MSM finally catching on to the facts about NO

[arsbanned]

I find it hard to believe you even find time for golf.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
It seems you completely ignore that I've already stated for some days now that Brown deserves to get fired and all along have pointed at authorities up and down the line while you make statements like:

"Get real. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. Bureaucrats are slaves to the rule book. Being a leader means knowing when to break the rules, and being willing to accept the consequences for your decisions. One of my greatest gripes about Bush is he fails on both counts. He has proven time and again he is willing to break the rules when it suits his agenda, and God knows he has never shown any willingness whatsoever to accept responsibility for his poor decisions. We're already sliding down that slippery slope, yet Bush was unwilling to use his authority the one time it was most critically needed."

And, per your usual, you're sputtering on endlessly about "Bush," "Bushies," and republicans and insisting they are the ones to blame. So take your high and mighty act and stow it, pal. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

Yes, dear. We know you're willing to sacrifice Brown as a scapegoat. You have yet to say a single word critical of your man who put him there, however. Surprise (not).

As far as taking one of my quotes out of context, that simply reinforces your status as a partisan tool. I have posted many comments critical of performance at all levels. The only arguments I get back are from you Bush apologists who want to protect George at all costs. It's therefore hardly surprising that I spend more time addressing that issue than ones where we're all in agreement.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
It seems you completely ignore that I've already stated for some days now that Brown deserves to get fired and all along have pointed at authorities up and down the line while you make statements like:

"Get real. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. Bureaucrats are slaves to the rule book. Being a leader means knowing when to break the rules, and being willing to accept the consequences for your decisions. One of my greatest gripes about Bush is he fails on both counts. He has proven time and again he is willing to break the rules when it suits his agenda, and God knows he has never shown any willingness whatsoever to accept responsibility for his poor decisions. We're already sliding down that slippery slope, yet Bush was unwilling to use his authority the one time it was most critically needed."

And, per your usual, you're sputtering on endlessly about "Bush," "Bushies," and republicans and insisting they are the ones to blame. So take your high and mighty act and stow it, pal. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

Yes, dear. We know you're willing to sacrifice Brown as a scapegoat. You have yet to say a single word critical of your man who put him there, however. Surprise (not).

As far as taking one of my quotes out of context, that simply reinforces your status as a partisan tool. I have posted many comments critical of performance at all levels. The only arguments I get back are from you Bush apologists who want to protect George at all costs. It's therefore hardly surprising that I spend more time addressing that issue than ones where we're all in agreement.

"One" of your quotes. LOL. I could post many more that all go right back to your same single-minded them - Get Bush. It's a theme you've constantly pushed in here and that is surely no secret to anyone whatsoever.

So you've "posted many comments critical of performance at all levels." Please show me where you've blamed Nagin or Blanco specifically. You name Bush constantly. Where have you pointed at the failings of the others?

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
It seems you completely ignore that I've already stated for some days now that Brown deserves to get fired and all along have pointed at authorities up and down the line while you make statements like:

"Get real. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. Bureaucrats are slaves to the rule book. Being a leader means knowing when to break the rules, and being willing to accept the consequences for your decisions. One of my greatest gripes about Bush is he fails on both counts. He has proven time and again he is willing to break the rules when it suits his agenda, and God knows he has never shown any willingness whatsoever to accept responsibility for his poor decisions. We're already sliding down that slippery slope, yet Bush was unwilling to use his authority the one time it was most critically needed."

And, per your usual, you're sputtering on endlessly about "Bush," "Bushies," and republicans and insisting they are the ones to blame. So take your high and mighty act and stow it, pal. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

Yes, dear. We know you're willing to sacrifice Brown as a scapegoat. You have yet to say a single word critical of your man who put him there, however. Surprise (not).

As far as taking one of my quotes out of context, that simply reinforces your status as a partisan tool. I have posted many comments critical of performance at all levels. The only arguments I get back are from you Bush apologists who want to protect George at all costs. It's therefore hardly surprising that I spend more time addressing that issue than ones where we're all in agreement.

"One" of your quotes. LOL. I could post many more that all go right back to your same single-minded them - Get Bush. It's a theme you've constantly pushed in here and that is surely no secret to anyone whatsoever.

So you've "posted many comments critical of performance at all levels." Please show me where you've blamed Nagin or Blanco specifically. You name Bush constantly. Where have you pointed at the failings of the others?

Because you deflect from Bush constantly, as I already pointed out. Because Bush was the one person most able to cut through the bureaucracy and spur a faster, better federal response (as I've also pointed out repeatedly).

Let's go back to the point you dodged again: you have yet to express a single word critical of Bush himself. Why is that, I wonder? Nevermind, you'll just duhvert again. Run, Chicken, run. You're fooling no one, not even yourself.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
It seems you completely ignore that I've already stated for some days now that Brown deserves to get fired and all along have pointed at authorities up and down the line while you make statements like:

"Get real. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. Bureaucrats are slaves to the rule book. Being a leader means knowing when to break the rules, and being willing to accept the consequences for your decisions. One of my greatest gripes about Bush is he fails on both counts. He has proven time and again he is willing to break the rules when it suits his agenda, and God knows he has never shown any willingness whatsoever to accept responsibility for his poor decisions. We're already sliding down that slippery slope, yet Bush was unwilling to use his authority the one time it was most critically needed."

And, per your usual, you're sputtering on endlessly about "Bush," "Bushies," and republicans and insisting they are the ones to blame. So take your high and mighty act and stow it, pal. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

Yes, dear. We know you're willing to sacrifice Brown as a scapegoat. You have yet to say a single word critical of your man who put him there, however. Surprise (not).

As far as taking one of my quotes out of context, that simply reinforces your status as a partisan tool. I have posted many comments critical of performance at all levels. The only arguments I get back are from you Bush apologists who want to protect George at all costs. It's therefore hardly surprising that I spend more time addressing that issue than ones where we're all in agreement.

"One" of your quotes. LOL. I could post many more that all go right back to your same single-minded them - Get Bush. It's a theme you've constantly pushed in here and that is surely no secret to anyone whatsoever.

So you've "posted many comments critical of performance at all levels." Please show me where you've blamed Nagin or Blanco specifically. You name Bush constantly. Where have you pointed at the failings of the others?

Because you deflect from Bush constantly, as I already pointed out. Because Bush was the one person most able to cut through the bureaucracy and spur a faster, better federal response (as I've also pointed out repeatedly).

Let's go back to the point you dodged again: you have yet to express a single word critical of Bush himself. Why is that, I wonder? Nevermind, you'll just duhvert again. Run, Chicken, run. You're fooling no one, not even yourself.

Answer my question Finger, or it's you who are running. Again you harp on Bush as well in your usual manner. Please show us where you "posted many comments critical of performance at all levels." and lambasted Nagin or Blanco in the same manner as you have consistently done to Bush.

I'll be waiting.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Yes, dear. We know you're willing to sacrifice Brown as a scapegoat. You have yet to say a single word critical of your man who put him there, however. Surprise (not).

As far as taking one of my quotes out of context, that simply reinforces your status as a partisan tool. I have posted many comments critical of performance at all levels. The only arguments I get back are from you Bush apologists who want to protect George at all costs. It's therefore hardly surprising that I spend more time addressing that issue than ones where we're all in agreement.

"One" of your quotes. LOL. I could post many more that all go right back to your same single-minded them - Get Bush. It's a theme you've constantly pushed in here and that is surely no secret to anyone whatsoever.

So you've "posted many comments critical of performance at all levels." Please show me where you've blamed Nagin or Blanco specifically. You name Bush constantly. Where have you pointed at the failings of the others?

Because you deflect from Bush constantly, as I already pointed out. Because Bush was the one person most able to cut through the bureaucracy and spur a faster, better federal response (as I've also pointed out repeatedly).

Let's go back to the point you dodged again: you have yet to express a single word critical of Bush himself. Why is that, I wonder? Nevermind, you'll just duhvert again. Run, Chicken, run. You're fooling no one, not even yourself.

Answer my question Finger, or it's you who are running. Again you harp on Bush as well in your usual manner. Please show us where you "posted many comments critical of performance at all levels." and lambasted Nagin or Blanco in the same manner as you have consistently done to Bush.

I'll be waiting.

I won't. I won't play your assinine game, not about this.

😛retzel;

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Yes, dear. We know you're willing to sacrifice Brown as a scapegoat. You have yet to say a single word critical of your man who put him there, however. Surprise (not).

As far as taking one of my quotes out of context, that simply reinforces your status as a partisan tool. I have posted many comments critical of performance at all levels. The only arguments I get back are from you Bush apologists who want to protect George at all costs. It's therefore hardly surprising that I spend more time addressing that issue than ones where we're all in agreement.

"One" of your quotes. LOL. I could post many more that all go right back to your same single-minded them - Get Bush. It's a theme you've constantly pushed in here and that is surely no secret to anyone whatsoever.

So you've "posted many comments critical of performance at all levels." Please show me where you've blamed Nagin or Blanco specifically. You name Bush constantly. Where have you pointed at the failings of the others?

Because you deflect from Bush constantly, as I already pointed out. Because Bush was the one person most able to cut through the bureaucracy and spur a faster, better federal response (as I've also pointed out repeatedly).

Let's go back to the point you dodged again: you have yet to express a single word critical of Bush himself. Why is that, I wonder? Nevermind, you'll just duhvert again. Run, Chicken, run. You're fooling no one, not even yourself.

Answer my question Finger, or it's you who are running. Again you harp on Bush as well in your usual manner. Please show us where you "posted many comments critical of performance at all levels." and lambasted Nagin or Blanco in the same manner as you have consistently done to Bush.

I'll be waiting.

I won't. I won't play your assinine game, not about this.

😛retzel;

iow, you can't substantiate your claim. Thought so.

Run finger. Run.

 

[OrByte]

wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: OrByte
wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

I would suggest you read this thread again. Or would you like me to help you see where I've provided my "argument," since you seem blind to the numerous links to information I've provided and the nuerous statements I've made relevant to the discussion?

Nor do I see you making any argument whatsoever, but merely making an appearance to pontificate and try to redirect, once again, to the insistence that Bush should be bashed relentlessly over this and be snarky towards me.

Bush did his job, and did what he was supposed to do. Many others up and down the line failed, but this seeming red herring that Bush should micromanage evey single department below him, whether he had responsibility for them or not, and if he didn't have responsibility he should have broken the law and grabbed it, is utterly ridiculous and is clearly grasping at straws.

You and the other usual suspects in here can go on and continue to blame Bush. Huddle together with the small percentage of the public that agrees with you.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: OrByte
wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

I would suggest you read this thread again. Or would you like me to help you see where I've provided my "argument," since you seem blind to the numerous links to information I've provided and the nuerous statements I've made relevant to the discussion?

Nor do I see you making any argument whatsoever, but merely making an appearance to pontificate and try to redirect, once again, to the insistence that Bush should be bashed relentlessly over this and be snarky towards me.

Bush did his job, and did what he was supposed to do. Many others up and down the line failed, but this seeming red herring that Bush should micromanage evey single department below him, whether he had responsibility for them or not, and if he didn't have responsibility he should have broken the law and grabbed it, is utterly ridiculous and is clearly grasping at straws.

You and the other usual suspects in here can go on and continue to blame Bush. Huddle together with the small percentage of the public that agrees with you.

wow, you proved my point way to easily.

one question: Where does the "Buck" stop?

 

[AnyMal]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: OrByte
trollslikechicken

hehe thats good one!

When Liberals like Conjur have no argument, they turn to the politics of personal destruction. Conjur's name-calling is a good case in point.

This is true for both sides. Indeed, the Bush machine (particularly Karl Rove) is the pinnacle of the politics of personal destruction. That you chose to present this as a "Liberal" trait exposes your own blind partisanship.

Liberals are masters at name calling.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: AnyMal
Neocons are masters at name calling.

agreed.

 

[GhettoPeanut]

this just fits so well with Bushes "Blame Game" tactics. each side is blaming the other, they're both at fault if you wask me, the state officials for being to stupid to act, and the Bush admin. for being to damn slow.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: OrByte
wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

I would suggest you read this thread again. Or would you like me to help you see where I've provided my "argument," since you seem blind to the numerous links to information I've provided and the nuerous statements I've made relevant to the discussion?

Nor do I see you making any argument whatsoever, but merely making an appearance to pontificate and try to redirect, once again, to the insistence that Bush should be bashed relentlessly over this and be snarky towards me.

Bush did his job, and did what he was supposed to do. Many others up and down the line failed, but this seeming red herring that Bush should micromanage evey single department below him, whether he had responsibility for them or not, and if he didn't have responsibility he should have broken the law and grabbed it, is utterly ridiculous and is clearly grasping at straws.

You and the other usual suspects in here can go on and continue to blame Bush. Huddle together with the small percentage of the public that agrees with you.

wow, you proved my point way to easily.

one question: Where does the "Buck" stop?

The buck stops where people have been trying to tell you and others for days, yet it's ignored. It stops at Blanco. She is in charge and refused to cede that responsibility. Instead some people are making an argument that Bush should have declared martial law, usurping her power. I could just imagine the howls of disgust, were that the case, coming from the very same people making that assertion. What they are really saying is that they wanted to see Bush make the proclamation so they could finally point their fingers at him with good reason. Right now they are struggling mightily and fighting an uphill battle, after popping off before all the facts were in, and doing little more than trying to save face for jumping the gun.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: GhettoPeanut
this just fits so well with Bushes "Blame Game" tactics. each side is blaming the other, they're both at fault if you wask me, the state officials for being to stupid to act, and the Bush admin. for being to damn slow.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: OrByte
wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

I would suggest you read this thread again. Or would you like me to help you see where I've provided my "argument," since you seem blind to the numerous links to information I've provided and the nuerous statements I've made relevant to the discussion?

Nor do I see you making any argument whatsoever, but merely making an appearance to pontificate and try to redirect, once again, to the insistence that Bush should be bashed relentlessly over this and be snarky towards me.

Bush did his job, and did what he was supposed to do. Many others up and down the line failed, but this seeming red herring that Bush should micromanage evey single department below him, whether he had responsibility for them or not, and if he didn't have responsibility he should have broken the law and grabbed it, is utterly ridiculous and is clearly grasping at straws.

You and the other usual suspects in here can go on and continue to blame Bush. Huddle together with the small percentage of the public that agrees with you.

wow, you proved my point way to easily.

one question: Where does the "Buck" stop?

The buck stops where people have been trying to tell you and others for days, yet it's ignored. It stops at Blanco. She is in charge and refused to cede that responsibility. Instead some people are making an argument that Bush should have declared martial law, usurping her power. I could just imagine the howls of disgust, were that the case, coming from the very same people making that assertion. What they are really saying is that they wanted to see Bush make the proclamation so they could finally point their fingers at him with good reason. Right now they are struggling mightily and fighting an uphill battle, after popping off before all the facts were in, and doing little more than trying to save face for jumping the gun.

you give new meaning to the term "partisan hack".

anyways, can we all just agree that EVERYBODY botched this thing up badly, from the local/state level all the way up to the federal level? i seriously hope all local/state gov'ts and FEMA are seeing this as a huge wakeup call that we all need to get our act together and be more prepared for ANY possible disaster that may occur in our borders.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: OrByte
wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

I would suggest you read this thread again. Or would you like me to help you see where I've provided my "argument," since you seem blind to the numerous links to information I've provided and the nuerous statements I've made relevant to the discussion?

Nor do I see you making any argument whatsoever, but merely making an appearance to pontificate and try to redirect, once again, to the insistence that Bush should be bashed relentlessly over this and be snarky towards me.

Bush did his job, and did what he was supposed to do. Many others up and down the line failed, but this seeming red herring that Bush should micromanage evey single department below him, whether he had responsibility for them or not, and if he didn't have responsibility he should have broken the law and grabbed it, is utterly ridiculous and is clearly grasping at straws.

You and the other usual suspects in here can go on and continue to blame Bush. Huddle together with the small percentage of the public that agrees with you.

wow, you proved my point way to easily.

one question: Where does the "Buck" stop?

The buck stops where people have been trying to tell you and others for days, yet it's ignored. It stops at Blanco. She is in charge and refused to cede that responsibility. Instead some people are making an argument that Bush should have declared martial law, usurping her power. I could just imagine the howls of disgust, were that the case, coming from the very same people making that assertion. What they are really saying is that they wanted to see Bush make the proclamation so they could finally point their fingers at him with good reason. Right now they are struggling mightily and fighting an uphill battle, after popping off before all the facts were in, and doing little more than trying to save face for jumping the gun.

you give new meaning to the term "partisan hack".

Yeah, just about everyone in here who makes that claim has a political ideology that opposes mine, which is why the accusation so frequently falls flat on its face and has no value. Nor do I see the same folks making that accusation foist it on their ideological pals in here who ARE so plainly partisan hacks. So the accusation primarily comes down to someone deciding to be a representative for the CJ crew making it, which is why it's a meaningless sentiment. Just admit that your comment has far more to do with your personal dislike of me and move on. ::ho hum::

anyways, can we all just agree that EVERYBODY botched this thing up badly, from the local/state level all the way up to the federal level? i seriously hope all local/state gov'ts and FEMA are seeing this as a huge wakeup call that we all need to get our act together and be more prepared for ANY possible disaster that may occur in our borders.

If you'll do some research, I made that very same claim long, long ago on this subject already and was one of the first to point ou that their was blame to be laid on the local and state authorities while there were 6 or 7 threads where the usual suspects were bashing Bush senseless with partisan abandon. Congrats on being late to the party.

 

[Corn]

Bottom line, people are dead because they did not leave.

It does not matter why they stayed, only that they did.

The path of the hurricane was known 2 days before it hit.

If the state/city was unable to evacuate the willing in those 2 days with a fully operational transportation infrastructure, how can anyone blame the Feds for taking twice as long with only 5% of the transportation infrastructure intact?

People are bitching about unused city busses. The problem isn't that they weren't used after the hurricane hit as the majority of the roads were immediately flooded. They were useless after Katrina hit. The problem is they should have been outside the city packed with evacuees before the hurricane even hit land.

Thousands of people did not die in the week of the hurricane like Bowfinger claims. As will be shown, the overwhelming vast majority of the dead will have drowned the day the hurricane hit.

Local control and coordination in these circumstances are preferred for a reason. Anyone care to hazard a guess?

How about a hint.........why was FEMA unaware of refugees at the convention center? Was the entire Dept patently stupid? Please....... No, the problem wasn't stupidity, IT WAS IGNORANCE! Efforts must be coordinated. Woefully lacking in this whole sad episode was simple communication: "Brown should have known, TV showed people at the convention center!!!" But wait......is Brown supposed to be gaining his information from the TV? Why was he or his organization not informed of these details? It is one thing to not know, it is quite another to know and not act.

My god, most of you people are truly disgusting, using the rotting corpses of fellow Americans to further a political agenda. You don't really care about what went wrong and why things happened, you just care about being right and affirming your biased judgement.

You people are disturbed and sick.

Just like Kirk, I've got my own list. Sure, there's some duplication of names between our lists, but I'm not shouting out props. Mine is a list of shame. Unlike Kirk's list, mine's pretty evenly represented by both supposed liberal and conservative alike.

I don't need to post my list, those on it already know who you are......

I can think of no more a worthless waste of my time than to continue discussing this tragedy with some of you animals. This tragedy brought me back to this forum, which I abandoned nearly a year ago. Ironic that it is also reaffirming my reasons for originally quitting here........

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
anyways, can we all just agree that EVERYBODY botched this thing up badly, from the local/state level all the way up to the federal level? i seriously hope all local/state gov'ts and FEMA are seeing this as a huge wakeup call that we all need to get our act together and be more prepared for ANY possible disaster that may occur in our borders.

That is fine... to a point. There's certainly enough blame to go to a lot of places. What bothers me is, the asshole at the top seems to think he can duck responsibility for his own incompetence by spreading the blame around as many names and places as he can, like a little kid trying to spread the vegetables around his plate, thinking it will look like there is less left.

George W. Bush appointed Michael Chertoff as head of the Department of Homeland Security.

George W. Bush appointed Michael Brown as director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Brown, whose qualifications in disaster management include being fired from his last private-sector job as the commissioner of judges and stewards for the International Arabian Horse Association, a breeders' and horse-show organization based in Colorado, has publically displayed total incompetence, including his week has has made several shocking public admissions, including interviews where he suggested FEMA was unaware of the misery and desperation of refugees stranded at the New Orleans convention center.

George W. Bush made similar disclaimers and admissions of ignorance about the adequacy of his administration's preparedness for a disaster we all watched coming on TV On September 1, 2005, on Good Morning America, He said,

I don?t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees. They did anticipate a serious storm. But these levees got breached. And, as a result, much of New Orleans is flooded. And now we?re having to deal with it and will.

George W. Bush is totally incompetent to choose run a baseball team, let alone a team qualified to rescue American citizens from natural disasters, protect us from terrorists, start, let alone complete, wars based on lies, or anything else of social significance.

Based on his performance, if George W. Bush were the head of a major company, instead of the United States of America, he and his entire adminstration would have been fired long ago as a public embarrassment. :|

 

[ExpertNovice]

I started a post linking to many of those laws so people could read for themselves.

Most (all?) liberals decided, again, that the law doesn't matter.

Edited to add:

"If the city and the state are stumbling or in over their head, then it's FEMA's [Federal Emergency Management Agency's] responsibility to show some leadership," said Jerry Hauer, director of public health preparedness at the Department of Health and Human Services.

Leadership. Again with the ignore the Governor and send in troops to restore order so FEMA workers wouldn't be shot and killed for trying to help.

 

[ExpertNovice]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: OrByte
wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

I would suggest you read this thread again. Or would you like me to help you see where I've provided my "argument," since you seem blind to the numerous links to information I've provided and the nuerous statements I've made relevant to the discussion?

Nor do I see you making any argument whatsoever, but merely making an appearance to pontificate and try to redirect, once again, to the insistence that Bush should be bashed relentlessly over this and be snarky towards me.

Bush did his job, and did what he was supposed to do. Many others up and down the line failed, but this seeming red herring that Bush should micromanage evey single department below him, whether he had responsibility for them or not, and if he didn't have responsibility he should have broken the law and grabbed it, is utterly ridiculous and is clearly grasping at straws.

You and the other usual suspects in here can go on and continue to blame Bush. Huddle together with the small percentage of the public that agrees with you.

wow, you proved my point way to easily.

one question: Where does the "Buck" stop?

The "Buck stops here" refers to managers who have the authority to hire and fire underlings. Maybe Clinton had the power to elect and fire the Governor of Lousiana. However, President Bush does not.

 

[Harvey]

Bush is either functionally illiterate or catastrophically under-read on matters of governance. In the 1930's, Winston Churchill said,

The responsibility of government for the public safety is absolute and requires no mandate. It is in fact the prime object for which governments come into existence.

In his memoirs, A World Transformed (1998), written with Brent Scowcroft, on pp. 489 - 490, George H.W. Bush wrote:

Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome.

Different problem. Same idiot in charge. Same catastrophic results. 🙁

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: OrByte
wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

:beer: He is collecting neocon green stamps for future use. He thinks if he collects enough, maybe the rich white boys club might let him join. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: OrByte
wow TLC you need to step back man. You Offer no argument whatsoever only personal attacks. Can you not see how you act like some kind of junkyard dog when it comes to protecting the Administration from criticism? You do the Administration proud, but you get no cookie points for it. Bush doesn't pay your bills...why are you so adamant about protecting him?

step away from the PC man. Go get some fresh air.

:beer: He is collecting neocon green stamps for future use. He thinks if he collects enough, maybe the rich white boys club might let him join. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Well to paraphrase Groucho Marx (not Karl, so don't get confused) - 'I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.'

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: Corn
Bottom line, people are dead because they did not leave.

It does not matter why they stayed, only that they did.

The path of the hurricane was known 2 days before it hit.

If the state/city was unable to evacuate the willing in those 2 days with a fully operational transportation infrastructure, how can anyone blame the Feds for taking twice as long with only 5% of the transportation infrastructure intact?

People are bitching about unused city busses. The problem isn't that they weren't used after the hurricane hit as the majority of the roads were immediately flooded. They were useless after Katrina hit. The problem is they should have been outside the city packed with evacuees before the hurricane even hit land.

Thousands of people did not die in the week of the hurricane like Bowfinger claims. As will be shown, the overwhelming vast majority of the dead will have drowned the day the hurricane hit.

Local control and coordination in these circumstances are preferred for a reason. Anyone care to hazard a guess?

How about a hint.........why was FEMA unaware of refugees at the convention center? Was the entire Dept patently stupid? Please....... No, the problem wasn't stupidity, IT WAS IGNORANCE! Efforts must be coordinated. Woefully lacking in this whole sad episode was simple communication: "Brown should have known, TV showed people at the convention center!!!" But wait......is Brown supposed to be gaining his information from the TV? Why was he or his organization not informed of these details? It is one thing to not know, it is quite another to know and not act.

My god, most of you people are truly disgusting, using the rotting corpses of fellow Americans to further a political agenda. You don't really care about what went wrong and why things happened, you just care about being right and affirming your biased judgement.

You people are disturbed and sick.

Just like Kirk, I've got my own list. Sure, there's some duplication of names between our lists, but I'm not shouting out props. Mine is a list of shame. Unlike Kirk's list, mine's pretty evenly represented by both supposed liberal and conservative alike.

I don't need to post my list, those on it already know who you are......

I can think of no more a worthless waste of my time than to continue discussing this tragedy with some of you animals. This tragedy brought me back to this forum, which I abandoned nearly a year ago. Ironic that it is also reaffirming my reasons for originally quitting here........

well said. :thumbsup: