Remember New Orleans?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


That's demonic powers, Mr. Fun. Get it right.

doh

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DanS
Yes, it's clear that Bush personally arranged for a major hurricane to strike New Orleans and for the levees to be misconstructed.

Shame on him.

No, he just slashed the funds needed to build the improved levees because he wanted to give tax cuts to millionaires and pay for an optional war in Iraq based upon falsified intel which he and his friends cooked up. When the army corp said the wet lands had to be restored in order to protect the city the administration gave them the finger.

Nice attempt to white wash the truth though.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Nice attempt to white wash the truth though.

Not really, given that anyone who was paying attention saw right through the attempt. And all you had to do to pay attention was to turn on your tv during the aftermath to know that Nero played a guitar and ate cake with a brown-noser while a major city drowned.

[snoopy369]

I love how people draw attention to "those tax cuts that could have gone to help ..."

Do you think the tax cuts are just intended to be money the federal government didn't want?

Tax cuts are intended to stimulate the economy, and not only help out the entire country by allowing for more jobs and faster expanson, but also expand the tax base, ultimately increassing the federal tax take ... and certainly tax cuts help in New Orleans just as much as anywhere else.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs


Not really, given that anyone who was paying attention saw right through the attempt. And all you had to do to pay attention was to turn on your tv during the aftermath to know that Nero played a guitar and ate cake with a brown-noser while a major city drowned.

Mmm... cake ...

[Mrs. Tuberski]

ok let me ask this, not supporting bush at all but doesnt the state of lousaiana have a thing to do with this. The drainage and roads in one state are part of the states responsabilities. I am sure the govt can contribute with funds but the city and state gvts need to take some responsiblities to pay for this stuff as well. if my state can manage to tax us 1/4 cent on the dollar to help pay for road repairs the city of new orleans can do the same and not even have the tax payers really notice the difference. Besides this is a big tourists attraction there should have been some money to be made and put aside to pay for things like this. the city the state and the citiens should be responisble for the repairs in their city. the goverment should be considered a big brother to help with what the city cannot afford, not the total bill. At this point with the city in shambles what i just said is a moot point.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by DanS


We can't have that, Flubber. Let's take cheap political shots instead. Always remember that, above all, this whole thing's Bush's fault.

Or maybe people blame him BECAUSE HE'S NOT DOING HIS DAMN JOB.

Political shots my azz.

You're the only one that sees it that way Dan.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by MrFun



Yeah -- that's exactly what Burh's critics are arguing -- obviously Bush summoned the hurricane using his supernatural powers.

Thought you were better than this, DanS. But hey, let the good times roll!!!!!!!

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
ok let me ask this, not supporting bush at all but doesnt the state of lousaiana have a thing to do with this. The drainage and roads in one state are part of the states responsabilities. I am sure the govt can contribute with funds but the city and state gvts need to take some responsiblities to pay for this stuff as well. if my state can manage to tax us 1/4 cent on the dollar to help pay for road repairs the city of new orleans can do the same and not even have the tax payers really notice the difference. Besides this is a big tourists attraction there should have been some money to be made and put aside to pay for things like this. the city the state and the citiens should be responisble for the repairs in their city. the goverment should be considered a big brother to help with what the city cannot afford, not the total bill. At this point with the city in shambles what i just said is a moot point.

When those planes hit the World Trade Center, the feds sent New York $21 billion.

When Hurricane Andrew hit Florida, the feds ponied up $12.5 billion.

We just lost a whole city, and we're spending chump change.

The States of New York and Florida are far more capable of paying for their own disasters than is Louisiana, and their disasters were less catastrophic. Yet there were no objections to such spending. Why? Because there's broad consensus that this is one of the things we have a federal government for -- to step in with its money and resources and tackle the catastrophic. Up until now, this is how we've done things -- with 9/11 and Andrew, with the 1993 Mississippi Flooding and the California earthquakes in the 80s and 90s. If we're going to change the rules, we should at least be honest about it.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


When those planes hit the World Trade Center, the feds sent New York $21 billion.

When Hurricane Andrew hit Florida, the feds ponied up $12.5 million.

We just lost a whole city, and we're spending chump change.

The States of New York and Florida are far more capable of paying for their own disasters than is Louisiana, and their disasters were less catastrophic. Yet there were no objections to such spending. Why? Because there's broad consensus that this is one of the things we have a federal government for -- to step in with its money and resources and tackle the catastrophic. Up until now, this is how we've done things -- with 9/11 and Andrew, with the 1993 Mississippi Flooding and the California earthquakes in the 80s and 90s. If we're going to change the rules, we should at least be honest about it.

Yes but if i am correct the whole issue here is about the funding of the levvies being taken away. For me and for most reasonable people this is a local problem that should have been handled first and formost within the the city of NO. and the state of LA. Now as you said yes the fed govt has come to the aid of all these disasters and i agree need to funel some cash toward the La area. But if i read right this was about the lack thereof funds for these levves to begin with. Which should have been the politicans main concerns that run this city to have those citizens that live in that area be responsible for repairs etc wheter it by mandatory or vouluntary put to the public by a vote to see which it would be.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

For example the city of san antonio buitl the alamo dome by raising our sales tax for a 3 year period by a 1/4 percent on the dollar. so to speak this is a multimillon dolar facility paid for by the citiens of san antonio. I am sure the folks of NO could have done something similar to accomplsh the repairs of these such levves

[Rufus T. Firefly]

The issue isn't the lack of funds to begin with. That's a question to be pursued, but not what I'm interested in here. The issue is the lack of serious funds now to rebuild the city and the levees. It doesn't matter who should have funded what before Katrina hit; what matters is what we do now, and we're not doing nearly enough.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Oerdin
No, he just slashed the funds needed to build the improved levees because he wanted to give tax cuts to millionaires and pay for an optional war in Iraq based upon falsified intel which he and his friends cooked up.

For Ming's sake! Louisiana had recieved more funding for Army Corps of Engineers projects than any other state since 2001.

[Dinner]

But the critical upgrad of the levee system had its funding slashed. I'd also like to see the figures you got that claim from since it likely includes disaster relief money (I.E. post disaster repairs and what not).

It could all have been prevented if the administration had actually done what the Army Corp said was needed.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
The issue isn't the lack of funds to begin with. That's a question to be pursued, but not what I'm interested in here. The issue is the lack of serious funds now to rebuild the city and the levees. It doesn't matter who should have funded what before Katrina hit; what matters is what we do now, and we're not doing nearly enough.

While agree that it seems or maybe in fact that nothing is being done here. And any ands, ifs, or buts, seems tonot matter here, when in fact they should since these levves were already a problem that many folks were aware of. You have used 911 as an example, there is no way anyone new that some idiot was going to fly two giant planes into the center of two buildings.. These leevies have been a problem for sometime. Any way the city is slowly rebuliding,not fast enough for some but how can they now when the city is almost deserted. The answers you seem to seek should have been addressed before this happened. For most of the folks that lived there are not wealthy and are in no positon to really rebuild. On top of every thing else is the city rid of all the water and debris that accumlated in the one area and are they able to start rebuilding?? you have to tear down the garbage before you can rebuild. I dont say this with ice in my veins, for gods sakes we have a entire apt building that burned alomost to the ground in front of where we live this happened 3 to 4 weeks ago 1 million in dammage and it hasnt been touched since the fire. rebuilding takes time. I do hope however that the city gets the monetery needs it deserves.