I'm ready to start pointing fingers
POSTED BY: embers
UPDATED: Sunday, March 8, 2026 23:08
VIEWED: 10706
PAGE 5 of 6
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
MAC, you're a moron. Why don't you and AJ go exchange your baseless ignorant excuses between yourselves and leave the conversation to people who really give a crap. I mean it. Just go away, you are callous and stupid beyond belief, and you'd kiss Bush's butt even as he was shitting on you. Which he is.
Please don't think they give a shit.
Finally SignyM, you show your ass, and what a true loser you really are! The only one shitting on people is you, because you attack anyone that doesn't worship at your alter of half truths and kneejerk theories! You've become the Michael Moore of this forum!
How dare you assume to tell me (or anyone) where I can or cannot post!
Now, here's a few facts that clearly point where the blame really belongs!
1) People talk about Bush cutting the funding for the levees. That is NOT true. Proposed increases not being passed are not "cuts". if that were the case, Clinton and Carter also cut funding for the levees.
2) Disaster warning, evacuation and relief and civil protection in the US, are state and local responsibilities. Even the "National Guard" is under the control state goverenor not the President! National Guard units only come under federal control when they are given deployment orders that take them outside of the US.
3) Almost all US Army personel and equipment are in the US, not in Iraq. 88% of all personel, MP's, planes, helicopters, trucks and supplies are it the US, 12% are depoyed outside the US in all operations including Iraq and Afghanistan!
http://www.punditguy.com/2005/09...5/09/ why_1.html
The above link has pictures of 205 school buses sitting in water. Why didn't the local, parish, or state officials use those buses to get people who did have a way out, transportation out before the hurricane hit?
http://instapundit.com/archives/...ives/ 025310.php
The New Orleans Regional Transportation Authority has hundreds of buses, none of them were used to get people out of the path of the hurricane! Why?
http://www.riehlworldview.com/ ca...and_securi.html
From the above link, "It was on the radio tonight, that Galveston, TX had its school buses fueled and ready to roll in case Katrina turned their way - not so for New Orleans." So, the leadership in Galveston were ready with their buses and the leadership in New Orleans were not. Tell me again that this is the President's fault? Also from the above link, "Ultimately, the local government and even the State Government in LA has to shoulder their share of the blame for ineffective planning. They knew full well what a storm like Katrina could do - including to the levee system."
I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
http://www.punditguy.com/2005/09...5/09/ why_1.html
The above link has pictures of 205 school buses sitting in water. Why didn't the local, parish, or state officials use those buses to get people who did have a way out, transportation out before the hurricane hit?
http://instapundit.com/archives/...ives/ 025310.php
The New Orleans Regional Transportation Authority has hundreds of buses, none of them were used to get people out of the path of the hurricane! Why?
I keep hearing the right-wing spin about the buses in the flooded lot. I figured this out myself before I heard it on the news, so maybe you all couldn't or didn't, so here goes.
The city of NO had hundreds of buses- But here's the $$$million question- Who's gonna drive them when the bus drivers are evacuating town ahead of the hurricane? There's an amusing story about a kid stealing a bus and driving 100 victims to Texas, but generally, there was no one to drive the buses. This is not the Mayor's fault. Some bus drivers stayed and took people out. Some didnt. That pic doesnt mean a damn thing other than there were no drivers for those buses.
I can't believe people are bashing Nagin. Here's a guy who managed to get over 90% of his city out of town before a disater hit. 90%. That's an amazing feat for an impoverished community. The people that were supposed to drive the buses left when told. What was Nagin supposed to do? Hold the bus drivers hostage against their will ("You all stay here while Katrina comes barrelling down on you")? Open the lots to let anyone take a bus that wanted to? While I'm sure that's a nice thought, it probably didn't cross his mind while trying to get everyone that could go the hell outta dodge. Especially since they thought the Dome would be safe, assuming the gov't came right away (and we saw how that played out).
While I do hold Bush responsible, I won't pin this entirely on him for the purposes of this thread (don't get me started about why he was in another state talking Soc. Sec. and playing guitar while a Cat 5 hurricane was heading for NO, not to mention his 'working' vacation- The seat of our govt is Washington, not Podunk Texas, I dont give a shit how much telecommunications tech has advanced- I expect my leader to be there). This falls at the feet of Chertoff and Brown. God forbid these jackasses should be in charge if a terrorist attack hits the US.
------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And since I'm on an article posting streak, here's another good clip about something many of you might not have known. I'd say this might also change minds, but hey, Bush said he doesn't read newspapers, so I'm betting most of his followers don't either (notice how I no longer call them "supporters"- ask yourselves why that is). This is from the Guardian -I put a bold on what I think are the really good parts, so take a gander.
Quote:
A year ago the US army corps of engineers proposed to study how New Orleans could be protected from a catastrophic hurricane, but the Bush administration ordered that the research not be undertaken. After a flood killed six people in 1995, the Congress created the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project. Operated by the corps of engineers, levees and pumping stations were strengthened and renovated. In 2001, when George Bush became president, the Federal Emergency Management Agency issued a report stating that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely potential disasters - after a terrorist attack on New York City. But by 2003 the federal funding essentially dried up as it was drained into the Iraq war. By 2004, the Bush administration cut the corps of engineers' request for holding back the waters of Lake Pontchartrain by more than 80%. By the beginning of this year, the administration's additional cuts, reduced by 44% since 2001, forced the corps to impose a hiring freeze. The Senate debated adding funds for fixing levees, but it was too late.
Or maybe this will catch your eye-
Quote:
"My administration's climate change policy will be science-based," President Bush declared. But in 2002, when the Environmental Protection Agency submitted a study on global warming to the UN, reflecting its expert research, Bush derided it as "a report put out by a bureaucracy", and excised the climate change assessment from its annual report. The next year, when the EPA issued its first comprehensive Report on the Environment, stating: "Climate change has global consequences for human health and the environment", the White House simply removed the line and all such conclusions. At the G8 meeting in Gleneagles this year, Bush stymied any common action on global warming. But scientists have continued to accumulate impressive data on the rising temperature of the oceans, producing more severe hurricanes
But hey, go on thinking that the GOP establishment in Washington cares about you. And before someone pulls a 'blame Clinton' or 'it's all politicians,' I'm going to lay down the law right now - Clinton isn't President, and the Dems do not control all 3 branches of govt. -
------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
http://www.punditguy.com/2005/09...5/09/ why_1.html
The above link has pictures of 205 school buses sitting in water. Why didn't the local, parish, or state officials use those buses to get people who did have a way out, transportation out before the hurricane hit?
http://instapundit.com/archives/...ives/ 025310.php
The New Orleans Regional Transportation Authority has hundreds of buses, none of them were used to get people out of the path of the hurricane! Why?
The city of NO had hundreds of buses- But here's the $$$million question- Who's gonna drive them when the bus drivers are evacuating town ahead of the hurricane? There's an amusing story about a kid stealing a bus and driving 100 victims to Texas, but generally, there was no one to drive the buses. This is not the Mayor's fault. Some bus drivers stayed and took people out. Some didnt. That pic doesnt mean a damn thing other than there were no drivers for those buses.
------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.
Amazing how you selectively respond to two of the sources I posted, but conveniently choose to ignore the last one.
http://www.riehlworldview.com/ ca...and_securi.html
From the above link, "It was on the radio tonight, that Galveston, TX had its school buses fueled and ready to roll in case Katrina turned their way - not so for New Orleans." So, the leadership in Galveston were ready with their buses and the leadership in New Orleans were not.
Seems that Galveston TX had a plan in place, with drivers! The obvious answer to your million dollar question is, Galveston had a plan in place and was ready to implement it, but New Orleans didn't! It's not that hard to figure out, but obviously many here want so desperately to blame the Federal Government for everything, that simple facts like this don't fit into their agenda! The majority of these people managed to make it to the Superdome and Convention Center on their own. Why weren't they then picked up from this staging area before the storm hit sunday night. Again I point out that Galveston had a plan like that in place! Why didn't New Orleans! God forbid we take the local government to task for this, when it's so much easier to blame the federal government.
I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
A response to Sevenpercent's Global Warming post:
S. Fred Singer, a former director of the US Weather Satellite Service and Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences from the University of Virginia, wrote this about Global Warming:
"The overwhelming balance of evidence shows no appreciable warming trend in the past 20 years, nor indeed since about 1940. While some surface readings in far-away locations (mainly Eastern Siberia and the tropical oceans) show warming trend, the well-maintained stations in the United States do not.
"Weather satellite data, the only true global measurements we have, show no warming. Neither do the independent data from weather balloons, which confirm the satellites in all respects. In addition, so-called proxy data, i.e., non-thermometer records from tree rings, ice cores, etc., show no warming."
Unless you include the past 10,000 years since the last Ice Age. Yes, in that case, the Earth has most certainly been enjoying almost consistent warming. If it were not, the history of man would be very different. Man, of course, is blamed by the Greens as the "cause" of the current "warming" which is not occurring. Mankind does not warm the earth. The Sun does that.
All this talk of too much carbon dioxide (CO2) is just nonsense. The climate of the earth was warmer 1000, 3000, and 6,000 years ago. All periods during which human civilization was developing. At the time of the dinosaurs, CO2 levels were five times those that exist today. The long-range threat to earth isn't too much CO2, it's too little!
It would be a naive kindness to assume that EPA Director Christie Whitman is simply uninformed. Were that the case, she would do herself and the nation a big favor by keeping her mouth shut about the subject of global warming.
Instead, she has been all over the place talking about it being "a real phenomenon" and even suggesting we might have to put "caps" on carbon dioxide. It turns out, though, that someone must have explained things to President Bush because, on March 14, the White House put out the word that it does not favor regulating CO2 emissions from power plants. He also made it clear that he takes a very dim view of the UN Kyoto Climate Control treaty.
Carbon Dioxide is a natural, abundant chemical that is essential to the growth of all plants and trees. You and every other member of the planet's six billion human population emits CO2 every time they exhale. Termites produce ten times the amount of C02 than all the fossil fuels burned in a year worldwide. The technology of energy production, transportation, etc., has been calculated to be only 0.04 per cent. The UN Kyoto Climate Control Treaty is intended to control that! Do you think 0.04 percent has any effect? The notion of calling CO2 a "pollutant" is ludicrous.
Recent scientific research is also disproving claims that global warming is causing the sea level to dangerously rise. In October 1999, a team of scientists led by Dr. Howard Conway of the University of Washington reported that the massive West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), considered to be especially vulnerable to alleged global warming, is not melting due to human influences. Dr. Conway said the gradual melting of the WAIS "appears to be part of an ongoing natural cycle" of melting that began when the ice age ended 10,000 years ago. It will take several thousand years before this melting ice sheet would even begin to affect seaboard cities - assuming the Earth doesn't enter a new ice age.
In light of such mounting evidence, environmentalist efforts to claim scientific support for the global warming theory are foundering. The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a liberal advocacy organization, points to the 1,500 scientists who signed a 1997 UCS document endorsing major cuts in greenhouse gases as evidence of scientific support for the global warming theory. But since then, nearly 17,000 scientists have signed a petition, organized by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which declares that, "There is no convincing scientific evidence th
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:
A year ago the US army corps of engineers proposed to study how New Orleans could be protected from a catastrophic hurricane, but the Bush administration ordered that the research not be undertaken. After a flood killed six people in 1995, the Congress created the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project. Operated by the corps of engineers, levees and pumping stations were strengthened and renovated. In 2001, when George Bush became president, the Federal Emergency Management Agency issued a report stating that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely potential disasters - after a terrorist attack on New York City. But by 2003 the federal funding essentially dried up as it was drained into the Iraq war. By 2004, the Bush administration cut the corps of engineers' request for holding back the waters of Lake Pontchartrain by more than 80%. By the beginning of this year, the administration's additional cuts, reduced by 44% since 2001, forced the corps to impose a hiring freeze. The Senate debated adding funds for fixing levees, but it was too late.
Let's clear this up a little. Bush didn't cut the Corps funding on Lake Pontchartrain, he cut an increase in funding by 80%. Essentually giving 20% more than the Clinton Administation, His Father's, Reagan's and Carter's Administations did. Yes, clearly that wasn't enough, but if you are going to take him to task for this, you DO have to take the previous administations to task for the same reasons! Sorry but your attempt to dodge that by saying "I'm going to lay down the law right now - Clinton isn't President, and the Dems do not control all 3 branches of govt.", is weak! When Clinton was elected, the Dems did control all three branches of govt and by a larger margin than Bush did when he was first elected. Why didn't the Clinton Administration increase funding back then? Both parties are equally accountable for this!
I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Amazing how you selectively respond to two of the sources I posted, but conveniently choose to ignore the last one
I didnt "conveniently forget" the link, so don't think I was ignoring your 'facts'- I'll go back and include it, if you want, will that make you happy? I was trying to edit so that I didnt have a 27 mile long quoted post, and just grabbed at the meat of your argument- It won't change my response in the least- What Galveston, which wasn't in a state of emergency did, vs. what NO did, is not the issue- I love how you try to spin this - I don't recall Galveston evacuating 500000 people, do you? They had their buses ready? Yes, because they would have had DRIVERS, which N.O. did not have, because they weren't EVACUATING GALVESTON - Not once did I hear, "everyone leave Galveston" - If I had, I bet you dollars to doughnuts there would have been a bunch of empty buses in Galveston sitting in a lot- Holy cow- To quote a movie, you have to be the dumbest smart person I have ever seen in my life-
------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Even NASA doesn't agree with the EPA on this:
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm
Wow - Impressive - Why don't you show me an article in a more recent publication? One reputable source (out of 3), but you pulled up a NASA article almost 10 years old- I just watched a professor of climatology the other night discussing how global warming was a very real threat - His point goes on to dispute your other statement here
Quote:
and no one can prove or disprove that global warming has anything to do with the higher number of hurricanes now
There aren't any more or less hurricanes than ever before- The climatologist explained it thusly: Global warming creates a rise in water temperature, which is the fuel that drives a hurricane- The warmer the water gets, the stronger the hurricane - Not an increase in amount, an increase in strength- And even you say you believe warming exists (well, you're not saying it doesn't exist, so I suppose you can weasel)- So if we have a govt that refuses to even acknowledge there may be a problem because they are anti-science......
I'd say you get the picture, but it's looking like you probably don't want to see it -
------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Sorry but your attempt to dodge that by saying "I'm going to lay down the law right now - Clinton isn't President, and the Dems do not control all 3 branches of govt.", is weak!
Weak? Weak is your retreat back to this bullshit that conservatives go back to every time. All you cons did during his entire Presidency was bash Clinton, yet every time you get backed into a corner you pull out the "he did it too" defense. Screw that. He's not President. Where does the buck stop with you people? This hasn't been Clinton's Presidency for 6 years. The Dems havent controlled congress since, what, 1994?
Yeah. They cut an increase in funding to build up the levees, not 'the funding.' Because if they couldn't do it with the money they had, and needed an increase, they were just magically going to be able to with a fraction of what they needed. What you are saying is if I have $5, but need $10 to do a job, and you say, well, I gave you $1 instead of $5, so you have $6 but hey, I didnt take the funding away totally, so don't blame me, then that's BS.
Then when the job doesn't get finished? It's the person's fault who wasn't even in charge anymore. Priceless.
Take the talking points somewhere else, they don't hold up to scrutiny.
------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:Quote:
Amazing how you selectively respond to two of the sources I posted, but conveniently choose to ignore the last one
I didnt "conveniently forget" the link, so don't think I was ignoring your 'facts'- I'll go back and include it, if you want, will that make you happy? I was trying to edit so that I didnt have a 27 mile long quoted post, and just grabbed at the meat of your argument- It won't change my response in the least- What Galveston, which wasn't in a state of emergency did, vs. what NO did, is not the issue- I love how you try to spin this - I don't recall Galveston evacuating 500000 people, do you? They had their buses ready? Yes, because they would have had DRIVERS, which N.O. did not have, because they weren't EVACUATING GALVESTON - Not once did I hear, "everyone leave Galveston" - If I had, I bet you dollars to doughnuts there would have been a bunch of empty buses in Galveston sitting in a lot- Holy cow- To quote a movie, you have to be the dumbest smart person I have ever seen in my life-
------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.
Oh please! This is a question of preparedness! Galveston was in the predicted path of Katrina too, and they took steps to prepare for it if it did. New Orleans wasn't EVACUATING either when Galveston made these plans! I don't have to spin this, you are! The fact remains that an other city saw the potential problem and had a plan in place to deal with it that New Orleans obviously didn't consider. Your bet is empty, because there is no way to prove your "empty buses in Galveston" prediction eitherway, but I will tell you I believe that if drivers were told this was needed, and if they were told that they could potentially save hundreds of lives, they would have done their jobs proudly. Sorry, but my estimation of the average citizen (these bus drivers) isn't as pessimistic as yours. I guess it makes you the smartest dumb person I've ever seen in my life, that you can't see how the New Orleans government dropped the ball on this
while another coastal city had a sound plan in place. New Orleans already ordered their people to either leave the city, or to go to the Superdome for shelter, and clearly from the news footage, they came in droves. Why didn't the local government take this a step further and start bussing these people out of harms way before Katrina hit? Sorry, but the logic escapes me.
I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME