not to vote for Bush because of what his campaign did to McCain. Before Bush was in office I considered myself a hardcore republican supporter, so trust me when I say I'm not 'liberally biased'

To blast one candidate for an item that the vice president you are now supporting also stated should be done doesn't make any sence at all, no matter the reason for the vote. There simply is no way to justify it.

And yes again Kerry was a douche bag

Hope you don't miss your flight.

[zman]

Was not a direct question to you, I stated

Ok I see. I didnt think so.

If he was to blast Kerry for this should he not also blast Cheney, and others as well?


I'll have a go at that.

Yes. However, I think Kerry would have had a much more difficult time answering the accusation. He would probably say "I have a plan".

Flight doesnt leave until 1:48 PM. ;)

[GRIM]

Yes. However, I think Kerry would have had a much more difficult time answering the accusation. He would probably say "I have a plan".

lol almost spit my coffee out on that one, you're probally right, maybe he would have even brought out some nice pie charts? Reminded me of the snl skits.

[ferret77]

they just removed the head of fema from katrina realted duties

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168915,00.html

[debunked]

they just removed the head of fema from katrina realted duties

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168915,00.html

Thats interesting - are you sure its true? you posted a foxnews link, it probably isn't true and it is so full of right wing propaganda, how can it be true?? This is so confusing for me, should I believe the story.... oh no, I think I am having a nervous breakdown...:eek:

Back to reality, that is interesting, I would have to say it is being done so that people can get work done instead of having to keep defending the guy whether he did something wrong or not. I am not defending him, so I don't know the facts, and if he isn't doing his job, then great! Get rid of him!:D

[gworld]

Thats interesting - are you sure its true? you posted a foxnews link, it probably isn't true and it is so full of right wing propaganda, how can it be true?? This is so confusing for me, should I believe the story.... oh no, I think I am having a nervous breakdown...:eek:

Back to reality, that is interesting, I would have to say it is being done so that people can get work done instead of having to keep defending the guy whether he did something wrong or not. I am not defending him, so I don't know the facts, and if he isn't doing his job, then great! Get rid of him!:D

It is interesting that even when the government that you defend so hard, fires the incompetent head of FEMA, you still can not say it that he was incompetent and shouldn't have got the job.
I know you are religious and It seems you put Bush in equal level to Jesus and anything remotely related to him is holy and can not be criticized. :rolleyes:

[debunked]

It is interesting that even when the government that you defend so hard, fires the incompetent head of FEMA, you still can not say it that he was incompetent and shouldn't have got the job.
I know you are religious and It seems you put Bush in equal level to Jesus and anything remotely related to him is holy and can not be criticized. :rolleyes:
Ya whatever. You sound so stupid when you make those kinds of comments.

I put the head of Fema in the same places as the mayor and governor. They all seem to be chickens with their heads cut off, but I am not there and don't have all the facts to say which, if not all, are guilty of being idiots and not doing what they should have. Still FEMA is not the 1st responder, but you problably didn't know that.

Bush is a man, and I still don't see why people want to point at him, nevermind I do, it is the seaving hatred that causes blindness to only point at one person and his "cronnies" but then again I thought he was the "cronnie"???

Why I answer you posts I don't know, I am assuming you only write stuff to try to make people mad. Sorry you failed. You just sound foolish.

[gworld]

Ya whatever. You sound so stupid when you make those kinds of comments.

I put the head of Fema in the same places as the mayor and governor. They all seem to be chickens with their heads cut off, but I am not there and don't have all the facts to say which, if not all, are guilty of being idiots and not doing what they should have. Still FEMA is not the 1st responder, but you problably didn't know that.

Bush is a man, and I still don't see why people want to point at him, nevermind I do, it is the seaving hatred that causes blindness to only point at one person and his "cronnies" but then again I thought he was the "cronnie"???

Why I answer you posts I don't know, I am assuming you only write stuff to try to make people mad. Sorry you failed. You just sound foolish.


I wasn't trying to make you mad, just made an observation that you are not capable of criticizing anything related to Bush.
It seems I made you mad anyway just by mentioning him since your posting doesn't make any sense, were you too mad to formulate your thoughts? ;)

[GTech]

It is interesting that even when the government that you defend so hard, fires the incompetent head of FEMA, you still can not say it that he was incompetent and shouldn't have got the job.
I know you are religious and It seems you put Bush in equal level to Jesus and anything remotely related to him is holy and can not be criticized. :rolleyes:

He was reassigned, not fired. Also worthy to note during a string of hurricanes last year, he was in charge and no one quested his abilities then. In fact, he was approved by the Senate, both Democrat and Republican.

What you were you saying earlier about the negligence of the Mayor and Governor? I missed it.

Don't think anyone ever answered what FEMA's response time is.

[Will.Spencer]

It seems I made you mad anyway just by mentioning him since your posting doesn't make any sense, were you too mad to formulate your thoughts? ;)

Debunked's post made perfect sense to me.

Perhaps this (http://www.hop.com/) will help your reading comprehension?

[ferret77]

Also worthy to note during a string of hurricanes last year, he was in charge and no one quested his abilities then. In fact, he was approved by the Senate, both Democrat and Republican.

Thats becasue he did a good job, it was an election year , swing state etc

[GTech]

I think he summed it up best himself, when asked if he was being made a scapegoat. "By the president, no, by the media, yes."

[ferret77]

your right gtech its all the mayor and governers fault, along with stupidity of the people in New Orleans

maybe now they will create some sort of federal agency to step in when giant emergencies happen that local governments can't handle

what do you think they should call that new agency Gtech .....

maye we can call FEMA

salon has this funny montage of fox people frantically tryignt o place blame on the local government its sort of funny

http://anon.salon.speedera.net/anon.salon/blame_game.mov

[ferret77]

a little different reaction in Florida

The White House has received sharp criticism for its slow response to the New Orleans catastrophe. But last year Bush and his inner circle were remarkably proactive during storm season. Just two days after Hurricane Charley hit the state's Gulf Coast, Bush took a helicopter ride over the region. Joining him to survey the damage were his brother Jeb Bush, FEMA director Brown, White House chief-of-staff Andrew Card and White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

Then one month before the election, Bush took the unusual measure of ordering FEMA to pay 90 percent of the costs local Florida agencies accrued in the wake of the hurricanes. Traditionally, FEMA only covers 75 percent of the costs not covered by insurance. The directive covered infrastructure repairs as well as police and fire department overtime.

[Dreamshop]

I definitely think the looting thing has been overplayed by the media. There needs to be a way of dealing with this without turning it into a spectacle. It obviously caused problems for a huge number of survivors trying to evacuate the city....all of the sudden the horrible acts of a small percentage of the population stains the reputation of the entire city.

It breaks my heart to read personal stories of those who were treated badly (http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-2/556/556_04_RealHeroes.shtml) because peopled started assuming and treating everyone in NOLA as if they were a thief/sniper/rapist.


Just wanted to post that the story I linked to (which Will decided was 100% propoganda) has been confirmed by several others sources, although the Police didn't say weather shots were fired or not...but the did confirm they turned hundreds of people back at the bridge (a bridge that just so happened to lead into an affluent neighborhood).

The NY Times ran an article on it. (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/10/national/nationalspecial/10emt.html?pagewanted=print)

[Will.Spencer]

This is more than a bit late, but I just saw the funniest video of looting in New Orleans: http://www.evtv1.com/index.asp-itemnum-598

Note: Yes, the advertisement preceeding the amusing video is very annoying.

[Will.Spencer]

More good stuff from my mailbox.

If you are not familiar with Walter Williams -- you should be.

----------------------------------------------

Is it permissible?
By Walter E. Williams
Sep 21, 2005

Professor, George Mason University and syndicated columnist.

Last week, President Bush promised the nation that the federal
government will pay for most of the costs of repairing hurricane-ravaged
New Orleans, adding, "There is no way to imagine America without New
Orleans, and this great city will rise again." There's no question that
New Orleans and her sister Gulf Coast cities have been struck with a
major disaster, but should our constitution become a part of the
disaster? You say, "What do you mean, Williams?" Let's look at it.

In February 1887, President Grover Cleveland, upon vetoing a bill
appropriating money to aid drought-stricken farmers in Texas, said, "I
find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do
not believe that the power and the duty of the General Government ought
to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no
manner properly related to the public service or benefit."

President Cleveland added, "The friendliness and charity of our
countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow citizens in
misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated.
Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on
the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national
character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that
kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common
brotherhood."

President Cleveland vetoed hundreds of congressional spending measures
during his two-term presidency, often saying, "I can find no warrant for
such an appropriation in the Constitution." But Cleveland wasn't the
only president who failed to see charity as a function of the federal
government. In 1854, after vetoing a popular appropriation to assist
the mentally ill, President Franklin Pierce said, "I cannot find any
authority in the Constitution for public charity." To approve such
spending, argued Pierce, "would be contrary to the letter and the spirit
of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the
Union of these States is founded."

In 1796, Rep. William Giles of Virginia condemned a relief measure for
fire victims, saying that Congress didn't have a right to "attend to
what generosity and humanity require, but to what the Constitution and
their duty require." A couple of years earlier, James Madison, the
father of our constitution, irate over a $15,000 congressional
appropriation to assist some French refugees, said, "I cannot undertake
to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a
right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of
their constituents."

Here's my question: Were the nation's founders, and some of their
successors, callous and indifferent to human tragedy? Or, were they
stupid and couldn't find the passages in the Constitution that
authorized spending "on the objects of benevolence"?

Some people might say, "Aha! They forgot about the Constitution's
general welfare clause!" Here's what _* James Madison said: *_ _*
"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded
them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take
them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the
Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was NOT
contemplated by its creators." *_

_* Thomas Jefferson explained *_, _* "Congress has not unlimited powers
to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically
enumerated." *_ _* In 1828, South Carolina Sen. William Drayton said*_,
_* "If Congress can determine what constitutes the general welfare and
can appropriate money for its advancement, where is the limitation to
carrying into execution whatever can be effected by money?" *_

Don't get me wrong about this. I'm not being too critical of President
Bush or any other politician. There's such a _* broad ignorance or
contempt for constitutional principles among the American people *_
that _* any politician who bore truth faith and allegiance to the
Constitution would commit political suicide. *_
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find this story at:
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/walterwilliams/2005/09/21/155654.html

[ferret77]

so the world is full of heartless shitheads who cares

take a poll of country and see which people would perfer billions of their tax dollars spent on Iraq and subsides for energy companies

or to help rebuild the gulf, which contains ports vital to our national health

I wonder which one people would perfer

you guys are so worried about a couple of dollars of your tax money going to something that actually helps people its pathetic, and petty

and you know what even funnier will, if your family lived in New Orleans they would be the people stranded on those roof tops

by your own admission you were so poor growing up that you couldn't afford food and furniture, that would be your family stuck at some super dome, and you you would vote to leave them there if it cost a nickel of your taxes.

its so funny you are outraged by the spending of taxes on disaster relief, yet the government handouts to oil companies, farmers, and million pork barrel projects in that transportation bill doesn't seem to bother you a bit. I don't think I have heard you once object to any other of those ongoing tax suckholes.

[ferret77]

this townhall site is riot, I have to book mark it

I have previously noted in this column the widespread approval of foul language on the Left, such as the expletive-filled entertainment at a John Kerry fundraiser organized by MoveOn.org. Nor is it surprising that a high percentage of my e-mail from people on the Left contains obscenities. To most Americans, the huge increase in public cursing is a sign of a deteriorating civilization; to the Left it is a sign of a freer, less hypocritical one.

yeah fuckers

[zman]

yeah fuckers

:D LMAO!

Now that was funny.

[ferret77]

did you read the one about the chimpazzees , classic

So while the deciphering of the chimpanzee genome is “a really big deal,” it shouldn’t obscure an even bigger deal: No matter how many genes we share, man is fearfully and wonderfully made—a unique work of the Creator.

now that thats estabished