| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Mike Painter" |
| Date: |
01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 AM |
| Object: |
Hard New Test for President |
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/01/national/nationalspecial/01bush.html?ex=1283227200&en=8723f22b2afde0f9&ei=5089&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rssI watched a show on the Meth problem in Missouri the other night. The firechief talked about how dangerous those labs can be to everybody and saidthere wasn't much they could to to protect their officers prior to 9/11Now they have Hazmat gear from the "war on terrorism" to use in the ignoredproblem with Meth in our land.Maybe trickle down does work :)--Take a CPR class and get your community involved in an AED program.
.
|
|
| User: "Apostate" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
01 Sep 2005 05:59:35 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
--
/Apostate
alt.atheist #1931 I've found it!
BAAWA Knife AND SMASHer
EAC Supernumerary Deputy Director, Department of Redundancy Department
plonked by Lani_girl, first post; Billions Served!
I doubt, therefore I might be.
"Mr. Worf, set phasers on "***** You" and fire at
will. -- Doc Smartass
e-mail to lower-case only
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
01 Sep 2005 06:53:31 PM |
|
|
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
.
|
|
|
| User: "Apostate" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
01 Sep 2005 08:53:13 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard for shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his handlers can muster the managerial
what-have-you to mount a disaster reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that /doesn't/ involve Arab nationals.
Or the progress of theocracy in the U.S.
--
/Apostate
alt.atheist #1931 I've found it!
BAAWA Knife AND SMASHer
EAC Supernumerary Deputy Director, Department of Redundancy Department
plonked by Lani_girl, first post; Billions Served!
I doubt, therefore I might be.
"Mr. Worf, set phasers on "***** You" and fire at will."
. -- Doc Smartass
e-mail to lower-case only
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
01 Sep 2005 10:14:09 PM |
|
|
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that
/doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of theocracy in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have to
keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’
- Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
01 Sep 2005 11:21:33 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have to
keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
I just heard the idiot in a soundbite where he said that there should be
zero tolarance for looters.
So instead of helping people the cops would be mandated to arrest and
process everybody including those who needed the food.
Without his handlers he does not seem to think clearly.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 11:55:29 AM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
news:12MRe.306$I91.12@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have
to keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong
comic book.
I just heard the idiot in a soundbite where he said that there should
be zero tolarance for looters.
You got a problem with that?
So instead of helping people the cops would be mandated to arrest and
process everybody including those who needed the food.
There are armed gangs roaming the streets. It's too bad, but they have
attacked food and medical relief trucks and even shot at police and
rescue choppers.
Without his handlers he does not seem to think clearly.
He seems to be thinking a hell of a lot more clearly than you are.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’ - Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "nJb" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 06:02:07 AM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that
/doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of theocracy in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have to
keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
Would an aircraft carrier landing in a flight suit declaring "End of
major flooding" be too much to ask?
--
Jack
Plonked by Native American
bobo1148atxmissiondotcom
http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/xmissionbobo/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 04:13:28 PM |
|
|
nJb <none@nowhere.com> wrote:
Would an aircraft carrier landing in a flight suit declaring "End of
major flooding" be too much to ask?
That's hilarious. Thanks for the biggest laugh of the morning.
.
|
|
|
| User: "nJb" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
04 Sep 2005 08:16:31 PM |
|
|
Scott Richter wrote:
nJb <none@nowhere.com> wrote:
Would an aircraft carrier landing in a flight suit declaring "End of
major flooding" be too much to ask?
That's hilarious. Thanks for the biggest laugh of the morning.
I wish I could find something funny today. With the city almost
evacuated, the body counts should be coming in any time.
--
Jack
Plonked by Native American
bobo1148atxmissiondotcom
http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/xmissionbobo/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
04 Sep 2005 11:38:34 PM |
|
|
nJb <none@nowhere.com> wrote:
Scott Richter wrote:
nJb <none@nowhere.com> wrote:
Would an aircraft carrier landing in a flight suit declaring "End of
major flooding" be too much to ask?
That's hilarious. Thanks for the biggest laugh of the morning.
I wish I could find something funny today.
Maybe this will help:
Next thing you know, Bush will be calling himself a "Storm President"...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Apostate" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
01 Sep 2005 10:45:48 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:14:09 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that
/doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of theocracy in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have to
keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
Ah, you must mean *not* the one you read instead of the posting you purport to be replying to.
--
/Apostate
alt.atheist #1931 I've found it!
BAAWA Knife AND SMASHer
EAC Supernumerary Deputy Director, Department of Redundancy Department
plonked by Lani_girl, first post; Billions Served!
I doubt, therefore I might be.
"Mr. Worf, set phasers on "***** You" and fire at will."
. -- Doc Smartass
e-mail to lower-case only
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 11:47:54 AM |
|
|
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125615715.5786b4ce2f379dfdf8a19fa1a6fb5d23@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:14:09 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard
for shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his
handlers can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a
disaster reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they
collectively lack the perspective that foresight matters in any
arena that /doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of
theocracy in the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have to
keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
Ah, you must mean *not* the one you read instead of the posting
you purport to be replying to.
Hmm, I guess I got thrown off by the snark about foresight. My bad.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’
- Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 03:25:38 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:14:09 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125612849.d9d2b833fa2218ed03e64111a1943594@teranews> wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that
/doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of theocracy in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have to
keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center. And if we had not put all of
our resources into Iraq the Army Corp of Engineers might not have had
their budgets of levee repair cut. And if Rummy had not sold off the
logistics arm of the military it might not take until next week for
the Army to get people to NO. I have no idea, however, why we have not
asked Canada to help, they offered.
I do find it interesting that Katrina led him to cut his vacation
short, but Shrub found time during a war to take more vacation, in
five years, than any president in history.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "zach" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 07:40:00 AM |
|
|
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center. And if we had not put all of
our resources into Iraq the Army Corp of Engineers might not have had
their budgets of levee repair cut. And if Rummy had not sold off the
logistics arm of the military it might not take until next week for
the Army to get people to NO. I have no idea, however, why we have not
asked Canada to help, they offered.
I have noticed people blaming republicans, democrats, Fema folks, Bush, etc,
etc.
Has anyone blamed the hurricane? It swept far and wide, doing more damage
than four other
hurricanes put together, all at once. Fuel is in short supply, damaged
square miles are greater than
most of you understand, and still people feel the need to point blame, as if
that will help the situation.
It takes time to move thousands of military folks, police, National Guard,
and at the same time rescue individuals
from thousands of homes and broken buildings.
If that wasn't bad enough, idiots and assholes steal guns and roam around
raping, pillaging, and pretending
like they have a right to take the law into their own hands.
Those pointing their fingers could just shut the ***** up and donate time,
money, and FUEL!
zach #33 the ultimate nonbeliever
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 12:28:59 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:m6hfh1pn1nvctjl4abkjo6d61sg8ghm0nc@4ax.com:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:14:09 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125612849.d9d2b833fa2218ed03e64111a1943594@teranews> wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard
for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his
handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that
/doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of theocracy
in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have to
keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center. And if we had not put all of
our resources into Iraq the Army Corp of Engineers might not have had
their budgets of levee repair cut. And if Rummy had not sold off the
logistics arm of the military it might not take until next week for
the Army to get people to NO. I have no idea, however, why we have not
asked Canada to help, they offered.
And if Bush was God he could fix everything in a blink of an eye.
I do find it interesting that Katrina led him to cut his vacation
short, but Shrub found time during a war to take more vacation, in
five years, than any president in history.
Sigh. Have you never heard of telephones? The whole Congress is on
vacation too. Why don't you blame them?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’
- Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 02:24:52 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 12:28:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125664144.fd689580463e5968cb296c1ebcf19e9c@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:m6hfh1pn1nvctjl4abkjo6d61sg8ghm0nc@4ax.com:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:14:09 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125612849.d9d2b833fa2218ed03e64111a1943594@teranews> wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard
for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his
handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that
/doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of theocracy
in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have to
keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong comic
book.
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center. And if we had not put all of
our resources into Iraq the Army Corp of Engineers might not have had
their budgets of levee repair cut. And if Rummy had not sold off the
logistics arm of the military it might not take until next week for
the Army to get people to NO. I have no idea, however, why we have not
asked Canada to help, they offered.
And if Bush was God he could fix everything in a blink of an eye.
True, but instead he is an ignorant incompetent president, so he can't
get done what he could and should get done. He did not even know,
days after the disaster, that the levee break had been predicted. You
don't seem to have an actual response to what I said. It seems that
you want to give him credit for anything good that happens, but no
blame for any of the bad. To that extent, I suppose, he is God. We
have done a large scale transfer of our military logistic capability
to the "private sector". This was an explicit goal. We did transfer
lots of Army CoE money to projects in Iraq, taking it directly from
levee projects in the delta. Seeing that this was wrong would not
require supernatural abilities. If you could get past defending
anything ever done by a Republican you could see this.
I do find it interesting that Katrina led him to cut his vacation
short, but Shrub found time during a war to take more vacation, in
five years, than any president in history.
Sigh. Have you never heard of telephones? The whole Congress is on
vacation too. Why don't you blame them?
I do. Not as much because as a legislature they don't have the same
operational influence, but I don't understand why they take the
vacations they do.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 03:22:54 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:9pngh1pnt287apotljeggv47or4eonlbol@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 12:28:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125664144.fd689580463e5968cb296c1ebcf19e9c@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:m6hfh1pn1nvctjl4abkjo6d61sg8ghm0nc@4ax.com:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:14:09 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125612849.d9d2b833fa2218ed03e64111a1943594@teranews> wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard
for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his
handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that
/doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of
theocracy
in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have
to keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong
comic book.
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center. And if we had not put all of
our resources into Iraq the Army Corp of Engineers might not have
had their budgets of levee repair cut. And if Rummy had not sold off
the logistics arm of the military it might not take until next week
for the Army to get people to NO. I have no idea, however, why we
have not asked Canada to help, they offered.
And if Bush was God he could fix everything in a blink of an eye.
True, but instead he is an ignorant incompetent president, so he can't
get done what he could and should get done. He did not even know,
days after the disaster, that the levee break had been predicted.
It hadn't been predicted. It had been speculated about, long ago, along
with other worst-case what-if scenarios.
You
don't seem to have an actual response to what I said. It seems that
you want to give him credit for anything good that happens, but no
blame for any of the bad.
No, I'm willing to give him the blame for the things that are truly his
fault. But saying that "nobody expected the levees to break" is in fact
the truth.
To that extent, I suppose, he is God. We
have done a large scale transfer of our military logistic capability
to the "private sector". This was an explicit goal. We did transfer
lots of Army CoE money to projects in Iraq, taking it directly from
levee projects in the delta.
The Corps of Engineers says that funding levels didn't have any effect
on the problem. In fact the part of the levee that broke was one of the
parts that had been upgraded.
Seeing that this was wrong would not
require supernatural abilities. If you could get past defending
anything ever done by a Republican you could see this.
Since I don't defend everything ever done by a Republican, your
complaint has no merit.
I do find it interesting that Katrina led him to cut his vacation
short, but Shrub found time during a war to take more vacation, in
five years, than any president in history.
Sigh. Have you never heard of telephones? The whole Congress is on
vacation too. Why don't you blame them?
I do. Not as much because as a legislature they don't have the same
operational influence, but I don't understand why they take the
vacations they do.
It's pretty hard to blame anybody with any justice. They did the best
they could to plan for something that no conceivable amount of planning
would fix any faster.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’ - Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 04:00:21 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 15:22:54 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125674574.a2e1820ab55c11aa0380d21a1a7deda1@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:9pngh1pnt287apotljeggv47or4eonlbol@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 12:28:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125664144.fd689580463e5968cb296c1ebcf19e9c@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:m6hfh1pn1nvctjl4abkjo6d61sg8ghm0nc@4ax.com:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:14:09 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125612849.d9d2b833fa2218ed03e64111a1943594@teranews> wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be hard
for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his
handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they collectively
lack the perspective that foresight matters in any arena that
/doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the progress of
theocracy
in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just have
to keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through the
bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state of
emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal agencies
were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and fly
around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the wrong
comic book.
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center. And if we had not put all of
our resources into Iraq the Army Corp of Engineers might not have
had their budgets of levee repair cut. And if Rummy had not sold off
the logistics arm of the military it might not take until next week
for the Army to get people to NO. I have no idea, however, why we
have not asked Canada to help, they offered.
And if Bush was God he could fix everything in a blink of an eye.
True, but instead he is an ignorant incompetent president, so he can't
get done what he could and should get done. He did not even know,
days after the disaster, that the levee break had been predicted.
It hadn't been predicted. It had been speculated about, long ago, along
with other worst-case what-if scenarios.
Not worst case, but expected result. Read the SciAm article.
You
don't seem to have an actual response to what I said. It seems that
you want to give him credit for anything good that happens, but no
blame for any of the bad.
No, I'm willing to give him the blame for the things that are truly his
fault. But saying that "nobody expected the levees to break" is in fact
the truth.
Predicted to occur with a Cat 4 hurricane, but not expected. Sure.
To that extent, I suppose, he is God. We
have done a large scale transfer of our military logistic capability
to the "private sector". This was an explicit goal. We did transfer
lots of Army CoE money to projects in Iraq, taking it directly from
levee projects in the delta.
The Corps of Engineers says that funding levels didn't have any effect
on the problem. In fact the part of the levee that broke was one of the
parts that had been upgraded.
Wow, the sitting military man does not blame the president. Alert the
media.
[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 05:06:37 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:9ltgh1tjmon4tgphikjkt1p13iar5vscge@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 15:22:54 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125674574.a2e1820ab55c11aa0380d21a1a7deda1@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:9pngh1pnt287apotljeggv47or4eonlbol@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 12:28:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125664144.fd689580463e5968cb296c1ebcf19e9c@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote
in news:m6hfh1pn1nvctjl4abkjo6d61sg8ghm0nc@4ax.com:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:14:09 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125612849.d9d2b833fa2218ed03e64111a1943594@teranews> wrote:
Apostate <apostate.invalid.still@yeehaw.org> wrote in
news:1125608387.2406415560d2e2bdd12fa6fb444816f2@teranews:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:53:31 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 05:19:33 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Does it involve multiplication tables?
It went past that shortly after 9/11. Now it's exponential
I was posing/querying about the reason the test would be
hard
for
shrub.
But since you bring it up, I don't doubt that he and his
handlers
can muster the managerial what-have-you to mount a disaster
reponse, after the fact. It's just a shame they
collectively lack the perspective that foresight matters in
any arena that /doesn't/ involve Arab nationals. Or the
progress of theocracy
in
the U.S.
They did OK after 9/11. Bush and "his handlers" basically just
have to keep out of the way and expedite resource requests through
the bureaucracy.
And in fact Bush has done just fine so far. He declared the state
of emergency *before* Katrina hit so that the relevant federal
agencies were already getting mobilized.
Of course if you're expecting him to put on his blue spandex and
fly around to fix the problems singlehanded, well, you got the
wrong comic book.
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they
would have known about the convention center. And if we had not
put all of our resources into Iraq the Army Corp of Engineers
might not have had their budgets of levee repair cut. And if Rummy
had not sold off the logistics arm of the military it might not
take until next week for the Army to get people to NO. I have no
idea, however, why we have not asked Canada to help, they offered.
And if Bush was God he could fix everything in a blink of an eye.
True, but instead he is an ignorant incompetent president, so he
can't get done what he could and should get done. He did not even
know, days after the disaster, that the levee break had been
predicted.
It hadn't been predicted. It had been speculated about, long ago,
along with other worst-case what-if scenarios.
Not worst case, but expected result. Read the SciAm article.
BTDT. Not expected. Presumed.
You
don't seem to have an actual response to what I said. It seems that
you want to give him credit for anything good that happens, but no
blame for any of the bad.
No, I'm willing to give him the blame for the things that are truly
his fault. But saying that "nobody expected the levees to break" is in
fact the truth.
Predicted to occur with a Cat 4 hurricane, but not expected. Sure.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?U149259BB
To that extent, I suppose, he is God. We
have done a large scale transfer of our military logistic capability
to the "private sector". This was an explicit goal. We did transfer
lots of Army CoE money to projects in Iraq, taking it directly from
levee projects in the delta.
The Corps of Engineers says that funding levels didn't have any effect
on the problem. In fact the part of the levee that broke was one of
the parts that had been upgraded.
Wow, the sitting military man does not blame the president. Alert the
media.
Wow, the snarky Democrat sticks to his delusions even after the people
who know explain the facts. What a surprise!
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’ - Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "WCB" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 10:38:13 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein wrote:
I do find it interesting that Katrina led him to cut his vacation
short, but Shrub found time during a war to take more vacation, in
five years, than any president in history.
Sigh. Have you never heard of telephones? The whole Congress is on
vacation too. Why don't you blame them?
I do. Not as much because as a legislature they don't have the same
operational influence, but I don't understand why they take the
vacations they do.
Most of them are out raising money actually.
--
Xenu is around and about,
mention Hubbard, Xenu pops out!
No way for the clams to stamp Xenu out,
Xenu is around and about!
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 AM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough so that any
reasonable person should be able to take the job and just sit there through
several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the infrastructure in
such a short time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 01:08:51 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough so that any
reasonable person should be able to take the job and just sit there through
several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the infrastructure in
such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax cuts,
you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut whatever
can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen FEMA as a
government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't give the money to
re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does mean that they tried to
sell FEMA off to the private sector.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "WCB" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 10:22:27 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough so that
any reasonable person should be able to take the job and just sit there
through several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the infrastructure
in such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax cuts,
you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut whatever
can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen FEMA as a
government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't give the money to
re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does mean that they tried to
sell FEMA off to the private sector.
No, they saw it as a play toy.
When that ***** Reagan was president, he diverted FEMA from
dealing with Earthquakes, floods and huurricanes to running around
planning for declaring martial law and running America after a
nuclear war. Its great fun, but doesn't help with real problems.
The first thing ***** Bush did was gut FEMA's budget, drop
it from a cabinet level position to a sub- department of homeland
security, and run around doing phoney-baloney anti-terrorist
nonsense while neglecting its real mission, dealing with flood,
hurricanes and earthquakes.
Its a chronic problem.
After Hurricane Andrew hit Florida and Bush nearly lost that state
to Clinton because the Reaganized FEMA was not capable
of dealing with the aftermath, Clinton, rebuilt and rejuvinated
FEMA. He gave it leadership, direction and clear priorities.
Bush and the Assholes gutted all of that, cancelled all Clinton's
programs, and then demoted FEMA and slashed its budget.
Thus FEMA was not even capable of doing its new mandated
anti-terrorist drills adequately, and Bush didn't even care about
that.
Its all politics and show.
So we have a 20 year long record here, the GOP never sees
FEMA as being the agency to deal with hurricanes, floods and
earthquakes, you gut its budget and programs and then play
games.
End of the world post WWIII! Anti-raghead terrorists!
But deal with the REAL problems? No! No! No! Never!
20 years of playing dungeon and dragon type games with FEMA.
Jimmy Carter created FEMA, Reagan and Bush wrecked and diverted
it. Clinton rebuilt it and got it moving, Bush gutted it. GOP
is incompetent. Too bad America is so incompetent it does
not notice.
--
Xenu is around and about,
mention Hubbard, Xenu pops out!
No way for the clams to stamp Xenu out,
Xenu is around and about!
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 01:14:00 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 13:08:51 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they would
have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough so that any
reasonable person should be able to take the job and just sit there through
several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the infrastructure in
such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax cuts,
you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut whatever
can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen FEMA as a
government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't give the money to
re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does mean that they tried to
sell FEMA off to the private sector.
CNN broadcast an interview with the head of FEMA this morning. He was
pathetic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 02:28:34 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1ujgh11gof66g3rst6b9c1sc899qm6i23n@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 13:08:51 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they
would have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough so
that any reasonable person should be able to take the job and just
sit there through several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the
infrastructure in such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax cuts,
you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut whatever
can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen FEMA as a
government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't give the money to
re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does mean that they tried to
sell FEMA off to the private sector.
CNN broadcast an interview with the head of FEMA this morning. He was
pathetic.
CNN is pathetic.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’
- Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 02:55:52 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:28:34 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125671315.93fec4b2e50703308c5784868231c5b3@teranews> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1ujgh11gof66g3rst6b9c1sc899qm6i23n@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 13:08:51 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they
would have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough so
that any reasonable person should be able to take the job and just
sit there through several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the
infrastructure in such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax cuts,
you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut whatever
can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen FEMA as a
government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't give the money to
re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does mean that they tried to
sell FEMA off to the private sector.
CNN broadcast an interview with the head of FEMA this morning. He was
pathetic.
CNN is pathetic.
Now that is a response. That the head of FEMA did not know about the
convention center is probably because CNN is pathetic. Here is the
logic. CNN reported from Sunday, at least, on, that the NO convention
center was a place of refuge. CNN is pathetic. The FEMA head does not
watch CNN because it is pathetic. So he did not know about the people
at the convention center until Thursday. Clearly it is CNN's fault. If
they were better he would have watched and so would have learned.
That probably explains why Shrub did not know that the levee break had
been predicted, neither Fox nor Rove had told him. CNN reported the
possibility, but why watch a pathetic network.
At least you have this Fred, people are going to pay less attention to
Republican criminality now.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 04:21:51 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:mopgh1ljbru3kv2gh4aunjmjgl3me3b335@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:28:34 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125671315.93fec4b2e50703308c5784868231c5b3@teranews> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1ujgh11gof66g3rst6b9c1sc899qm6i23n@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 13:08:51 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they
would have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough so
that any reasonable person should be able to take the job and just
sit there through several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the
infrastructure in such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax
cuts, you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut
whatever can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen FEMA
as a government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't give the
money to re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does mean that
they tried to sell FEMA off to the private sector.
CNN broadcast an interview with the head of FEMA this morning. He
was pathetic.
CNN is pathetic.
Now that is a response. That the head of FEMA did not know about the
convention center is probably because CNN is pathetic.
Why was it his problem to know that? Where were the local authorities?
Here is the
logic. CNN reported from Sunday, at least, on, that the NO convention
center was a place of refuge.
Who *else* knew about it?
CNN is pathetic. The FEMA head does not
watch CNN because it is pathetic. So he did not know about the people
at the convention center until Thursday. Clearly it is CNN's fault. If
they were better he would have watched and so would have learned.
CNN is pathetic for making a big deal out of his not knowing details
that the local authorities were responsible for.
That probably explains why Shrub did not know that the levee break had
been predicted, neither Fox nor Rove had told him. CNN reported the
possibility, but why watch a pathetic network.
The levee break had been *hypothesized* in an article about disaster
scenarios. But the people involved didn't think that they would actually
break after Katrina had already passed by the city.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?U149259BB
But don't let little things like the *whole truth* deter you from your
Bush-bashing. Heaven knows, it never did before.
At least you have this Fred, people are going to pay less attention to
Republican criminality now.
Too bad for you Democrats, they *are* paying attention to your
mendacity.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’ - Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 04:42:26 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 16:21:51 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125678111.013beb3cab8a96f9228cec46ece16a1c@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:mopgh1ljbru3kv2gh4aunjmjgl3me3b335@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:28:34 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125671315.93fec4b2e50703308c5784868231c5b3@teranews> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1ujgh11gof66g3rst6b9c1sc899qm6i23n@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 13:08:51 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they
would have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough so
that any reasonable person should be able to take the job and just
sit there through several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the
infrastructure in such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax
cuts, you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut
whatever can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen FEMA
as a government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't give the
money to re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does mean that
they tried to sell FEMA off to the private sector.
CNN broadcast an interview with the head of FEMA this morning. He
was pathetic.
CNN is pathetic.
Now that is a response. That the head of FEMA did not know about the
convention center is probably because CNN is pathetic.
Why was it his problem to know that?
Because they were in charge of the relief efforts.
Where were the local authorities?
A near as I can tell, trying to find someone who had resources to
help.
Here is the
logic. CNN reported from Sunday, at least, on, that the NO convention
center was a place of refuge.
Who *else* knew about it?
The several million people who watch CNN.
CNN is pathetic. The FEMA head does not
watch CNN because it is pathetic. So he did not know about the people
at the convention center until Thursday. Clearly it is CNN's fault. If
they were better he would have watched and so would have learned.
CNN is pathetic for making a big deal out of his not knowing details
that the local authorities were responsible for.
ROTFLMAO. Right. FEMA ignores several thousand people who were asked
to go to a refuge and you blame CNN. Sorry, but they reported it and
lots of people listening think it is important. That you call them
pathetic is, well, pathetic.
That probably explains why Shrub did not know that the levee break had
been predicted, neither Fox nor Rove had told him. CNN reported the
possibility, but why watch a pathetic network.
The levee break had been *hypothesized*
Predicted. When creationists play with the language like that you sure
object.
in an article about disaster
scenarios. But the people involved didn't think that they would actually
break after Katrina had already passed by the city.
They thought it might *before*. Do you understand what "anticipate"
means? It was foreseen, to the ability humans have to foresee. They
should have been preparing for this possibility while the storm was on
its way. That Shrub thinks it was not "anticipated" is astounding.
(That said, def 3 from dictionary.com is "To deal with beforehand; act
so as to mitigate, nullify, or prevent:". By that definition Shrub may
well have been right. What he was doing was admitting that they did
nothing, not saying a thing about knowledge, but action.)
http://makeashorterlink.com/?U149259BB
But don't let little things like the *whole truth* deter you from your
Bush-bashing. Heaven knows, it never did before.
From that story:
"Large numbers of National Guard troops should have been deployed on
flooded streets early in the disaster to keep order, the critics said.
And some questioned whether the federal government's intense focus on
terrorism had distracted from planning practical steps to cope with a
major natural disaster."
"While some in New Orleans fault FEMA - Terry Ebbert, homeland
security director for New Orleans, called it a "hamstrung" bureaucracy
- others say any blame should be more widely spread."
Fine by me, I think we can blame lots of people. Lets start with the
long term starving of critical infrastructure by Republicans. And then
go to a long term policy for ignoring environmental effects of policy.
Particularly those that dismiss concerns regarding wetlands.
The article does say "Neither exercise expected the levees to fail. "
It was foolish of them since the scientists had predicted this. But
then we get the next paragraph:
" Some lapses may have occurred because of budget cuts. For example,
Mr. Tolbert, the former FEMA official, said that "funding dried up"
for follow-up to the 2004 Hurricane Pam exercise, cutting off work on
plans to shelter thousands of survivors.
Brian Wolshon, an engineering professor at Louisiana State University
who served as a consultant on the state's evacuation plan, said little
attention was paid to moving out New Orleans's "low-mobility"
population - the elderly, the infirm and the poor without cars or
other means of fleeing the city, about 100,000 people. "
Was this really the article you want to use as a defense?
At least you have this Fred, people are going to pay less attention to
Republican criminality now.
Too bad for you Democrats, they *are* paying attention to your
mendacity.
Really? My own personal mendacity?
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org
Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
02 Sep 2005 05:23:04 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:khvgh11a1dc95p39le7jvta8bdm4h4eqir@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 16:21:51 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125678111.013beb3cab8a96f9228cec46ece16a1c@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:mopgh1ljbru3kv2gh4aunjmjgl3me3b335@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:28:34 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125671315.93fec4b2e50703308c5784868231c5b3@teranews> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1ujgh11gof66g3rst6b9c1sc899qm6i23n@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 13:08:51 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they
would have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough
so that any reasonable person should be able to take the job and
just sit there through several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the
infrastructure in such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax
cuts, you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut
whatever can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen
FEMA as a government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't
give the money to re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does
mean that they tried to sell FEMA off to the private sector.
CNN broadcast an interview with the head of FEMA this morning. He
was pathetic.
CNN is pathetic.
Now that is a response. That the head of FEMA did not know about the
convention center is probably because CNN is pathetic.
Why was it his problem to know that?
Because they were in charge of the relief efforts.
He and nobody else had any responsibility?
Where were the local authorities?
A near as I can tell, trying to find someone who had resources to
help.
And finding them.
Here is the
logic. CNN reported from Sunday, at least, on, that the NO
convention center was a place of refuge.
Who *else* knew about it?
The several million people who watch CNN.
And? CNN is real good at showing people who complain; they're not so
good at showing just how busy the first-responders were.
CNN is pathetic. The FEMA head does not
watch CNN because it is pathetic. So he did not know about the
people at the convention center until Thursday. Clearly it is CNN's
fault. If they were better he would have watched and so would have
learned.
CNN is pathetic for making a big deal out of his not knowing details
that the local authorities were responsible for.
ROTFLMAO. Right. FEMA ignores several thousand people who were asked
to go to a refuge and you blame CNN. Sorry, but they reported it and
lots of people listening think it is important. That you call them
pathetic is, well, pathetic.
You have no evidence that FEMA ignored anybody. Just because the head
didn't know the particulars doesn't prove that nobody in the whole
agency wasn't aware and trying to allocate the resources to help out.
That probably explains why Shrub did not know that the levee break
had been predicted, neither Fox nor Rove had told him. CNN reported
the possibility, but why watch a pathetic network.
The levee break had been *hypothesized*
Predicted. When creationists play with the language like that you sure
object.
I'm objecting to the way *YOU* play with the language.
in an article about disaster
scenarios. But the people involved didn't think that they would
actually break after Katrina had already passed by the city.
They thought it might *before*. Do you understand what "anticipate"
means? It was foreseen, to the ability humans have to foresee.
Yes, to the ability that *HUMANS* have, in a hypothetical situation.
They
should have been preparing for this possibility while the storm was on
its way. That Shrub thinks it was not "anticipated" is astounding.
They had two whole days, and they had plans in place which didn't
include the levees breaking. Whoops. Gosh, they weren't perfect. Your
problem is still that they aren't gods.
(That said, def 3 from dictionary.com is "To deal with beforehand; act
so as to mitigate, nullify, or prevent:". By that definition Shrub may
well have been right. What he was doing was admitting that they did
nothing, not saying a thing about knowledge, but action.)
No, in fact they did all that they could, according to the plans that
they had in place. It wasn't enough. No conceivable plan would have been
enough.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?U149259BB
But don't let little things like the *whole truth* deter you from your
Bush-bashing. Heaven knows, it never did before.
From that story:
"Large numbers of National Guard troops should have been deployed on
flooded streets early in the disaster to keep order, the critics said.
And some questioned whether the federal government's intense focus on
terrorism had distracted from planning practical steps to cope with a
major natural disaster."
That was the Governor's responsibility.
"While some in New Orleans fault FEMA - Terry Ebbert, homeland
security director for New Orleans, called it a "hamstrung" bureaucracy
- others say any blame should be more widely spread."
Fine by me, I think we can blame lots of people. Lets start with the
long term starving of critical infrastructure by Republicans.
And Democrats.
And then
go to a long term policy for ignoring environmental effects of policy.
Particularly those that dismiss concerns regarding wetlands.
Where was the state government on all that? Is it now the Feds' job to
control where people build along the coast?
The article does say "Neither exercise expected the levees to fail. "
It was foolish of them since the scientists had predicted this. But
then we get the next paragraph:
" Some lapses may have occurred because of budget cuts. For example,
Mr. Tolbert, the former FEMA official, said that "funding dried up"
for follow-up to the 2004 Hurricane Pam exercise, cutting off work on
plans to shelter thousands of survivors.
Brian Wolshon, an engineering professor at Louisiana State University
who served as a consultant on the state's evacuation plan, said little
attention was paid to moving out New Orleans's "low-mobility"
population - the elderly, the infirm and the poor without cars or
other means of fleeing the city, about 100,000 people. "
Was this really the article you want to use as a defense?
You do a good job of cherry-picking. Yes, the plans weren't perfect.
Gosh. How damning. Humans aren't perfect, call the newspapers!
At least you have this Fred, people are going to pay less attention
to Republican criminality now.
Too bad for you Democrats, they *are* paying attention to your
mendacity.
Really? My own personal mendacity?
Yes, yours.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I think if we had a three-word message right now it’d be, ‘We can do
better.’ - Howard Dean
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hard New Test for President |
05 Sep 2005 07:43:40 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 17:23:04 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125681785.f0e5d3de6d26daf4df57141da68a9ac6@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:khvgh11a1dc95p39le7jvta8bdm4h4eqir@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 16:21:51 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125678111.013beb3cab8a96f9228cec46ece16a1c@teranews> wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:mopgh1ljbru3kv2gh4aunjmjgl3me3b335@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:28:34 GMT, in alt.atheism , Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> in
<1125671315.93fec4b2e50703308c5784868231c5b3@teranews> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1ujgh11gof66g3rst6b9c1sc899qm6i23n@4ax.com:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 13:08:51 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:16:44 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<0fRRe.528$pt.474@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
<snip >
If he had not chosen an estate lawyer to run FEMA perhaps they
would have known about the convention center.
It's got to go deeper than that. FEMA's been around long enough
so that any reasonable person should be able to take the job and
just sit there through several years with no real damage done.
Something "pro-active" would have to be done to wreck the
infrastructure in such a short time.
Republican administrations have a long standing method of cutting
infrastructure investment. They need some way to pay for the tax
cuts, you can't do it just by increasing the debt. So they cut
whatever can't be seen. This administration has explicitly seen
FEMA as a government boondoggle. That does not mean they don't
give the money to re-build big homes on sand dunes, but it does
mean that they tried to sell FEMA off to the private sector.
CNN broadcast an interview with the head of FEMA this morning. He
was pathetic.
CNN is pathetic.
Now that is a response. That the head of FEMA did not know about the
convention center is probably because CNN is pathetic.
Why was it his problem to know that?
Because they were in charge of the relief efforts.
He and nobody else had any responsibility?
Of course not. There are certainly many people who have screwed up
here. I happen to disagree with the current administrations position:
find the lowest level person in the government (or highest level
Democrat, or person furthers from the Saudis) to blame and stop there.
That is how 9/11 and Abu Grab were treated and how they seem to treat
this. Yeah, someone in FEMA screwed up big time and did not let their
boss know about thousands of stranded people. You know what, when the
organization screws up big time you start at the top and work your way
down.
Where were the local authorities?
A near as I can tell, trying to find someone who had resources to
help.
And finding them.
Late and not in the numbers necessary. For example, that hospital ship
should have been on alert on Friday and sailing by Monday. In time of
war it should not take more than 48 hours to sail. If they need more
"perishables" they can stop on the way or get re-provisioned in
transit. We used to be able to do things like that.
Here is the
logic. CNN reported from Sunday, at least, on, that the NO
convention center was a place of refuge.
Who *else* knew about it?
The several million people who watch CNN.
And? CNN is real good at showing people who complain; they're not so
good at showing ju | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
