Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 2:38 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 113 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who's watching the inaguration?
Poll ended at Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:41 am
I might watch some of it. 38%  38%  [ 3 ]
I have to work. 38%  38%  [ 3 ]
I already have my cold beer and pretzels ready. 25%  25%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 8
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:16 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:09 pm
Posts: 2083
Location: Hingham, MA
Willton wrote:
In the meantime Bush was not able to keep the country safe from natural disasters, or at least mitigate some of the damage therefrom. See Hurricane Katrina.


Hmmm, I suppose it would be considered impolite of me to note for the record that under President Obama, as of Saturday, FEMA had "50 to 100 generators" on the way to Kentucky, where tens of thousands of people have had no electricity since the ice storm that hit the state on . . . Tuesday. This, while Mr. Obama is photographed in shirt sleeves in the Oval Office because -- how did special adviser David Axelrod put it? Ah, yes -- "He likes it warm; you could grow orchids in there.” ;)

_________________
If you think nobody notices you and you're all alone, try not paying your bills.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Bob in Boston wrote:
Willton wrote:
In the meantime Bush was not able to keep the country safe from natural disasters, or at least mitigate some of the damage therefrom. See Hurricane Katrina.


Hmmm, I suppose it would be considered impolite of me to note for the record that under President Obama, as of Saturday, FEMA had "50 to 100 generators" on the way to Kentucky, where tens of thousands of people have had no electricity since the ice storm that hit the state on . . . Tuesday. This, while Mr. Obama is photographed in shirt sleeves in the Oval Office because -- how did special adviser David Axelrod put it? Ah, yes -- "He likes it warm; you could grow orchids in there.” ;)

No, it would be considered irrelevant. What does an ice storm in Kentucky have to do with Bush's response to Hurricane Katrina?

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:54 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
Even more appropiate, we should ask what the temperature in the oval office has to do with an ice storm in Kentucky? Should the President open the windows and turn off the electricity in the White House so that he suffers like them?

That's a pretty silly implication made by you. We do expect him to make good solid decision unfettered by uncomfortable surroundings, don't we?

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:04 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
What he should do here is back off some of the liberal agenda and only address those items which most solidly are stimulas. That does not mean the republiucan Party should define what is and is not stimulus.

Compromise is a the heart of good democracy in action. However, just giving in to those who won't accept change would be wrong. The list of items that BBF made covers almost everything domestically on the table. Somewhere,someone is going to have to tell them that their ideas lost badly in the last two elections and they shoould find ways to be more accommodating risk more loses in 2010. The ball is in their court. It's their party, and they can cry if they want to. (Sure did mix some medaphors there)

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 10:35 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4293
Location: Zelienople, PA
It has everything to do, as defined by Dems during Bush's admin.

Of course, during Katrina, it was the system for the states to respond first and foremost. La failed, while Al and MS responded appropriately for the same degree of damage.

But, if the bar is now in an emergency (declared in KY) that it is the federal gov's job to bring expidious and effective relief in lieu of the states, then Bob's point is right on

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
ZelieMike wrote:
It has everything to do, as defined by Dems during Bush's admin.

Of course, during Katrina, it was the system for the states to respond first and foremost. La failed, while Al and MS responded appropriately for the same degree of damage.

But, if the bar is now in an emergency (declared in KY) that it is the federal gov's job to bring expidious and effective relief in lieu of the states, then Bob's point is right on

ZM

ZM, FEMA has been around since the 80's, and it exists for a reason. If not to help states out in situations like Katrina, then what is FEMA supposed to do?

Bush declared a state of emergency for select regions of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama on August 27, 2005. Unfortunately, those select regions did not include the Louisiana coastline, an area that was most likely to be hit by Hurricane Katrina. This is curious since the Governor of Louisiana requested aid from the Federal Gov't for all of Louisiana's coastal parishes on the 26th. The Hurricane hit on the 29th and devastated those local parishes. Tell me: how much warning did the Federal Gov't need in order to respond effectively?

The levees that were supposed to protect the Southeastern coastline were built by the Federal Gov't. Tell me: who do you think should be responsible for their upkeep?

The Federal Gov't knew this was coming long before Katrina hit, and it did nothing to mitigate the damage that it should have known would eventually be caused to Louisiana's coastline. Please, tell me: how is this in any way similar to the Kentucky ice storm?

If you can't call Bush's response to Hurricane Katrina an unqualified disaster, then there's little reason for any of us to consider your opinion an objective one.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:41 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 3006
Substitute2 wrote:
Compromise is a the heart of good democracy in action. However, just giving in to those who won't accept change would be wrong. The list of items that BBF made covers almost everything domestically on the table. Somewhere,someone is going to have to tell them that their ideas lost badly in the last two elections and they shoould find ways to be more accommodating risk more loses in 2010. The ball is in their court. It's their party, and they can cry if they want to. (Sure did mix some medaphors there)


Jesus Christ you do a great job of raising my blood pressure.

First, the list of things I provided does cover most FISCAL issues on the table. I think you would find that I was as left-leaning as Barry (or even moreso) on most social issues, including gay marriage, abortion, ending the "war on drugs", and even legalization of prostitution.

And it seems by "Compromise" you mean that Republicans should just accept whatever it is that the Democrats want to do. It doesn't seem that there is much compromise on either side of the aisle. I certainly didn't see any efforts of compromise over the past 8 years by either side, just escalating rhetoric. But now that the democrats hold both branches, they want compromise. Funny how that works.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4293
Location: Zelienople, PA
Willton wrote:
ZM, FEMA has been around since the 80's, and it exists for a reason. If not to help states out in situations like Katrina, then what is FEMA supposed to do?

Bush declared a state of emergency for select regions of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama on August 27, 2005. Unfortunately, those select regions did not include the Louisiana coastline, an area that was most likely to be hit by Hurricane Katrina. This is curious since the Governor of Louisiana requested aid from the Federal Gov't for all of Louisiana's coastal parishes on the 26th. The Hurricane hit on the 29th and devastated those local parishes. Tell me: how much warning did the Federal Gov't need in order to respond effectively?


This shows me you know little of how this works. Do you have any idea how often a hurricane switches course? Any at all. Its the norm. I know, I lived in N'awlins for years.

Predicting where a hurricane will hit three days in advance is a more like fortune-telling than a science. All you could say with any accuracy 3-days before hand is that the hurrican would enter the gulf. And, in fact, the predictions did prove wrong in that the hurricane did NOT hit New Orleans as predicted, but the tidal surge did come up the Mississippi and overwhelm the levees that were SUPPOSEd to protect the city.

Further, as subsquently shown, the governer as well as the mayor of NO, were absolutly incompetant as to what was going on, or what to do and when to do it. You want to see competant, look at Biloxi and Mobile. That doesn't mean that FEMA was doing a spot on job at all. It means that the storm overwhelmed the system, which has happened more than once in the past down there, and that an incompetant local and state government compounded an underprepared and overwhelmed FEMA response. Again, look at how quickly and more efficiently the response was in MS and AL. Same FEMA, same Bush. Differant local governments.

Quote:
The levees that were supposed to protect the Southeastern coastline were built by the Federal Gov't. Tell me: who do you think should be responsible for their upkeep?


Geez, at least know how the levee system works. The levee system is built and maintained by a LA/NO Levee Commission. They were built to protect New Orleans, and the Mississippi River shipping line, not the "Southeastern Coastline". There are no levees along the coast. The federal involvement comes from the Corp from the monies funneled to them, and given direction by, the Levee Commission, which by the bye, is one of the most notoriously corrupt commissions known to the US. The feds gave them the monies, they grafted it, and built and maintained substandard levees, which was the problem.

Quote:
The Federal Gov't knew this was coming long before Katrina hit, and it did nothing to mitigate the damage that it should have known would eventually be caused to Louisiana's coastline. Please, tell me: how is this in any way similar to the Kentucky ice storm?


No they didn't. No one did. That is why no one left the city in the face of Katrina. And folks in LA know much more about hurricanes than someone in a FEMA office.

In contrast, everyone saw the ice storm coming, just as you suppose with Katrina. However, unlike a Hurricane that USUALLY switches course and does not go where it is predicted (and Katrina did not). You can do this with this type of winter storm.

Quote:
If you can't call Bush's response to Hurricane Katrina an unqualified disaster, then there's little reason for any of us to consider your opinion an objective one.
[/quote][/quote]

Exactly, and thus Bob's point. In case you've not got it yet, this isn't about exonorating FEMA's response under Bush.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:38 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
The suggestion that the Bush administration was not the problem in NO is comic. Yes, you can hold local and state officials as bad too, but any disaster of this magnitude necessitates federal handling. There is absolutely no way any gruop in America is capable of dealing with this. If you remember correctly, things only improved when troops were sent in to the mess.

Objective people (not me) have pointed to this as one of the worst stains on his Presidency. You can deny that all you want but American aren't going to allow history rewritten. Take a poll of American about who they hold responsible for wrong handling and you'll see. Of course, you must know more as Americans aren't as smart as you, so go ahead and discount everyone else.-- "Look there, everyone in the band is out of step except my son.

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:02 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
Now, BBf-- I appreciate the fact that in reference to me you refer to JC. My mother would be very pleased that her son was memtioned in the same sentence with her God.

All I ask is that you take a chill pill and try to relax. I am not trying to cause an physical problem for you as I enjoy your comments most of the time.

Please re-read my post about compromise. I started by suggesting that Obama back off some of the more lioberal parts of this plan. You define compromise if that doesn't fit your thinking.

The person most responsible for the tension between people is Carl Rove. His whole theory of getting Bush elected was to make Democrats the devil. Willy Horton came from his mentor Lee Atwater who before he died apologized for his actions. There is nothing positive by misusing issues like Willy Horton to make people afraid of your opponemt. Fear was his and his student, Rove's strategy. To get there, they had to lie and misrepresent the other guy. Both admit this was the case. Both were willing brcause winning was all that mattered. It didn't matter that false and interntionally misleading statements were made. The result is that their believer hate and fear the left, and the left which feels abused hates the right.

These people are very dangerous to our system, and have IMO brought about this unreasonable attitute of people.

Now, tell me who is working to end this? Who's having people (twice)to the White House? who's going to the opposite party in the Capital and listening to their views? Carl Rove would get ill even thinking about such an attitude.

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4293
Location: Zelienople, PA
Substitute2 wrote:
The suggestion that the Bush administration was not the A problem in NO is comic..
Emphasis mine. Corrected is the better way, and ...

...Exactly. Thus, Bob's post.

Where's the outrage? People are dying in Kentucky.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 2:25 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
ZelieMike wrote:
This shows me you know little of how this works. Do you have any idea how often a hurricane switches course? Any at all. Its the norm. I know, I lived in N'awlins for years.

Predicting where a hurricane will hit three days in advance is a more like fortune-telling than a science. All you could say with any accuracy 3-days before hand is that the hurrican would enter the gulf. And, in fact, the predictions did prove wrong in that the hurricane did NOT hit New Orleans as predicted, but the tidal surge did come up the Mississippi and overwhelm the levees that were SUPPOSEd to protect the city.

I see that as a distinction without a difference. Whether New Orleans was devastated by Katrina itself or by the residual effects of Katrina seems to be splitting hairs. The end result is that New Orleans was devastated as a consequence of the storm, and that result could have been fairly predicted at least 2 days beforehand, especially given the timing of the declared state of emergency.

ZelieMike wrote:
Further, as subsquently shown, the governer as well as the mayor of NO, were absolutly incompetant as to what was going on, or what to do and when to do it. You want to see competant, look at Biloxi and Mobile. That doesn't mean that FEMA was doing a spot on job at all. It means that the storm overwhelmed the system, which has happened more than once in the past down there, and that an incompetant local and state government compounded an underprepared and overwhelmed FEMA response. Again, look at how quickly and more efficiently the response was in MS and AL. Same FEMA, same Bush. Differant local governments.

Care to share what it was that made the responses in MS and AL so different? You give the appearance of having knowledge in this area, so please, share with the rest of us.

ZelieMike wrote:
Geez, at least know how the levee system works. The levee system is built and maintained by a LA/NO Levee Commission. They were built to protect New Orleans, and the Mississippi River shipping line, not the "Southeastern Coastline". There are no levees along the coast. The federal involvement comes from the Corp from the monies funneled to them, and given direction by, the Levee Commission, which by the bye, is one of the most notoriously corrupt commissions known to the US. The feds gave them the monies, they grafted it, and built and maintained substandard levees, which was the problem.

Yes, but the thing is that the substandard condition of the levees was known, and yet President Bush repeatedly claimed that "no one" expected that the levees would be breached, even though he was briefed about the issue days before Katrina's landfall. And you're trying to marginalize the federal government's responsibility for the damage caused as a result of the levee breach?

ZelieMike wrote:
Quote:
The Federal Gov't knew this was coming long before Katrina hit, and it did nothing to mitigate the damage that it should have known would eventually be caused to Louisiana's coastline. Please, tell me: how is this in any way similar to the Kentucky ice storm?


No they didn't. No one did. That is why no one left the city in the face of Katrina. And folks in LA know much more about hurricanes than someone in a FEMA office.

Really? No one knew this was coming? Then please explain to me the declared state of emergency for LA/MS area, because that sure seems like some sort of prediction, or at least an educated guess as to what might happen.

ZelieMike wrote:
In contrast, everyone saw the ice storm coming, just as you suppose with Katrina. However, unlike a Hurricane that USUALLY switches course and does not go where it is predicted (and Katrina did not). You can do this with this type of winter storm.

Okay .... so did anyone predict that this storm was coming? Are there any reports that predict such a storm? Were there any declarations of a state of emergency before the ice storm hit?

ZelieMike wrote:
Exactly, and thus Bob's point. In case you've not got it yet, this isn't about exonorating FEMA's response under Bush.

ZM

Then what is it about? What the hell is Bob's point? Because I'm seriously confused as to what the ice storm has to do with Katrina, especially when the amount of damage caused by each is markedly different, and the respective responses thereto have also been markedly different.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... gD963S5FG0

All Bob is doing is making flippant comments on how Obama likes it warm in his office, and now you're telling me to also stare at this red herring for reasons I don't understand.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:26 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4293
Location: Zelienople, PA
No, Bob's comment was about the level of federal support being supplied to a devestated area. A point you and other constantly rant about using Katrina as your example.

So, to Bob's flippant point. Where's the consistancy?

To other points. The differance between MS/AL and LA is simple. More competant local government that, as FEMA was/is structured are the FIRST RESPONDERS.


Quote:
I see that as a distinction without a difference. Whether New Orleans was devastated by Katrina itself or by the residual effects of Katrina seems to be splitting hairs. The end result is that New Orleans was devastated as a consequence of the storm, and that result could have been fairly predicted at least 2 days beforehand, especially given the timing of the declared state of emergency.


This is absolutly NOT a distinction without differance. Have you ever looked at a hurricane track? The end result is the end result and the point being, it was NOT predictable. And, it could NOT have been predicted before hand. The only things that could be predicted... and every New Orleanian knows this... is 1) that any hurricane that comes up the Mississippi River path will destroy the city, no matter what, and 2) the wave surge SHOULD have been handled by the levee system. However the LOCAL CONTROL of that levee system was so corrupt as to have failed to maintain it properly.

That is all that could be predicted. Katrina was not the biggest and baddest hurricane to come through. Others were larger. Under your idea of what constitutes "knowing" and "predicting", New Orleans would evacuate twice a year.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:44 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
Come on Z--- local governments aren't asked to pay for new bridges in their communities. Everyone knows that there is not near enough money locally to pay for it. Do you think that if the Hoover Dam was deamed weak that the locals would be expected to pay for a new dam? So, why then were the people of the government of NO be responsible for a breach in the levy system? There are countless examples of things that should be done that impact local governments, that can't be paid for by local people. All levels of government knew that there was danger here but only one level had the ability (think tax base) to address it.

It's not that the feds didn't address the problem as much as they didn't prepare in the immediate pre-storm and worst they didn't respond with any credibility in the aftermath when Americans were dieing for days in the flood and sheltered areas like the Superdome. Once again W was caught reading a book to kids and frozen in inactivity when we most needed him. Sorry, he was flying over and glancing out at the mess on his way back from vacation.

Then we heard "BROWNIE YOU'RE DOING A HELL OF A JOB DOWN HERE."

Where's the comparison in Kentucky? No where. People who wish the worst for America should at least not manufacture issues to destroy others.

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
ZelieMike wrote:
No, Bob's comment was about the level of federal support being supplied to a devestated area. A point you and other constantly rant about using Katrina as your example.

So, to Bob's flippant point. Where's the consistancy?

"Consistancy" (sic) indeed. What you fail to realize is that the two situations are incomparable.

Hurricane Katrina
$80+ million in damage
1000+ deaths recorded as a result
Local gov't requested assistance prior to when storm hit
Lack of Nat'l Guard troops available to assist families due to their deployment in Iraq (a place the Nat'l Guard is not supposed to be)
FEMA and fed. gov't are blasted by New Orleans officials for FEMA failure to respond promptly and effectively

Jan 2009 Midwest Ice Storm
Damage expenses not recorded as of yet
<60 deaths recorded as of today
Local gov't requested assistance subsequent to when storm hit
No claimed shortage of Nat'l Guard troops available to deal with the storm
FEMA and fed. gov't commended by KY Governor Beshear and other KY officials for FEMA's responsiveness

You and Bob are trying to create an issue that does not exist in a poorly constructed attempt to slander the Obama administration, and by implying that Obama is keeping his office warm at the expense of Kentucky citizens, you're doing so in a rather undignified way.

ZelieMike wrote:
To other points. The differance between MS/AL and LA is simple. More competant local government that, as FEMA was/is structured are the FIRST RESPONDERS.

ZM

Um, that's not answering the question. What did MS/AL actually do that was different from LA? It's okay to say that you don't know.

You also did not answer my other question: did anyone actually predict this ice storm? If "everyone saw the ice storm coming" as you say, then surely you can find some evidence of authorities predicting this ice storm prior to its occurrence.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4293
Location: Zelienople, PA
Willton wrote:
...You and Bob are trying to create an issue that does not exist in a poorly constructed attempt to slander the Obama administration, and by implying that Obama is keeping his office warm at the expense of Kentucky citizens, you're doing so in a rather undignified way.


No, it points to the hypocrisy of folks like you who won't hold a constant position. You manage to diminish the deaths of 60 people and the incapacity of 10,000's others who are without power. Are you of the opinion that 50 - 100 generators is help?

Further, the POTUS' own words are used here. He certainly didn't mind scolding all of us for "keeping our houses at 70 degrees while the rest of the world suffers", while keeping his place 80 or so.

I don't remember any attempt at balance, or "dignity" in yours, and others responses to anything "Bush".

Quote:
Um, that's not answering the question. What did MS/AL actually do that was different from LA? It's okay to say that you don't know.


Oh, I see. Let's make this very simple for you then. Hurricane the same. FEMA the same. Damage the same. What was differant... Hmmmm, lets see, the response of the state and local government agencies to the disaster. Biloxi, Mobile, Gulf Shores, Pass Christian... all completely cleaned and rebuilt... and New Orleans?

If you are asking me who gave what orders, that is a baseless point and only those that worked there know. I see the results. I saw local, state, and federal folks begin to clean and rebuild while folks in LA still couldn't open roads. Somehow or other, the supply and relief caravans were allowed to pass checkpoints in AL and MS, and the supplies were delivered where needed while supply trucks rotted at checkpoints in LA.

How do you suppose that is. I guess Bush ordered only the "Republican" states to get their supplies. :roll:

Quote:
You also did not answer my other question: did anyone actually predict this ice storm? If "everyone saw the ice storm coming" as you say, then surely you can find some evidence of authorities predicting this ice storm prior to its occurrence.


Yes, the weatherman on my Channell 11 News showed the track of the storm for days leading up. You can at your convenience, go to Accuweather.com, or Intellicast, or any weather channel and check it out.

Your capacity for being dense on purpose, or to avoid a point is tedious.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
ZelieMike wrote:
No, it points to the hypocrisy of folks like you who won't hold a constant position. You manage to diminish the deaths of 60 people and the incapacity of 10,000's others who are without power. Are you of the opinion that 50 - 100 generators is help?

If that's what Kentucky thinks, then yes, I do. They are the ones suffering through this, so their opinion matters most. If Kentucky officials think that FEMA is being responsive, then who am I to tell them that they are wrong?

Stop erecting strawmen. I don't diminish the plight of the Midwesterners suffering through this mess. What I diminish is your comparison of this ice storm to Hurricane Katrina.

ZelieMike wrote:
Further, the POTUS' own words are used here. He certainly didn't mind scolding all of us for "keeping our houses at 70 degrees while the rest of the world suffers", while keeping his place 80 or so.

Alright, so he said something hypocritical, and he should be rightly roasted for it. What I don't understand is how that has anything to do with the administration's response to the ice storm.

ZelieMike wrote:
I don't remember any attempt at balance, or "dignity" in yours, and others responses to anything "Bush".

I'm not the one making the outlandish implication that Obama is heating the White House at the expense of Kentuckians.

Quote:
Oh, I see. Let's make this very simple for you then. Hurricane the same. FEMA the same. Damage the same. What was differant... Hmmmm, lets see, the response of the state and local government agencies to the disaster. Biloxi, Mobile, Gulf Shores, Pass Christian... all completely cleaned and rebuilt... and New Orleans?

If you are asking me who gave what orders, that is a baseless point and only those that worked there know. I see the results. I saw local, state, and federal folks begin to clean and rebuild while folks in LA still couldn't open roads. Somehow or other, the supply and relief caravans were allowed to pass checkpoints in AL and MS, and the supplies were delivered where needed while supply trucks rotted at checkpoints in LA.

I don't want to know who gave what orders. I want to do know what they did. I want to know what actions the Mississippi and Alabama local governments took compared to Louisiana. I'd also like to know how the damages in each state were the same, if they were the same at all. Surely that can be seen and analyzed without having been on the ground at the time. I'm sure that the Louisiana state and local governments did a poor job, but if MS/AL set an example as you appear to imply, then I'd like to know what that example was.

ZelieMike wrote:
How do you suppose that is. I guess Bush ordered only the "Republican" states to get their supplies. :roll:

You said it, not me.

ZelieMike wrote:
Quote:
You also did not answer my other question: did anyone actually predict this ice storm? If "everyone saw the ice storm coming" as you say, then surely you can find some evidence of authorities predicting this ice storm prior to its occurrence.


Yes, the weatherman on my Channell 11 News showed the track of the storm for days leading up. You can at your convenience, go to Accuweather.com, or Intellicast, or any weather channel and check it out.

I tried, and I can't find it. If you can find it and show me, that would be great. It would also help if you could find a link that predicted this storm's severity as well.

ZelieMike wrote:
Your capacity for being dense on purpose, or to avoid a point is tedious.

ZM

And your inability to back up anything you say with evidence is equally frustrating.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 9:17 pm
Posts: 1163
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g_8OFJGKcPdCNnCMJOsgRmTtL1HgD963S5FG0

Kentucky officials are complaining.....Liberals just don't want to listen.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:14 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:09 pm
Posts: 2083
Location: Hingham, MA
Whew! This has become heated.

While we're at it, Willton, I'd be interested to know your proof for the following:

Quote:
If anything, Bush has made it less safe to live here by engendering negative sentiment towards our country in foreign nations. See Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, Abu-Ghraib, and the executive's policy on torture. The fact that there has not been another attack since 9/11 means just that. It does not mean that Bush has stopped any attacks or potential attacks from foreign nations.


How do you know that?

Sorry, "I heard Joe Biden say it in the debate on TV" isn't admissible as evidence.

Negative sentiment? On the part of whom? Governments that never have liked us anyway: Russia, China, North Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, Hamas?

Belarus?

Zimbabwe?

Do you mean to suggest that they're bothered by the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or forcing a few terrorist thugs to wear women's panties on their heads? If you do, get real. They do far worse to anyone who poses an internal threat.

Or do you refer to the Socialists who run most of Europe? If so, who cares? They're no help to us. They couldn't even intervene to stop a civil war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

One other question: What, exactly, do you mean by "attacks or potential attacks by foreign nations"? I work in international news, but I must have missed those reports of foreign troops preparing to land on our shores.

I do, however, remember 19 Islamist fanatics hijacking airliners and flying them into the World Trade Center and Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001. And the Dec. 14, 1999, incident in which a Customs agent got lucky and stopped Islamist would-be bomber Ahmed Ressam at Port Angeles, Wash. And the Egyptian Islamist immigrant who went on a shooting spree in the El Al terminal at LA International Airport on July 4, 2002. And the Islamist terrorist cell that was broken up in Buffalo in 2002, followed by the rolling up of the Islamist "Portland Seven" terrorist cell later that year. And the Islamist plot to kill soldiers at Fort Dix, N.J. And the Islamist plot to blow up the fuel lines to LaGuardia Airport in the summer of 2007. Seems to me that all but the arrest at Port Angeles occurred during the Bush 43 presidency.

_________________
If you think nobody notices you and you're all alone, try not paying your bills.


Last edited by Bob in Boston on Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Who's watching the inaguration?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Jeremy wrote:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g_8OFJGKcPdCNnCMJOsgRmTtL1HgD963S5FG0

Kentucky officials are complaining.....Liberals just don't want to listen.

The same article cites Kentucky officials commending the Obama administration for their response:
Quote:
Beshear has consistently praised Obama, a fellow Democrat, for the attention he's devoted to what Beshear calls the biggest natural disaster to hit his state.

"We have had tremendous and quick response from President Obama and his administration," Beshear said Monday. "I don't think any of our folks that have dealt with disasters before ever recall as quick a response as we got last Wednesday."

Trina Sheets, executive director of the National Emergency Management Association, based in Lexington, Ky., said that from what she's heard, FEMA's response has been very good so far. Her group represents emergency management directors from all 50 states.

"The governor's declaration request for an emergency was turned around very, very quickly by FEMA and the White House," said Sheets, who just had her power restored Monday after four days without it. "And President Obama has spoken with the governor of Kentucky on several occasions throughout the event."

Sheets said she hadn't heard any complaints so far about the federal response.

"FEMA and the Kentucky National Guard are doing everything they can to get things back up and running," Sen. Jim Bunning said.

That doesn't sound like complaining.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 113 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits