Hey Signym, did ya see this? AP retracts Katrina story on Bush.

POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Monday, March 6, 2006 02:25
VIEWED: 4303
PAGE 4 of 4

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4

SEVENPERCENT

Sunday, March 5, 2006 6:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
That might work for most hurricanes and some earthquakes,

Isn't that what we're talking about here?

Quote:
but my professional expert opinion for all its worth is that it will not work if an adversary wants to detonate a nuclear device in an American city since most such terrorists will not be so courteous as to offer advanced warning.

Just what, pray tell, does that have to do with this thread? We're talking about government responsibility for an event they knew was coming and were called in to assist with. WTHLF (what the holy living fark) does a nuclear device have to do with this debate? Absolutely nothing, and had that happened in NOLA we wouldn't be having this debate (but it wasn't, and we are). Just come out and say, "yes 7%, you got me on this one," and leave it at that.

Quote:
Any scenario that relies on the federal government to be the first or even a co-first responder in the advent of a major catastrophe is risking failure.

In this instance, a disaster area was declared in advance of the hurricane (by 2 days, and by your own admission they need 24 to 48 hrs to mobilize

Quote:
You can expect that to take between 24 and 48 hours

, so you shot yourself in the foot on that one) and the federal government was warned that a city that sits below sea level would have its levee system topped. Are you advocating that the federal government be abolished? What, then, is the role of the federal government in disaster relief? None? I don't understand your reasoning. We have a FEMA (which, if I recall corectly, the EM stands for emergency management) because of problems too great to be handled by first responders and local officials.

Quote:
I don’t think that what I’m saying is that controversial, but I also don’t think you really care, so I’m just going to shut up now.

It is controversial, and I do care, and I'd like you to explain your logic to me.

You're saying that in any disaster situation too great for the local government to handle it, we should just let a city fall into chaos; because if a city can't handle it, all the massive resources we pay taxes for are ill-equipped for the task and if they aren't utilized correctly, then it's no one in the federal government's fault? That we should abolish FEMA, Homeland Sec., etc., because they're useless in a crisis, even if they'd been notified beforehand? That my dear sir, is highly controversial.

And the "you aren't listening?" Fancy way of tactically retreating, IMO. I assure you, I'm awaiting the explanation eagerly.

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, March 5, 2006 6:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:
It is controversial, and I do care, and I'd like you to explain your logic to me.

You're saying that in any disaster situation too great for the local government to handle it, we should just let a city fall into chaos; because if a city can't handle it, all the massive resources we pay taxes for are ill-equipped for the task and if they aren't utilized correctly, then it's no one in the federal government's fault? That we should abolish FEMA, Homeland Sec., etc., because they're useless in a crisis, even if they'd been notified beforehand? That my dear sir, is highly controversial.

I never said any of that. That’s not even remotely similar to what I said. And if you actually did care what I had to say, you would at least know what I said. We can both see that this is a waste of my time. And there’s nothing tactical about my retreat. I’m just throwing in the towel. I give up. Sometimes, the only thing to do with crazy people is just smile and nod.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Sunday, March 5, 2006 7:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:

all the massive resources we pay taxes for are ill-equipped for the task

Seven, I think this is the point right here.
We pay taxes primarily so rich folk can protect their resources and livelihoods. Near middle and at bottom, it's the law of the jungle; we're all on our own. Any assistance from government is a bonus in this game. And any obstruction from government is to be expected.

Finn says it needs work, I'd say a complete overhaul is in order. We need to wipe the system clean, and re-load the Constitution, minus the self-serving viruses that distort it's basic principles.

I think we basically all agree on the underlying problems of what we're discussing, we just disagree on how far we need to go to fix them, and how vehemently we label the dorks responsible for the messes.

Suddenly, Moderator Chrisisall

SIGNYM

Sunday, March 5, 2006 8:58 PM

Quote:
I’m just throwing in the towel. I give up. Sometimes, the only thing to do with crazy people is just smile and nod.

Yep!

FWIT- I think the first thing we should do is create a single-frequency nation-wide emergency communication system, preferably satellite and microwave-based. I know that for everyday kind of responses you don't want firefighter communication tromping on police communication, but this would be special-purpose.

The emergency-call systems (911) needs a major infusion of cash, and the institution of a nationwide non-emergency number. The chain of command- and when which chain comes into play- must be made absolutely crystal clear. No, the Feds don't need to get involved in every single building fire or refinery explosion. But what happens when you're out of the realm of what an "incident commander" can handle? From my experience, I can tell you that as the scope of emergency gets bigger, the lines of authority become progressively more and more tangled.

Ok- so what do YOU think we be doing?
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.

RUE

Sunday, March 5, 2006 10:31 PM

The story should have made clear that Bush was warned about floodwaters overrunning the levees, rather than the levees breaking.

I thought I'd chime in here - the levees failed because they were over-run. The cascading water on the 'dry' side dug out the foundation which then caused the levees to collapse.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, March 5, 2006 10:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
-- ...create a single-frequency nation-wide emergency communication system, preferably satellite and microwave-based.
-- The emergency-call systems (911) needs a major infusion of cash, and the institution of a nationwide non-emergency number.

Both good suggestions.

We need to make private contractors an integral part of the supply train. Governments, at all levels, are notoriously slow and often mind-numbingly bureaucratic, but private contractors who stand to make a reasonable profit will quickly jump in the game with often already handy warehouses of supplies. Supplies might be brought to bear faster from the private sector, more efficiently and maybe even cheaper. After all, it’s unlikely that a private contractor will be as likely to allow hundreds of trailers to go to ruin. We are already set up to do this. During the Katrina incident, the private sector stepped up into the mess of bureaucratic infinite loops that crippled both the local and the federal governments and started supplying the people with water, food, medical supplies and even personnel. If this had been harnessed and put to a concerted effort from the beginning much of the suffering could have been avoided. The federal government already relies heavily on very capable defense contractors for advanced weapons systems, mission planning and specialized infantry, using a similar set of contractors for disaster relief can’t be that much more difficult (one imagines probably easier.) And this is something that the state and local governments can enact immediately.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Sunday, March 5, 2006 11:55 PM

SevenPercent,

I just thought I'd look up some figures about the rich and the rest of the US.

Here they are:

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h02ar.html
In 2004 the lowest quintile (one-fifth) in the US made 3.4% of all income, the second quintile 8.7%, third (middle, which is the median US income) 14.7%, fourth 23.2%, and top quintile 50.1%. The mode is near the second quintile.

http://bernie.house.gov/economy/today.asp
If you look at wealth rather than annual income, "Bill Gates, owns more wealth than the bottom 45% of American households combined."

According to another inequality measure (Gini index) the US gap between rich and poor has grown.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
Gini coefficients in the US over time according to the US Census Bureau:

1970: 0.394
1980: 0.403
1990: 0.428
2000: 0.462

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

SEVENPERCENT

Monday, March 6, 2006 1:53 AM

Quote:
I thought I'd chime in here - the levees failed because they were over-run. The cascading water on the 'dry' side dug out the foundation which then caused the levees to collapse.

Well, no sense chiming in; apparently anyone who offers "constructive criticism" of the federal government's role is in the mentally deficient crowd, according to Finn.

He and Cartoon don't believe there was any problem with the fed's response, and I can't even get a straight answer out of him about what the role of the federal government should have been in the first place without him trying to change the subject to nuclear terror attacks (which is typical Bush-supporting behavior - whenever criticized for a mistake, make the issue about terror).

Lets look at the facts:
1. The federal government was asked to declare a disaster in advance of the hurricane by 2 days
2. The President was notified that flooding of some sort would occur
3. A catagory 5 hurricane looming over a sub-sea level city is unmanageable by a local gov't
4. The restructuring of FEMA into HOSEC and the appointment of Brown was a colossal mistake
5. Bush's action of being on vacation and doing the flyover, if not a mistake in itself, gave the impression of uncaring

Lets look at other occurrences of a similar nature:
6. When the Mississippi flooded in '93, I worked sandbag crews in my area. The National Guard was ahead of possible breaches with the necessary supplies all along the river, and the Corps of Engineers was with them, ready to go where the first responders needed them. That didn't happen in NOLA.

I have no clue whatsoever how the fed can be exempt from criticism for its role in the problem; but any criticism makes me a "Bush hater." I'm not a hater, I'm thanking God that I didn't live in NOLA and paid my taxes like a good little citizen to get nothing from my government in return. If I was a NOLA resident, I'd want somebody on the federal level's head on a pike in my flooded front yard.

Does the fed's management need to be better streamlined? Certainly, but just because that's the case doesn't mean no one's responsible.

I mean, seriously - what do you have to do with our leaders to get them to admit a mistake? And we wonder why our kids are growing up like they are.

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

DREAMTROVE

Monday, March 6, 2006 2:25 AM

Quote:
I think this country made the right decision between Bush and Kerry.

And I'm not doubting this. But it was a hell of a choice. I've been rating my ranking of Bush on a scale of 0-100 with 100 being the best president ever, and 0 being the worst. and I think last I posted it that was around 40. Now I'd say after these port deals and the munitions and the latest break of the nuclear proliferation, I have him down where the people as a whole have him, at 34.

This doesn't mean I'm being negative, I'm being fair, by the people, to him, which is to say, treating him totally neutral. The change is that I'm no longer giving him bonus points for being a republican, because, objectively, regardless of what kind of president he is, he's a terrible republican.

Overall, I think that the president's lowest on the overall range for me are mostly democrats, Jackson, Wilson, Truman and Johnson, down in the 10 range for me, and the worst republican was Hoover, down in the 20 range. Lincoln, in my view, was actually never president of the United States, since the civil war started before Lincoln became president and the country was not re-united until after his death, thus he was no more president than was Jefferson Davis, a democrat. Collectively, they obvious rank pretty low.

Kerry I can't accurately rank since he hasn't been president, but based on what he said he was going to do, I'd rate him about a 25. He has some downward potential of becoming Johnson or Truman, and some upward potential of becoming Clinton or FDR. He's not going to be a Carter or JFK, we can tell that from his platform.

But still and all. When I am faced with a choice of a probably 25 and a known 34, yes, sure, you're correct, 34 is better than 25. I think Kerry is more in line with the democratic party than Bush is with the republican, and he might be earning higher marks now with democrats, so they might disagree with the choice from their perspective, but that's really not my gripe. I accept Bush is not as bad as Kerry.

My own position is that either choice is terrible, and given the possibility of replacing Bush with a random unnamed republican from the House or Senate, I'd take that chance. I think Duke Cunningham is an improvement over Bush. Dennis Hastert is possibly a drastic improvement over Bush. It's like a roulette wheel where you're guaranteed a non-black result, (race jokes about republicans aside,) and you have all your money on red. But they only loss is it comming up double zero, which is like getting Tom Delay.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4