Katrina-related accusations and the info behind them
POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 03:57
VIEWED: 7777
PAGE 9 of 11
Quote:This is the other lesson that he learned: when the facts don't go your way, just engage in ad hominem attacks.
Since you have such distain for common folks
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:'Standard Government ineptitude' is a conspiracy in itself; kickbacks, nepotism, favouritism.
Originally posted by Geezer:
Oh, come on. Standard government ineptitude is easily enough to generate failures in certain areas, but far from the conspiracy theories you promulgate.
Giving the wrong important jobs to your idiot drinking buddies can be lethal.
Wanting to be heroes by not DEMANDING help when needed and seeking to handle things yourself can be lethal.
But if that's standard, i.e. acceptable, than I stand corrected.
We should just accept needless death and displacement...?
Even The Alliance would not have let Katrina happen that way.
Can't we all agree that the people in power only care about polls, and by extention their ability to remain in control, Geez?
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer can I ask a question?
About the only thing that folks on both sides of the political fence agree on is that defence is a legitimate function of government. I think we can agree that the intention of FEMA is to provide a civil defence function.
Had the army or the navy screwed up in such a way that (what?) 3,000 Americans were now dead you know there would be a full enquiry, if for no better reason than to prevent it from happening again.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
NO, NO Chrisisall- You've got it all WRONG. The Bush administration is golden. Everything they do is OK, or at least SOP. There is nothing new here... certainly not anything to be alarmed about! Claims about Iraq WMD? Bad intelligence. Poor post-war planning? Must have been bad advice from the generals. Social Security "reform"? Just being "proactive". Medicare pharamcy plan cost coverup? Nah... just a convenient "re-estimation" by a political appointee. Replacement of 30-year staffers with incompetent fundraisers? Executive perogative- "everyone" does it, previous appointments notw/standing. Spying on citizens w/o a warrant? Well, CLINTON certainly asked for greater powers, doesn't that make him just as culpable? Bribery in the GOP? Lobbyists writing legislation? Indefinite detention of citizens? Improbable vote tallies? Billion$ "lost" by no-bid contractors? Stonewalling the 9-11 and Katrina Commissions? A budget deficit larger than all other deficits combined?
Piffle! Mere nothings!
I mean, really- you're just LOOKING for reasons to pick on Bush!
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Geezer can I ask a question?
About the only thing that folks on both sides of the political fence agree on is that defence is a legitimate function of government. I think we can agree that the intention of FEMA is to provide a civil defence function.
Although that's now part of its task, it was originally set up to deal disaster response and recovery. Sticking it with a Homeland Security role probably didn't help, since it had to cause a loss of focus.
Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Had the army or the navy screwed up in such a way that (what?) 3,000 Americans were now dead you know there would be a full enquiry, if for no better reason than to prevent it from happening again.
I'm not sure the assumption that 3,000 people are dead entirely due to screwups is a valid one. Even with the best response possible, folks are going to die in a disaster of that magnitude.
There have been, and continue to be, investigations of the response to Katrina. After all the political blameslinging settles down, the recommendations will probably be to increase training and improve communications. They usually are. Then someone will ask where the money for this is coming from, and since there's a limited pot and no one wants to give up their share, it'll quietly be tabled.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
This is the other lesson that he learned: when the facts don't go your way, just engage in ad hominem attacks.
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
Listen - don't you hear the sound of a pot calling a kettle black?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Um... nope. One comment is responsive to previous posts- an observation of a rhetorical tactic. The other... you know, the one about looking down on common people... appeared to be completely baseless and off-topic from the previous posts.
But it IS refreshing that Geezer admits he posts ad hominem attacks, if only in a backhand sort of way. I, on the other hand, am golden! 
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I personally freely admit to ad hominem attacks on Geezer. He has proved over and over that he's worth it.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well I noticed right away that Geezer had nothing to say about the "Heckuva job" emails OR the fact that Bush has been/still is stonewalling the Commission. But he conjured up black helicopters. I dunno Rue, did YOU bring up black helicopters??? Did I?? Did Fletch?? I don't think so... but my memory's kinda fuzzy... Maybe Geezer can show how that's relevant to the discussion. You know, the one that he started in order to get to the bottom of things.
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME