Get your ass down there and save those people, you worthless, selfish bastard! You keep telling me "We" are the government, so where the hell have you been? Why didn't you save those people? Because you're a racist murderer, that's why. It's all your fault, you sonofabitch.......
Florida was pretty well organized for last years 3 hurricanes.
It seemed like both the Mayor and the Governor wanted to handle it themselves, too bad they couldn't realize they were over their head and accept help a little more readily.
Could it be that this was an overwhelming disaster and nothing could be done because the city didn't have adequate defenses? Why the need to lay this at the feet of one person or another? Particularly when you can't help but notice that blame is following political affilition right down the line.
True Rat, maybe everyone is doing the best they can.
But there are still places where people haven't been reached and no trucks should be turned away. They should just drive and drive until they find a group they can help.
There are plenty of people stranded and still waiting for help.
No time to turn the helpers away just because there is no one to give them direction.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Sep 8, 2005 at 05:13am.]
No matter what side of the fence you sit on, I think we can all agree that this is the most devistating thing that has happened on our soil in this generation.
Could it be that this was an overwhelming disaster and nothing could be done because the city didn't have adequate defenses? They could have got those buses out and moved the people out as their disaster plan stated they should.Why the need to lay this at the feet of one person or another? I guess you have figured it out. The inept response was due to two democrat administrations-the mayor of new orleans and the governor of lousiana.Â
... is only the heightened state of personal-resentments that causes MOST of the bad-blood in this place, and most of the misinformation that is bandied about.
so how much resentment do you carry? you do know that most of the misinformation posted here comes from you and crabs, don't you?
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- New York Sen. Charles Schumer warned Thursday that Senate Democrats may filibuster the Supreme Court nomination of John Roberts if he doesn't provide satisfactory answers about controversial issues like abortion during his Judiciary Committee hearings that begin next week.
....
Roberts backers have accused abortion advocates in the Senate of holding Roberts to a higher standard than the two previous nominees, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
That is where I will be, by tomorrow night. Want to come meet up with us... tonight?
Not that I ever want to ever meet up with you for any purpsose, I'd love to go, but I can't. It's simply impossible. I have a job.
Is there ANY reason (other than the DATE), why Gdubbya is coming to the gulf states tomorrow...? Certainly! A dishonest and insulting misuse of badly-needed resources, in his continuing efforts to play Americans one against the other, by using 9-11 for his own political-purposes.
Yeah, he planned the hurricane, so he could use it, and 9/11 mind you, for political purposes.
It's all part of his brilliant scheme.
NOT
As if he cares for "political purposes". He's on his second term, and he's never going to be up for re-election again.
"As if he cares for "political purposes". He's on his second term, and he's never going to be up for re-election again. "
You think he's now the only Bush in the world? -- no way in hell. He thinks like a Bush from the time he gets up in the morning to the time he goes to bed at night. This family is going to be written in history, and he never forgets it.
[Edited 7 times. Most recently by on Sep 10, 2005 at 06:16pm.]
"This metro region cannot afford to continue keeping bad company. Look at the cities that share our habits. Do we really want to emulate the sprawling, car-bound lifestyles of Jacksonville, Charlotte, Atlanta and Houston? Do we aspire to be Oklahoma City? These Southern places guzzle a third more gasoline per household than Boston, Seattle and Portland, places where people drive less and cover shorter distances. Which kind of city is better equipped to compete in a world of expensive gasoline?"
and...
"The administration and Legislature have responded by cutting transit service, raising fares and taking a skeptical approach to new transit projects while borrowing billions for new roads"
Dump the pork from the last transportation bill and use it rebuild the Gulf Coast. The country will get along.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Sep 11, 2005 at 07:30am.]
These Southern places guzzle a third more gasoline per household than Boston, Seattle and Portland, places where people drive less and cover shorter distances.
I'll ignore the usual South bashing and point out that "these...places" are bigger.You have to drive further in big states to get places.
People want choices.
Correct. How can public transit help you drop the kids off in the morning, then pick them up after work and run your errands, get home, fix dinner, take the kids to their various activities, etc. etc.? Public transportation isn't flexible enough.
Which path -- car dependence or diversification -- is more energy-efficient? Which is better for the environment? Which conserves more open land and requires less infrastructure? Which enhances family time? Which promotes an active, healthy lifestyle? Which lessens dependence on foreign oil and reduces the chance for international conflict?
There is so much wrong with this preachy paragraph that I hardly know where to start. It's nothing but spouting political correctness. What good is energy-efficient transport when it can never pay for itself? And family time? Public transport is much slower than driving yourself and means LESS time at home. Less infrastructure? Ripping out buildings to build rail lines means that those displaced people and businesses have to move somewhere else, thus increasing the required physical space. At least buses can move along streets that are already there. Lessen dependence on foreign oil? Open up ANWR. Promotes a healthy lifestyle? Where does that fit in, and where is it a journalist's or a government's place to tell people to do that?
Light rail should have been built in the '50s and '60s when they first started talking about it. Now it's just an expensive black hole. Houston has started putting in light rail. Not only is it ruinously expensive, but it's actually financially hurting the bus lines.
Dump the pork from the last transportation bill and use it rebuild the Gulf Coast.
I couldn't agree more. It just shows that Republicans are as irresponsible as Democrats when they have a majority. A pox on both their houses!
"Ripping out buildings to build rail lines means that those displaced people and businesses have to move somewhere else, thus increasing the required physical space."
I guess that never happens during highway construction.
WASHINGTON -- With Senate confirmation of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. as chief justice virtually assured, the struggle for the Supreme Court returns to replacing retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The belief in legal and political circles is that President Bush will name a conservative woman, and the front-runner is Federal Appellate Judge Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit, Austin, Texas).
Once we understand that, we can see through the silliness of all the learned hand-wringing about what the writers of the Constitution might possibly have meant when they wrote it. What matters is what the people understood those words to mean when they ratified it and amended it. They didn't vote on what was in the back of somebody else's mind.
And the "right to bear arms" was clearly meant in the context of organizing a militia. Or else, why specify it in the first half of the Second Amendment?
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater ... confidence than an armed man." --Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in 'On Crimes and punishment', (1764)
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." --George Mason, during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution (1788)
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." --James Madison, 'The Federalist Papers', No. 46
"...but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights..." --Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in 'Federalist', No. 29
"The supposed quietude of a good mans allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside...Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them..." --Thomas Paine, I 'Writings of Thomas Paine', at 56 (1894)
So why is the militia mentioned in the constitution? Because we may need people trained in the use firearms to be called upon in a minutes notice. The idea was that if people had and knew how to use firearms properly, then we could save the time needed to train them when they are needed. Someone who has used a rifle since they were little will make a better soldier than someone who fires his first shot at basic training.
"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
So, who's talking about disarming anyone?
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes."
Apply for a permit, and you would probably get it (as did 90 plus percent of the applicants before CC in MN). So nothing is forbidden.
I don't know what Madison is carrying on about, but it's probably suspicion fit for the time.
Ditto, Hamilton.
Buncha upper middle class white guys with what looks like no idea what 21st Century America would look like. Actually, a little more thought and foresight would have saved future generations a lot of heartache or at least one Civil War.
[Edited 3 times. Most recently by on Sep 14, 2005 at 04:02pm.]
You were. You seem to think that only the state militia should have arms.
Buncha upper middle class white guys with what looks like no idea what 21st Century America would look like. Actually, a little more thought and foresight would have saved future generations a lot of heartache and at least one Civil War.
What about the mayors? The governors? Those that refused to leave?
What about those that continue to stay and refuse to leave?
Is the government supposed to rescue them in two/three weeks?
Where does the buck stop?
The government didn't even SHOW UP for nearly a week.
You really didn't expect crabweed to actually answer a question, did you THX?
you didn't actually expect torpedo to be anything but a dumbass, did you?
The government didn't even SHOW UP for nearly a week.
Since the levees didn't give way until Tuesday, are you stating that the Federal Government did nothing until today (Tuesday)?
so, you are saying the levees were the only problem that needed any help?
Where does the buck stop?
With you Crabby
Get your ass down there and save those people, you worthless, selfish bastard! You keep telling me "We" are the government, so where the hell have you been? Why didn't you save those people? Because you're a racist murderer, that's why. It's all your fault, you sonofabitch.......
I mean, I'm sorry, please don't call my boss.
Like I would ever tell you anything ever again.
Hi everyone. Hope to see you at Able Minds or World Crossing when PF ends.
I'd like to know why FEMA is turning away truck loads of food, single serving that people from Ocala Florida sent to Mississippi, i think it was.
What an idiot FEMA worker.
Never turn down food, redirect maybe, but never turn away food.
I watched Oprah for the past two days. Seems she is quick to shed a tear with Mayor Nagin, and blame others to divert from his failures.
She should have asked him "Mayor Nagin, why didn't you use the buses to get people out."
If they are handing out blame, he certainly should get a big portion.
Florida was pretty well organized for last years 3 hurricanes.
It seemed like both the Mayor and the Governor wanted to handle it themselves, too bad they couldn't realize they were over their head and accept help a little more readily.
Bill, I wanted to see what was going on, even if it was thru Oprah's discriminate eyes.
FEMA aren't first responders, they are the second line. First is the response from the city government.
Could it be that this was an overwhelming disaster and nothing could be done because the city didn't have adequate defenses? Why the need to lay this at the feet of one person or another? Particularly when you can't help but notice that blame is following political affilition right down the line.
[Edited by on Sep 8, 2005 at 05:09am.]
Jeb Bush knew how to get everything lined up and ready to respond.
That would be a conservative's response.
True Rat, maybe everyone is doing the best they can.
But there are still places where people haven't been reached and no trucks should be turned away. They should just drive and drive until they find a group they can help.
There are plenty of people stranded and still waiting for help.
No time to turn the helpers away just because there is no one to give them direction.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Sep 8, 2005 at 05:13am.]
No matter what side of the fence you sit on, I think we can all agree that this is the most devistating thing that has happened on our soil in this generation.
It's amazing how that happens on occasion. :)
[Edited by on Sep 8, 2005 at 06:19am.]
Could it be that this was an overwhelming disaster and nothing could be done because the city didn't have adequate defenses? They could have got those buses out and moved the people out as their disaster plan stated they should.Why the need to lay this at the feet of one person or another? I guess you have figured it out. The inept response was due to two democrat administrations-the mayor of new orleans and the governor of lousiana.Â
... is only the heightened state of personal-resentments that causes MOST of the bad-blood in this place, and most of the misinformation that is bandied about.
so how much resentment do you carry? you do know that most of the misinformation posted here comes from you and crabs, don't you?
I am so hurt, fold.
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- New York Sen. Charles Schumer warned Thursday that Senate Democrats may filibuster the Supreme Court nomination of John Roberts if he doesn't provide satisfactory answers about controversial issues like abortion during his Judiciary Committee hearings that begin next week.
....
Roberts backers have accused abortion advocates in the Senate of holding Roberts to a higher standard than the two previous nominees, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat1586.html
HEY! Fold gave that title to me!!
Mom has a stroke. Fold is here. Enough said.
I thought he was on his way to TX?
That wouldn't surprise me either.
I'm sure Alexandria, LA. will be thrilled to have a psycho coming to their city.
Sorry Foldo. Can't make it. That little thing called WORK sometimes gets in the way. But you wouldn't know about that.
That is where I will be, by tomorrow night. Want to come meet up with us... tonight?
Not that I ever want to ever meet up with you for any purpsose, I'd love to go, but I can't. It's simply impossible. I have a job.
Is there ANY reason (other than the DATE), why Gdubbya is coming to the gulf states tomorrow...? Certainly! A dishonest and insulting misuse of badly-needed resources, in his continuing efforts to play Americans one against the other, by using 9-11 for his own political-purposes.
Yeah, he planned the hurricane, so he could use it, and 9/11 mind you, for political purposes.
It's all part of his brilliant scheme.
NOT
As if he cares for "political purposes". He's on his second term, and he's never going to be up for re-election again.
"As if he cares for "political purposes". He's on his second term, and he's never going to be up for re-election again. "
You think he's now the only Bush in the world? -- no way in hell. He thinks like a Bush from the time he gets up in the morning to the time he goes to bed at night. This family is going to be written in history, and he never forgets it.
[Edited 7 times. Most recently by on Sep 10, 2005 at 06:16pm.]
Toward a more enlightened transportation approach
"This metro region cannot afford to continue keeping bad company. Look at the cities that share our habits. Do we really want to emulate the sprawling, car-bound lifestyles of Jacksonville, Charlotte, Atlanta and Houston? Do we aspire to be Oklahoma City? These Southern places guzzle a third more gasoline per household than Boston, Seattle and Portland, places where people drive less and cover shorter distances. Which kind of city is better equipped to compete in a world of expensive gasoline?"
and...
"The administration and Legislature have responded by cutting transit service, raising fares and taking a skeptical approach to new transit projects while borrowing billions for new roads"
Dump the pork from the last transportation bill and use it rebuild the Gulf Coast. The country will get along.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Sep 11, 2005 at 07:30am.]
These Southern places guzzle a third more gasoline per household than Boston, Seattle and Portland, places where people drive less and cover shorter distances.
I'll ignore the usual South bashing and point out that "these...places" are bigger.You have to drive further in big states to get places.
People want choices.
Correct. How can public transit help you drop the kids off in the morning, then pick them up after work and run your errands, get home, fix dinner, take the kids to their various activities, etc. etc.? Public transportation isn't flexible enough.
Which path -- car dependence or diversification -- is more energy-efficient? Which is better for the environment? Which conserves more open land and requires less infrastructure? Which enhances family time? Which promotes an active, healthy lifestyle? Which lessens dependence on foreign oil and reduces the chance for international conflict?
There is so much wrong with this preachy paragraph that I hardly know where to start. It's nothing but spouting political correctness. What good is energy-efficient transport when it can never pay for itself? And family time? Public transport is much slower than driving yourself and means LESS time at home. Less infrastructure? Ripping out buildings to build rail lines means that those displaced people and businesses have to move somewhere else, thus increasing the required physical space. At least buses can move along streets that are already there. Lessen dependence on foreign oil? Open up ANWR. Promotes a healthy lifestyle? Where does that fit in, and where is it a journalist's or a government's place to tell people to do that?
Light rail should have been built in the '50s and '60s when they first started talking about it. Now it's just an expensive black hole. Houston has started putting in light rail. Not only is it ruinously expensive, but it's actually financially hurting the bus lines.
Dump the pork from the last transportation bill and use it rebuild the Gulf Coast.
I couldn't agree more. It just shows that Republicans are as irresponsible as Democrats when they have a majority. A pox on both their houses!
[Edited by on Sep 11, 2005 at 08:29am.]
Mmmmmmmm....Pork!
It's what's for dinner!
"Ripping out buildings to build rail lines means that those displaced people and businesses have to move somewhere else, thus increasing the required physical space."
I guess that never happens during highway construction.
Beef is what's for dinner.
when you read the rat's post you think something is cooking but it is just smoke from the cow chips he uses to keep warm.
WASHINGTON -- With Senate confirmation of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. as chief justice virtually assured, the struggle for the Supreme Court returns to replacing retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The belief in legal and political circles is that President Bush will name a conservative woman, and the front-runner is Federal Appellate Judge Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit, Austin, Texas).
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20050912.shtml
Once we understand that, we can see through the silliness of all the learned hand-wringing about what the writers of the Constitution might possibly have meant when they wrote it. What matters is what the people understood those words to mean when they ratified it and amended it. They didn't vote on what was in the back of somebody else's mind.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20050914.shtml
By that reasoning the Second Amendment applies only to the types of "arms" that were available in the late 18th century.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Sep 14, 2005 at 03:08pm.]
And the "right to bear arms" was clearly meant in the context of organizing a militia. Or else, why specify it in the first half of the Second Amendment?
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater ... confidence than an armed man." --Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in 'On Crimes and punishment', (1764)
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." --George Mason, during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution (1788)
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." --James Madison, 'The Federalist Papers', No. 46
"...but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights..." --Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in 'Federalist', No. 29
"The supposed quietude of a good mans allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside...Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them..." --Thomas Paine, I 'Writings of Thomas Paine', at 56 (1894)
So why is the militia mentioned in the constitution? Because we may need people trained in the use firearms to be called upon in a minutes notice. The idea was that if people had and knew how to use firearms properly, then we could save the time needed to train them when they are needed. Someone who has used a rifle since they were little will make a better soldier than someone who fires his first shot at basic training.
"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
So, who's talking about disarming anyone?
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes."
Apply for a permit, and you would probably get it (as did 90 plus percent of the applicants before CC in MN). So nothing is forbidden.
I don't know what Madison is carrying on about, but it's probably suspicion fit for the time.
Ditto, Hamilton.
Buncha upper middle class white guys with what looks like no idea what 21st Century America would look like. Actually, a little more thought and foresight would have saved future generations a lot of heartache or at least one Civil War.
[Edited 3 times. Most recently by on Sep 14, 2005 at 04:02pm.]
So, who's talking about disarming anyone?
You were. You seem to think that only the state militia should have arms.
Buncha upper middle class white guys with what looks like no idea what 21st Century America would look like. Actually, a little more thought and foresight would have saved future generations a lot of heartache and at least one Civil War.
See.