Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,773 Year: 4,030/9,624 Month: 901/974 Week: 228/286 Day: 35/109 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Help Lizard Breath Save Bush from Hurricane Katrina
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 22 of 205 (240994)
09-07-2005 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by nwr
09-06-2005 8:00 AM


quote:
I think it is a mistake to single out Bush for criticism. This is a massive failure of the conservative experiment in cutting the size of government. It started with Reagan.
I agree that Bush is not at all the only one to lay blame upon.
But he is the person at who's feet the buck stops.
He may not be directly to blame, but he is responsible for making it right.
That's the President's job, right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by nwr, posted 09-06-2005 8:00 AM nwr has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 23 of 205 (240996)
09-07-2005 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Silent H
09-07-2005 3:57 AM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
quote:
Well to be more correct with your analogy, shouldn't we then divert our military to bomb some obscure creek somewhere, designated by Bush and Co as a major "fountain" of water related emergencies?
Yeah, and that creek would just happen to be flowing over one of the largest oil fields on Earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Silent H, posted 09-07-2005 3:57 AM Silent H has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 25 of 205 (240998)
09-07-2005 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Tal
09-07-2005 9:47 AM


Tal, do you have any plans for substantively addressing the OP or are you just going to make contentless asides throughout the thread?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Tal, posted 09-07-2005 9:47 AM Tal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Tal, posted 09-07-2005 10:08 AM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 28 of 205 (241005)
09-07-2005 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Tal
09-07-2005 10:08 AM


quote:
No. It's pretty ridiculous IMO. Political hackery all the way, even in the Nation's worst natural disaster ever.
Can you please explain how the OP is solely "political hackery all the way"? I thought it actually involeved the discussion of facts, timelines, and the federal response to Katrina, but maybe I'm mistaken.
It would be a major coup for you to skewer holmes by pointing out exactly where he is just playing politics in the OP, and since I didn't really read it that way, maybe you can explain to me the specific parts that seemed like hackery to you?
quote:
Some people simply hate Bush and blame him for everything.
Yes, that's true, but at least three people in this thread who do not like Bush have also said that he is not to blame for everything, so you wouldn't be talking about us.
It seems to me that you don't want to trouble yourself with actually considering the issues, so you just paint all criticisms of Bush and his appointees to be misguided because of where they come from instead of evaluating the quality of the information regardless of the source.
Some people just love Bush no matter what he does and never blame him for anything (which is the topic of this thread).
Can you honestly say that his and his FEMA and DHS appointees' responses to Katrina were exemplary?
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-07-2005 10:23 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Tal, posted 09-07-2005 10:08 AM Tal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Tal, posted 09-07-2005 10:28 AM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 31 of 205 (241009)
09-07-2005 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Tal
09-07-2005 10:28 AM


quote:
No. It's pretty ridiculous IMO. Political hackery all the way, even in the Nation's worst natural disaster ever.
Can you please explain how the OP is solely "political hackery all the way"? I thought it actually involeved the discussion of facts, timelines, and the federal response to Katrina, but maybe I'm mistaken.
It would be a major coup for you to skewer holmes by pointing out exactly where he is just playing politics in the OP, and since I didn't really read it that way, maybe you can explain to me the specific parts that seemed like hackery to you?
quote:
Some people simply hate Bush and blame him for everything.
Yes, that's true, but at least three people in this thread who do not like Bush have also said that he is not to blame for everything, so you wouldn't be talking about us.
It seems to me that you don't want to trouble yourself with actually considering the issues, so you just paint all criticisms of Bush and his appointees to be misguided because of where they come from instead of evaluating the quality of the information regardless of the source.
Some people just love Bush no matter what he does and never blame him for anything (which is the topic of this thread).
Can you honestly say that his and his FEMA and DHS appointees' responses to Katrina were exemplary?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Tal, posted 09-07-2005 10:28 AM Tal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Tal, posted 09-07-2005 10:42 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 56 of 205 (241262)
09-08-2005 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Silent H
09-07-2005 12:44 PM


quote:
Like Sam Kinnison said, “we have deserts but we don’t live in them.”
Tell that to the people of Las Vegas, Los Angeles, and almost everyone in Israel.
...and the 300,000 people who live, ranch, and farm in the Navajo Nation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Silent H, posted 09-07-2005 12:44 PM Silent H has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 59 of 205 (241265)
09-08-2005 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Tal
09-08-2005 7:26 AM


tal, the country is starting to wake up and smell the bullshit,
quote:
Keep thinking that.
Tal, what is the President's approval rating right now?
How does it compare to other Presedents' ratings?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Tal, posted 09-08-2005 7:26 AM Tal has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 63 of 205 (241269)
09-08-2005 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Tal
09-08-2005 8:46 AM


Re: The Plan
Nobody is saying that the Hurricane is Bush's fault.
Nobody is saying that the lack of evacuation plan was Bush's direct fault.
BUT, he did appoint the director of FEMA, who's job it is to deal with such things. He also created and appointed a director of an entirely new, big-budget part of the government called the Department of Homeland Security which was also supposed to deal with the response to natural disasters.
Both heads of these government agencies failed to deal with Katrina adequately, both proactively and reactively.
So, if the owner of my company hires a division manager who absolutely sucks, doesn't know how to do her job, and bungles a really big project such that the busniness starts to suffer dramatically, who is to blame?
I'd say the buck would stop at the person who hired the incompetent manager.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Tal, posted 09-08-2005 8:46 AM Tal has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 65 of 205 (241273)
09-08-2005 10:03 AM


this is weird, but should also settle the matter.
link
From This Modern World:
(bold added by me)
On Saturday, August 27, 2005 -- two days before Hurricane Katrina made landfall -- President George W. Bush assumed responsibility for the coordination of "all disaster relief efforts" in the State of Louisiana. This is the specific, undisputed language of Bush's declaration of a State of Emergency, issued that day by the White House, and still available for viewing on the White House website. The responsibility for coordinating all disaster relief efforts in New Orleans clearly rested with the White House. Despite all the post-disaster spin by the Bush Faction and its sycophants, despite all the earnest media analyses, the lines of authority are clear and indisputable. Here is the voice of George W. Bush himself, in the proclamation issued in his name, over his signature on Saturday, August 27, 2005:
"The President today declared an emergency exists in the State of Louisiana and ordered Federal aid to supplement state and local response efforts in the parishes located in the path of Hurricane Katrina beginning on August 26, 2005, and continuing. The President's action authorizes the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to coordinate all disaster relief efforts which have the purpose of alleviating the hardship and suffering caused by the emergency on the local population, and to provide appropriate assistance for required emergency measures"
Bush goes on to say: "Specifically, FEMA is authorized to identify, mobilize, and provide at its discretion, equipment and resources necessary to alleviate the impacts of the emergency."
"The President's action authorizes the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to coordinate all disaster relief efforts...in the parishes of Allen, Avoyelles, Beauregard, Bienville, Bossier, Caddo, Caldwell, Claiborne, Catahoula, Concordia, De Soto, East Baton Rouge, East Carroll, East Feliciana, Evangeline, Franklin, Grant, Jackson, LaSalle, Lincoln, Livingston, Madison, Morehouse, Natchitoches, Pointe Coupee, Ouachita, Rapides,
Red River, Richland, Sabine, St. Helena, St. Landry, Tensas, Union, Vernon, Webster, West Carroll, West Feliciana, and Winn."
Conspicuous by their absence are Orleans, St. Bernard, St. Tammany, Plaquemines, Jefferson and basically every coastal parish, and the next parishes closest to the coast. So then, let me understand this: Team Bush saw by 26 August that Katrina would be sufficiently dangerous to warrant a preemptive disaster declaration for what looks like about 65-70% of the land area of Lousiana, and he declares it for the _landlocked_ parishes?
Now, to follow up with later events...
link
On Monday, Aug 29, Bush issued another declaration, which again declares "a major disaster in the State of Louisiana," and this time does include all the coastal and NO-area parishes. But the specifics of this declaration deals only with making federal relief funds available to individuals and state and local governments, not coordinating relief efforts.
By Wednesday, Aug. 31, the White House was clearly saying that the federal government was in charge of the disaster response: "The President Has Given The Department Of Homeland Security (DHS) Authority To Coordinate The Response. The President announced that Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff will chair the interagency task force while Michael Brown, DHS Undersecretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response, is serving as the Administration's lead on the ground."
Again, this seems unambiguous. The federal government is taking responsibility for leading the relief effort, in New Orleans and throughout the Gulf Coast. Now, if the Bushists want to quibble and shuffle and dance on the head of a pin, saying, "The Aug. 27 declaration didn't include New Orleans! So the Leader's not responsible for anything that happened before Aug. 31!" that's OK. I don't think that's true -- but even if you grant that premise, we know that those days now indisputably under the federal umbrella -- Wednesday, Thursday and Friday -- were some of the most horrific of the entire week, when countless lives were needlessly lost, and tens of thousands of people languished without food, water, shelter or any other aid which could have easily been provided by that time.

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Tal, posted 09-08-2005 10:22 AM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 67 of 205 (241276)
09-08-2005 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Tal
09-08-2005 9:42 AM


Re: The Plan
NYC and Boston and San Francisco and Chicago have been run by liberals for quite a lot of their respective histories, and they are some of the greatest cities in the country. NYC is one of the greatest cities in the world, an has been traditionally liberal for a long time.
In fact, most of America's great cities are liberal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Tal, posted 09-08-2005 9:42 AM Tal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Tal, posted 09-08-2005 10:41 AM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 101 of 205 (241424)
09-08-2005 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Tal
09-08-2005 10:41 AM


Re: The Plan
NYC and Boston and San Francisco and Chicago have been run by liberals for quite a lot of their respective histories, and they are some of the greatest cities in the country. NYC is one of the greatest cities in the world, an has been traditionally liberal for a long time.
quote:
I agree.
OK, great, but the reason I wrote the above was because you said:
quote:
This liberal idea that Goverment is the answer to everything doesn't work. Look at NO. It is the perfect example. It's been run by liberals for 60 years.
If you agree that most of the greatest American cities, including NYC which is one of the greatest cities in the world, have been largely run by Liberals with liberal policies, then you are being completely inconsistent if you blame NOLA's problems on liberal leadership.
Right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Tal, posted 09-08-2005 10:41 AM Tal has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 102 of 205 (241425)
09-08-2005 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Yaro
09-08-2005 10:54 AM


Re: The Plan
deleted by author
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-08-2005 04:16 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Yaro, posted 09-08-2005 10:54 AM Yaro has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 103 of 205 (241426)
09-08-2005 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Yaro
09-08-2005 10:54 AM


Re: The Plan
Actually, many people go on welfare because of a medical emergency and no health insurance, and many others are women who had to flee an abusive husband or boyfriend.
Also, most of the people on welfare are children.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Yaro, posted 09-08-2005 10:54 AM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by Yaro, posted 09-08-2005 4:18 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 114 of 205 (241496)
09-08-2005 7:35 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Yaro
09-08-2005 4:18 PM


once again, things are not black and white, tal
source
Myth: 1. Poor women have more children because of the "financial incentives" of welfare benefits.
Repeated studies show no correlation between benefit levels and women's choice to have children. (See, for example, Urban Institute Policy and Research Report, Fall/93.) States providing relatively higher benefits do not show higher birth rates among recipients.
In any case, welfare allowances are far too low to serve as any kind of "incentive": A mother on welfare can expect about $90 in additional AFDC(Aid to Families with Dependent Children) benefits if she has another child.
Furthermore, the real value of AFDC benefits, which do not rise withinflation, has fallen 37 percent during the last two decades (The Nation,12/12/94). Birth rates among poor women have not dropped correspondingly.
The average family receiving AFDC has 1.9 children -- about the same as the national average.
source
As Congress considers reauthorization of welfare, we consider it imperative that any welfare legislation consider the particular needs of welfare recipients who are victims of domestic violence. Research demonstrates both the high prevalence of domestic violence among Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) recipients as well as the importance of TANF in helping women to escape abuse.
” Studies consistently show that at least 50 to 60 percent of women receiving welfare have experienced physical abuse by an intimate partner at some point during their adult lives, compared to 22 percent of the general population; some studies indicate rates as high as 82 percent. A significant number of women receiving welfare also report a history physical and sexual abuse in childhood.
” As many as 30 percent of women on welfare report abuse in a current relationship.
” In addition to domestic violence, many welfare recipients face additional barriers to employment, including, mental and physical health problems, disabilities, substance abuse, lack of child care, housing instability and lack of transportation.
” In a recent study of two California counties, Kern and Stanislaus, welfare recipients had lifetime abuse rates of 80 percent and 83 percent, respectively.
” Most battered women work or want to work if they can do so safely. Many women use welfare andwork as a way to escape an abusive relationship.
” Abusive partners often sabotage women’s efforts to become more financially self-sufficient by preventing women from working, attending interviews, or studying. By starting fights or inflicting visible injuries before key events, abusers also may prevent women from attending job interviews or going to work. Abusers may also threaten to kidnap the children or fail to provide promised child care or transportation.
” Some abusive partners may try to stop women from working by calling them frequently during the day or coming to their place of work unannounced. Research indicates that about 50 percent of battered women who are employed are harassed at work by their abusive partners.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Yaro, posted 09-08-2005 4:18 PM Yaro has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2196 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 122 of 205 (241732)
09-09-2005 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Tal
09-08-2005 10:22 AM


Re: this is weird, but should also settle the matter.
Tal, what about this, which you failed to address:
link

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Tal, posted 09-08-2005 10:22 AM Tal has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Silent H, posted 09-09-2005 9:49 AM nator has not replied
 Message 129 by arachnophilia, posted 09-09-2005 6:33 PM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024