President Bush last night

[drk]

I don't know what to think about these things from last night:

1.) Do we want to expand the role of the military to include domestic relief efforts?

2.) I guess that we are all in agreement that your and my money (NOT "the government's") should be used to rebuild N.O. Have we had that debate? I know it has historical value, but it's gonna be very expensive. The city seems ill-conceived in the first place, as harsh as that sounds. Am I off-base, here?

3.) This sets up a big precedent that sort of federalizes "insurance". If the private companies can't/ won't do it, then the US citizen ponies up. Ok by me, I guess, but let's be clear about what we're doing. Money is going out of my pocket into the pockets of construction companies (who, of course, will pay taxes in a never-ending cycle...). Maybe the precedent was set long ago.

Not trying to be a grouch; just learning from the event.

[Spexvet]

" As all of us saw on television, there's also some deep, persistent poverty in this region, as well. That poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action. So let us restore all that we have cherished from yesterday, and let us rise above the legacy of inequality. When the streets are rebuilt, there should be many new businesses, including minority-owned businesses, along those streets."


How can he reconcile these statements with his record of civil rights erosion, anti-affirmative action, and giving tax breaks to those who can most afford to pay taxes and need the tax cuts the least? :hammer:

[Spexvet]

...
3.) This sets up a big precedent that sort of federalizes "insurance". If the private companies can't/ won't do it, then the US citizen ponies up. Ok by me, I guess, but let's be clear about what we're doing. Money is going out of my pocket into the pockets of construction companies (who, of course, will pay taxes in a never-ending cycle...). Maybe the precedent was set long ago...

If private insurance companies take care of things, your money will go from your pocket to their stockholders, as they evade paying claims. Premiums will go up. Maybe they'll begin PMOs (property maintenance organizations).;)

[chip anderson]

Spexvet: Wastefull and greedy as they are private insurance companies, or private anything will never be as wasteful as govenment on any project.

[chip anderson]

Poverty has roots in people too lazy to work. Especially in N.O. which is a "minority" based population and economy. Jobs are there, especially now but the poor folks what has always been dependent on the "govment" don't want to change even now.

The schools, businsess, local and state govenment 90% of everything in N.O. and a marjority of most of Louisianna is minority run. So how can they be "discrimanted" against if they run the show?

Chip

You don't hear this kind of cry coming from Mississippi where we also have a "minority" majority. We helpin ourselves.

[Spexvet]

Poverty has roots in people too lazy to work.

You are misinformed and insensitive, and you're calling our president a liar.

[chip anderson]

DRK: I lives down here, I fit most of the prosthetic eyes in the state ,and I sees deese peoples. Day 90% lazy 10% afflicted by circumstances.

Git youself down in de getto see how many peoples there because of govment handouts, drug addiction, plumb lazzness, too dumb to use birth control before and after marriage. Den after wokin down der about 3 mo, you calls back ya' hear.

Chip

[Spexvet]

DRK: I lives down here, I fit most of the prosthetic eyes in the state ,and I sees deese peoples. Day 90% lazy 10% afflicted by circumstances.

Git youself down in de getto see how many peoples there because of govment handouts, drug addiction, plumb lazzness, too dumb to use birth control before and after marriage. Den after wokin down der about 3 mo, you calls back ya' hear.

Chip

Always a class act.

Just maybe it's attitudes like yours, and not laziness.

[chm2023]

I don't know what to think about these things from last night:

1.) Do we want to expand the role of the military to include domestic relief efforts?

2.) I guess that we are all in agreement that your and my money (NOT "the government's") should be used to rebuild N.O. Have we had that debate? I know it has historical value, but it's gonna be very expensive. The city seems ill-conceived in the first place, as harsh as that sounds. Am I off-base, here?

3.) This sets up a big precedent that sort of federalizes "insurance". If the private companies can't/ won't do it, then the US citizen ponies up. Ok by me, I guess, but let's be clear about what we're doing. Money is going out of my pocket into the pockets of construction companies (who, of course, will pay taxes in a never-ending cycle...). Maybe the precedent was set long ago.

Not trying to be a grouch; just learning from the event.

I think domestic relief has always been a military responsibility, as least the National Guard. Think the military alone has the scope for some of these operations? As well as deployment and logistics skills?

One of the things this episode illustrates is that there is a place for government--not the pigs at the trough government associated with liberals nor the small,shrunken government associated with (neo) conservatives.

Interesting piece by Gingrich (and no one is more astonished that I at my quoting the Newter!!) in today's paper that points out the folly of the neo-con agenda to shrink government in a time when national security and globalization are the top 2 issues facing the nation. We just need to figure out how to do this without waste and fraud.

Another interesting piece in the local paper (AP I think) that contrasted how Singapore handles emergency response--Singapore being widely regarded as the world's best "run" country. They pay a whole lot of money to people who are actually qualified and talented, as opposed to someone's college roommate--sorry, couldn't resist--and hold these bureaucrats to a high standard of performance and accountability. The last emergency they had of significant scale--I think a tunnel collapsed?--bureaucrats who had not performed acceptably were sent to jail.

Michael Brown, on the other hand, walks around a free man. (And no, I do not hold the mayor nor the governor blameless. But face it, the fire next time is not going to revolve around NO or the state of Louisiana.)

[chm2023]

...and the band played on.





September 16, 2005
G.O.P. Split Over Big Plans for Storm Spending

By CARL HULSE
WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 - The drive to pour tens of billions of federal dollars into rebuilding the hurricane-battered Gulf Coast is widening a fissure among Republicans over fiscal policy, with more of them expressing worry about unbridled spending.

On Thursday, even before President Bush promised that "federal funds will cover the great majority of the costs of repairing public infrastructure in the disaster zone," fiscal conservatives from the House and Senate joined budget watchdog groups in demanding that the administration be judicious in asking for taxpayer dollars.

One fiscal conservative, Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, said Thursday, "I don't believe that everything that should happen in Louisiana should be paid for by the rest of the country. I believe there are certain responsibilities that are due the people of Louisiana."

Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, called for restoring "sanity" to the federal recovery effort. Congress has approved $62 billion, mostly to cover costs already incurred, and the price tag is rising. The House and Senate approved tax relief Thursday at an estimated cost of more than $5 billion on top of $3.5 billion in housing vouchers approved by the Senate on Wednesday.

"We know we need to help, but throwing more and more money without accountability at this is not going to solve the problem," Mr. DeMint said.

Their comments were in marked contrast to the sweeping administration approach outlined by Mr. Bush in his speech from New Orleans and a call by Senate Republican leaders for a rebuilding effort similar to the Marshall Plan after World War II. Congressional Democrats advocated their own comprehensive recovery program Thursday, promoting a combination of rebuilding programs coupled with housing, health care, agriculture and education initiatives. The president also emphasized the importance of private entrepreneurship to create jobs "and help break the cycle of poverty."

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, said he believed that providing rapid and extensive help overrode the need to cut spending elsewhere. "I think we have to understand that we have a devastation that has to be taken care of," Mr. Reid said. "And I'm not into finding where we can cut yet."

That mindset is troubling to other lawmakers who fear that in addition to a reborn Gulf Coast, something else will rise from the storm: record federal deficits.

"We know this is a huge bill," said Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona. "We don't want to lay it on future generations." Given the fierce political backlash to the stumbling relief effort in the days after the hurricane struck, House Republican leaders have been reluctant to stand in the way of any emergency legislation. After the speech, Speaker J. Dennis Hastert acknowledged that the price tag means that "for every dollar we spend on this, it is going to take a little bit longer to balance the budget." He said he was willing to listen to ideas to pay for the aid, but, "Quite frankly, we have to get this job done."

Despite those comments, many Republicans are increasingly edgy about the White House's push for a potentially open-ended recovery budget, worried that the president - in trying to regroup politically - was making expensive promises they would have to keep.

"We are not sure he knows what he is getting into," said one senior House Republican official who requested anonymity because of the potential consequences of publicly criticizing the administration.

The fears about the costs of the storm are building on widespread dissatisfaction among conservatives about spending in recent years by the Republican-controlled Congress. That unrest was already high after Congressional approval of a transportation measure that critics denounced as bloated with marginal home-state projects.

That sore spot was rubbed raw earlier this week when Representative Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, suggested that the Republican Congress had already trimmed much of the fat from the federal budget, making it difficult to find ways to offset hurricane spending.

Mr. Coburn called such a claim ludicrous and other Republicans took exception as well.

"There has never been a time where there is more total spending and more wasteful spending in Washington than we have today," said Pat Toomey, a former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania and the head of the conservative Club for Growth. "There is ample opportunity to find the offsets we need so that this does not have to be a fiscal disaster as well as a natural disaster."

On another front, Republicans and Democrats continued their dispute over how to investigate government failures in the storm response. The House approved a select committee to oversee the inquiry despite Democratic objections that only a special commission outside of Congress could do a credible job.

The House voted 224 to 188 to establish a 20-member panel to work in concert with a similar Senate panel in studying the adequacy of local, state and federal preparations for the storm and why the relief effort was so troubled, stranding thousands in chaotic conditions without sufficient food, water or medical care.

Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader, said the special committee was an effort to "whitewash" the inquiry though she later said she would not stand in the way if Democrats want to sit on the panel. In another effort to reduce Democratic opposition, Mr. Hastert on Thursday named Representative Thomas M. Davis III, a sometimes Republican maverick from Virginia, to lead the panel.

As for paying for the recovery, Ms. Pelosi raised the possibility of 50-year bonds tied to the reconstruction.

The conservative Republicans worried about the outlays said the president and Congressional leaders need to ask the public to share in the sacrifice and suggested savings could be easily wrung from federal agencies or in Congress in ways like eliminating pet projects.

"Katrina breaks my heart," said Representative Mike Pence, Republican of Indiana and chairman of a caucus of more than 100 House Republicans who advocate conservative spending policy. "Congress must do everything the American people expect us to do to meet the needs of families and communities affected by Katrina. But we must not let Katrina break the bank for our children and grandchildren."

• <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Home <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Privacy Policy <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Search <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Corrections <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">XML <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Help <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Contact Us <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Work for Us <LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Site Map
• Back to Top

<IMG height=1 alt="" width=1 border=0 name=s_i_nytimesglobal>

[HarryChiling]

Bush is a retard!

[Spexvet]

Where to start....

The implosion of the republican party is always a good thing. And these guys are making themselves look soooo endearing to everyone who is not wealthy that it's sure to garner some votes in the next election . Talk about your compassionate conservative!:finger:

Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, called for restoring "sanity" to the federal recovery effort.

I wonder if he called for "restoring "sanity" to the federal recovery effort" after Hurricane Hugo slammed S.C. in 1989. Ahhhh, the old double standard...

"We are not sure he knows what he is getting into," said one senior House Republican official who requested anonymity because of the potential consequences of publicly criticizing the administration

What a great quote! Not only does the official admit that W. isn't intelligent, he confirms that this is an administration that would take vengeance on someone who opposes their policies (see Ambassador Wilson).

That sore spot was rubbed raw earlier this week when Representative Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, suggested that the Republican Congress had already trimmed much of the fat from the federal budget, making it difficult to find ways to offset hurricane spending.

Nope, can't trim "the bridge to nowhere" or the war in Iraq. On the other side of the coin: Couldn't have had forethought when cutting taxes for the rich. Can't stop the planned tax breaks for energy companies. Nope, no fat. It's hard work coming up with ways to cut spending or increase revenue.

That Tom DeLay - he's not only unethical, he's De-Lusional.

[chip anderson]

CHM2020
Singapore also has no drug problems. Thier solution: If anyone is found with drugs in thier possesseion, they are put up against the wall on the spot (no trial, no jury, no appeal) and shot.
I suspect that would end our drug problem and at least part of our populatin problem, as well as reduce some of our "entitlements" expense.
Still want to use them as an example?
Chip

[Cindy Hamlin]

DRK: I lives down here, I fit most of the prosthetic eyes in the state ,and I sees deese peoples. Day 90% lazy 10% afflicted by circumstances.

Git youself down in de getto see how many peoples there because of govment handouts, drug addiction, plumb lazzness, too dumb to use birth control before and after marriage. Den after wokin down der about 3 mo, you calls back ya' hear.

Chip

Chip,
This is COMPLETELY uncalled for. Normally, I overlook your rants and attempt at humor, but cannot in this case.

True, there are people that are in poverty because they are lazy, but most are in poverty for a myriad of other reasons most of which are not their fault. I really feel that you overstepped the bounds of even you here.

Please keep your remarks out of the personal realm. Thanks!

[Steve Machol]

I agree with Cindy, but the unfortunate truth is that this kind of attitude is still pervalent in this country so in a way it's good to have it out in the open so people can see that this does still exist. The issues of poverty and racism have been hidden and ignored in this country for too long.

In fact if Bush believes as Chip does (just saying 'if') , then his lack of urgency to this disaster would be fully explained. After all, it's their own fault for being poor.

Of course, you can work fulltime at WalMart for minimum wage and still be at poverty level, but if you do it's your own damn fault for not getting a job as CEO of Halliburton instead.

[chip anderson]

Steve:

There are jobs out there for those displaced @$15.00 hr. to assist with the reconstruction/clean-up. Most are just sitting around saying: "I'd rather have that $2500.00 voucher. Tell me these people are not the cause of thier own plight.
There is more construction work (yes, even un-skilled un-experienced) available now than can be done in the next 20 years. Jobs not being taken to the extent needed. Do you think it's the social structure? The jobs are not being offered "white only" or even "white first."
Too many of these people just want to sit around for the hand out. We do see many, far too many cases of truly needy people that are too young, too old or too infirm to help themselves. I have no problem with helping these. We feed refugees every most day at our church. We do what we can but I have NO sympathy for those that can and will not try to help themselves.
And while I might believe that George Bush would prefer to belong to an all white country club if the press would allow it, I don't think for a minitue that he would fail to pull a minority person from the water, or delay thier relief.

It's laziness and lack of ambition, or even apathy I am opposed to, not race or religion.

Chip

[Steve Machol]

Your '90% lazy' comment speaks for itself. We all know what you mean, and I thank you for at least bringing this out in the open.

[Cindy Hamlin]

Steve:
There are jobs out there for those displaced @$15.00 hr. to assist with the reconstruction/clean-up. Most are just sitting around saying: "I'd rather have that $2500.00 voucher. Tell me these people are not the cause of thier own plight.
There is more construction work (yes, even un-skilled un-experienced) available now than can be done in the next 20 years. Jobs not being taken to the extent needed. Do you think it's the social structure? The jobs are not being offered "white only" or even "white first."
Too many of these people just want to sit around for the hand out. We do see many, far too many cases of truly needy people that are too young, too old or too infirm to help themselves. I have no problem with helping these. We feed refugees every most day at our church. We do what we can but I have NO sympathy for those that can and will not try to help themselves.
And while I might believe that George Bush would prefer to belong to an all white country club if the press would allow it, I don't think for a minitue that he would fail to pull a minority person from the water, or delay thier relief.

It's laziness and lack of ambition, or even apathy I am opposed to, not race or religion.

Chip

Chip,
What I am upset about is you lumping everyone into one group. Look at the post above and how many times you used the term "these people."

Chip, I challenge you to give me numbers to back up the statements that you have made. Of the people we saw on the television begging for food and water, babies dying in mother's arms, people left dead by the side of the road, tell me who among them was there because they were lazy? Point them out, Chip. Tell me who they are.

Chip they were there because:

1. They were poor and disadvantaged
2. They could not leave when the others did as they had no means to flee

Give me stats on the numbers that took the vouchers and refuse to work. You cannot lump people together and that is what I am offended by. You are doing that very thing.

[Judy Canty]

Your '90% lazy' comment speaks for itself. We all know what you mean, and I thank you for at least bringing this out in the open.

I quite agree. Chip has now gone beyond the pale, doing nothing to enhance the "Southern" culture he so lovingly protects.

As a fledgling writer myself, I believe that Margaret Mitchell did a much better job at capturing dialect. Chip needs to restrict himself to commentary on contact lenses and prosthetic eyes.

[chm2023]

CHM2020
Singapore also has no drug problems. Thier solution: If anyone is found with drugs in thier possesseion, they are put up against the wall on the spot (no trial, no jury, no appeal) and shot.
I suspect that would end our drug problem and at least part of our populatin problem, as well as reduce some of our "entitlements" expense.
Still want to use them as an example?
Chip

OK sit down, this is way complicated and I don't want your head to explode.

First, having lived in Singapore, I assure you they do not execute drug possessors. Drug sellers yes. Their definition of selling is of course very, very broad. And in fact, the drug problem in Singapore is growing.

Second, I would like to use them as an example for government accountability, not drug policy.

Simple enough?

[chm2023]

I agree with Cindy, but the unfortunate truth is that this kind of attitude is still pervalent in this country so in a way it's good to have it out in the open so people can see that this does still exist. The issues of poverty and racism have been hidden and ignored in this country for too long.

In fact if Bush believes as Chip does (just saying 'if') , then his lack of urgency to this disaster would be fully explained. After all, it's their own fault for being poor.

Of course, you can work fulltime at WalMart for minimum wage and still be at poverty level, but if you do it's your own damn fault for not getting a job as CEO of Halliburton instead.

I don't know nor care if Bush is a racist, insensitive to the needs of the poor blah, blah, blah. What I do care about is that he is monumentally incompetent, which is worse. What he thinks is his business, what he does is mine. And I have had it with this clown. Cronyism is never a good idea, but when W puts someone like Brown into head up FEMA, completely ignoring the lack of any relavant experience--especially post 9/11 when the safety of the country is no longer a vague concept--then it's time to bounce his stupid *** back to Texas. (Where I have no doubt some of Dad's friends will come up with another enterprise he can run into the ditch--but hey, better them than us).

And now in a move fraught with meaning to anyone with a whit of sense, he has decided that the White House point man on post Katrina policy will be Karl Rove--yes the same Karl Rove who has been the WH political king pin for Bush. Someone needs to explain to W that while policy and politics have a lot of the same letters, they are very different things. So the big concern from the WH post Katrina--how it plays out politically.

Thus far Rove came up with the surreal New Orleans skit, with St Louis' lit up like Cinderella's castle and Bush striding across Jackson square in his High Noon impression--it's worth noting that Gary Cooper didn't wear a bullet proof vest. So now we have this, the Top Gun schtick, who knows what's next? I vote for Rain Man, with W in the Dustin Hoffman role minus the savant part.

I saw Bill Clinton being interviewed this weekend on a lot of different issues. Oh the memory of competence. I wanted to weep.

Postscript: Brown was Allbaugh's roommate in college--Allbaugh being the former FEMA director and (of course) campaign manager for Bush/Cheney. From that position he went on to further serve his country--by becoming a lobbyist for--guess who?

http://www.dcexaminer.com/articles/2...ewsdc23kkr.txt

Makes you proud to be an American, doesn't it?

[rep]

Attitude regarding personal responsibility.

If all of your life the government has provided everything for you then why shouldn't you expect them to provide transportation and more during a crisis. As is plainly evident, they can't. The answer is not bigger governmen at any level.

If there ever was classic example of governmental failure it was and is Katrina. That's failure up and down the line, not just Bush's two mistakes (appointing a political hack for FEMA and when it became clear the Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco was in way, way over her head he didn't move quicker, as he should have.)

There were rich, middle class and poor who managed to make their way our of New Orleans. (one sixteen year old boy took a bus and drove himself and everybody he found along the way all the way to Baton Rogue)

A question Newt asked today was, "Why were there so many poor in N.O. with all the democratic programs in place in a democratic run city and a democratic run state?" He also questions a proposal to make a number of large government run housing projects to house the displaced evacuees. Can you imagine the the results of that proposal being any different than section 8 housing in Chicago, New York, Washington or Atlanta?

I like Newts idea of making 50% of the reconstruction money in the form of tax credits to those doing the repairs. There is a lot less chance of outright theft of those funds and the projects are more likely to be completed properly with tax credits.

I am sure you have also heard about the inappropriate use of the debit cards (strip clubs and designer purses) The 60 million dollars of missing money in FEMA funds that led to criminal charges of local officials, before Katrina.The Sierra Club lawsuit that prevented the Army COE from reinforcing the levees. Mayor Ray Nagin's refusal to load up Amtrack on Saturday before the storm and the train left with 900 empty seats. and finally Governor Blanco's 5 day delay in signing a waiver to allow out of state doctors who came to help to practice in Louisiana.The final blow is that Congress allocated $500,000 to develop a "comprehensive plan and analysis of all alternatives for evacuation of New Orleans". The money was spent by the Greater New Orleans Expressway Comission, not on an evaccuation plan, but on what needed to be Lake Pontchartrain causeway over the next fifteen years or so. As we have already head, all of this too, is Bush's fault.

Rep

[chm2023]

Reporter: President Bush, what's your opinion of Roe v Wade?

Bush: I don't care how people get out of New Orleans.

[Pete Hanlin]

Wow, both sides are being a bit silly on this thread. Bush is neither a moron nor "monumentally incompetent," and all poor people are not lazy. Furthermore, racism is still present in America (and works both ways- there is racism on both sides).

Conversely, Bush has not handled every situation he's faced well (like most Presidents), and it is true that SOME poor people are lazy (as well as some rich people).

Who cares though- while tons of people in our country are suffering, we get to have such pleasant and objective discussions on how lazy people are and how stupid our government can be...

[Joann Raytar]

Pete,

I think a number of people missed the mark in dealing with Katrina - at least President Bush admitted it. I don't think anyone else has outright said that the take responsibility for the slow response.