Repairing the Breach

It's Time for a New "New Deal"

New Orleans is destroyed, the Gulf Coast's infrastructure is in tatters and tens of thousands of citizens are without jobs as gas prices nationwide rise to record levels. Television sets brought the destruction into all of our homes. But this White House seemed unable to grasp the misery unfolding before its own eyes.

Instead, President Bush treated the disaster as if he were a loutish frat boy when he joked to Americans that he had had good times partying in New Orleans as a young man and hoped in the near future to be able to sit on Senator Trent Lott's rebuilt porch in Mississippi.

But to really understand what went wrong with the Administration's shameful response, we need to look beyond Bush's blame-the-other, pass-the-buck and who-gives-a-____ attitude.

The Administration's ineptitude, as New York Times columnist Paul Krugman put it, was "a consequence of ideological hostility to the very idea of using government to serve the public good."

The government's failure was the result not of "simple incompetence" in the Administration but "of a campaign by most Republicans and too many Democrats to systematically vilify the role of government in American life," LA Times columnist Robert Scheer argued. And as the Financial Times observed, "For the past quarter-century in Washington...US politics has been dominated by the conviction that what was wrong with America would be solved by getting government off the people's backs"--an attitude that contributed to the criminal inaction on the part of the federal government.

Indeed, you could see what the dog-eat-dog, antigovernment philosophy of the far right has reaped in the bloated bodies and raw sewage in New Orleans's flooded streets.

That philosophy has attained new power under President Bush. While the Louisiana Army Corps of Engineers proposed $18 billion in projects that would have shored up the protective levees, improved flood control and perhaps prevented last week's breaches in the levees' walls, none of these projects were funded. Instead, the White House cut the Corps' budget and actually proposed a further 20 percent cut in 2006.

Which raises the question: What steps should we take to repair the breach that has become so apparent in our social fabric?

Here's one answer: Let's seize this moment by launching a twenty-first-century New Deal--with programs modeled after the Works Progress Administration, updated for these times. Why?

A modernized version of the WPA would help our nation to rebuild New Orleans and Mississippi's Gulf Coast, and repair the racial and class divides that we saw in such dramatic relief these past few days. It would rebuild and improve our nation's public infrastructure and (hopefully) alter the terms of our political discourse in the years ahead.

After all, Roosevelt's New Deal was so much more than simply a vehicle for providing economic relief to citizens in need. It gave Americans a sense of solidarity, a new social contract, as well as the chance to go to work. It also helped bring the country's infrastructure into the twentieth century.

Take a moment to consider these statistics: The WPA, according to historian William Leuchtenburg, "built or improved more than 2,500 hospitals, 5,900 school buildings, 1,000 airport landing fields, and nearly 13,000 playgrounds."

When the hurricane happened the poverty rate in New Orleans stood at 28 percent--more than double the national average. Fully half the children of Louisiana now live in poverty, the second-highest child poverty rate in the country (its neighbor, Mississippi, is number one). And as if to underscore the poverty of our politics, the same week the hurricane devastated the poorest regions the Census Bureau released a report that found the number of Americans living in poverty has climbed again--for the fourth straight year under President Bush.

African-Americans, who are two-thirds of the city's population, suffered the most in the hurricane's wake. As Professor Mark Naison wrote in a letter circulating on the web, this event is nothing short of "a humanitarian challenge of unprecedented proportions."

It showed "how deeply divided our nation is and how far our social fabric has been strained" by the Iraq war and by "policies which have widened the gap between rich and poor."

A post-New Orleans WPA could help to spark a new and desperately needed moral struggle for economic rights. It could provide jobs to Louisiana and Mississippi's poor and promote the goals of equality, justice and economic opportunity across American society.

(Bush's approach, in contrast, favors cronyism. Last week, Halliburton's stock hit a fifty-two-week high, presumably because Dick Cheney's former colleagues may reap the benefits of this tragedy securing government contracts to rebuild the Gulf Coast. Bush's approach has been a complete failure for the poor, elderly and largely African-American population of New Orleans.)

A WPA-style program could also begin to address the related crisis of the inner cities--a crisis that, as the Center for American Progress points out, this Administration has contributed to--as it has "repeatedly slashed job training [to the tune of more than $500 million] and vocational education programs."

The Milton Eisenhower Foundation has argued that the federal government should fund 1.25 million public-sector inner-city jobs. (Its website lays out a series of "what work" programs.)

We need a twenty-first-century WPA to restore the infrastructure not only in Louisiana and Mississippi, but in every state in America. As Representative Dennis Kucinich said this past week, the task ahead that is required to rebuild New Orleans includes a need for "new levees, new roads, bridges, libraries, schools, colleges and universities and...all public institutions, including hospitals." The government's highest priority should be on affordable housing and public infrastructure, not on casinos and luxury hotels, which skew development and contribute to environmental degradation.

We're "the only major industrial society that is not...renewing and expanding its public infrastructure," the Eisenhower Foundation reported. Instead of pork barrel spending on absurd bridges like "Don Young's Way" in Alaska, let's have the federal government spend our money wisely to modernize our hospitals, highways, universities and other institutions.

Senator Kennedy said in a Senate floor speech this week that "we can't just fix the hole in the roof. We need to rebuild the whole foundation." He proposed establishing "a New Orleans and Gulf Coast Redevelopment Authority modeled after the Tennessee Valley Authority in its heyday." His good idea is to "plan, help fund and coordinate for the reconstruction of that damaged region."

Finally, we must seek to upend twenty-five years of right-wing political dogma that is responsible for what went wrong in responding to this disaster.

We need a new politics of shared sacrifice and a renewed commitment to a politics of shared prosperity--with a federal government playing a vital role in creating a fairer, more just, full-employment economy. These proposals are common sense ideas; how could they be considered heretical in the hurricane's wake?

This is a moment ripe to reshape Americans' view of government. A twenty-first-century version of the WPA would halt the dismantling and begin the rebuilding of our nation's communities, of lives enmeshed in deep poverty and squalor, and provide some hope that the horrific abandonment by government of thousands of citizens will be an aberration, not a nightmarish portent of what lies ahead.

Comments (432)

1. WPA idea won't ever materialize. Why? Because this takes the profits out of the hands of the likes of KBR, etc. In this world of corporate domination, control and mergers, nothing will get done unless there is a buck to be made by a giant corporation.

   Posted by BlueTexan at 09/08/2005 @ 10:17am

2. Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) put his name on a bridge that goes to nowhere in Alaska.

   Don Young's Way shall become the symbol of this Republican-controlled Congress whose "Don Young's Way" illiberal public policies also take the nation to nowhere.

   Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 10:51am

3. It's an idealistic notion. How about mandatory civil service -right out of highschool - everybody serves two years in the military or something like the WPA! It would be great for the youth of America - a unifying, maturation process that would benifit our society in multiple ways!......

   Who am I kidding, we can't even talk realisticly about a draft!

   Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/08/2005 @ 10:53am

4. Pictures of Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) and his bridge to nowhere should be plastered throughout America, and especially the Gulf Coast states that suffered the devastating effects of Hurricane Katrina.

   Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 10:55am

5. I am curious about a few things:

   1. Since the city of NO and the state of Louisiana have been controlled by Dems for the past 60 years do they share ANY of the blame for what happened? From reading the Nation I gather it is ALL GB's fault. 2. And with that Dem control over the past 60 years how is it that the City was so poor? If dems can't produce results in 60 years in one city why should I trust them to run the country? 3. NO and Louisiana in general are cesspools of corruption. Again, this is with Dems in control. Please answer for that.

   Posted by vrwc at 09/08/2005 @ 10:56am

6. Another picture that should be posted in the Hurricane Katrina stricken areas is that of Speaker Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Frist turning their backs on questions about the new bicameral and 'bi-partison' Hurricane Katrina investigation committee.

   That picture is symbolic of Bush and the Republican Party turning their backs on Americans.

   Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 10:57am

7. George Bush's statement to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of "What went wrong?" referring to HK catastrophe should be posted around the nation. A picture of Bush should accompany the statement.

   Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 11:00am

8. Handbills and posters should be distributed that say:

   "Federal Help Wanted, Dead or Alive".

   Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 11:01am

9. A picture of Dick Cheney and Tom DeLay looking down on the HK survivors with the caption "Let them eat cake" should be posted around the nation.

   Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 11:04am

10. The survivors of the HK catastrophe should put red ink on their index finger to indicate their survival of HK while Bush fiddled in San Diego.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 11:06am

11. Katrina,

    Thank you for writing such a fine and insightful article.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 11:08am

12. A single-payer health care system would help a lot, too.

    It's going to take a sea change in the power structure to do it; primarily, the GOP must become the minority party again. A very tall order, considering the increasing GOP gerrymandering of congressional districts and Diebold black-box closed-source voting machines.

    Tom DeLay said he would not allow any investigation of the Federal failures in the Gulf disaster. Whatever investigation happens will be controlled by the GOP and designed to swerve and deflect the blame from Bush's crony-filled FEMA and DHS. DeLay has already thrown down the partisan gauntlet by saying that states with republican governors had fewer problems with the disaster than Louisiana and New Orleans, which have Democratic leaders.

    Posted by proudlib at 09/08/2005 @ 11:11am

13. I agree a large scale public works project could provide all of the benefits described in the post (if it's not handed to KBR et al. with no competitive bidding by the Corps of Engineers). However, one thing missing from the discussion is how much the landscape of the Gulf Coast has been altered over the past 60 years from the massive construction of levees and petroleum pipelines, which leads to decreased sediment deposits, and a gradual losing of solid ground to open water. In the long run, this ensures not only the largest loss of freshwater wetlands in the U.S. and all it's associated benefits from an ecological standpoint, but also ensures more ferocious hurricanes because of the higher water levels and greater pressure on the levees.

    While the WPA and other programs were great from an economic and political perspective, I would hardly agree that the many dams built on our great rivers were good in the long run. Any discussion of redevelopment must include restoration and preserveration of the vast wetland complex that dwarfs the Everglades by comparison.

    Posted by mooreda at 09/08/2005 @ 11:18am

14. I am facinated by the non-response to my post.

    Posted by vrwc at 09/08/2005 @ 11:26am

15. I've been mentioning the James Kroeger article, The Republican Nemesis, on the blogs because I feel so strongly about its potential to make the Democrats the majority party again.

    It's lengthy, but it's packed with insights into why Democratic campaign strategists fail when they go up against the Republicans.

    Here's what others have been saying about The Republican Nemesis [taxwisdom.org]

    Posted by Linette at 09/08/2005 @ 11:33am

16. "These proposals are common sense ideas; how could they be considered heretical in the hurricane's wake?"

    Even though Katrina exposed the utter incompetence of this administration as well as the need for big government, I fear that W's team will once again demonstrate its political brilliance, and with cooperation from a still neutered press, turn this into an asset for the rep's and a liability for the dem's.

    I bet that within 1 month the republicans will be insisting that repeal of the estate tax is essential to recover from the hurricane, and people will believe them.

    What can we do to stop this from happening?

    Posted by hollowr at 09/08/2005 @ 11:41am

17. 1. Since the city of NO and the state of Louisiana have been controlled by Dems for the past 60 years do they share ANY of the blame for what happened? From reading the Nation I gather it is ALL GB's fault. 2. And with that Dem control over the past 60 years how is it that the City was so poor? If dems can't produce results in 60 years in one city why should I trust them to run the country? 3. NO and Louisiana in general are cesspools of corruption. Again, this is with Dems in control. Please answer for that.

    1: We blame George for poor leadership, in terms of timing and a tepid response, when he managed a much better performance in the wake of what was a less vicious, and less predictable occurrence. At the highest level, there was a thorough credibility gap between what we heard, and what other sources reported. That's a very, very bad example to set in times of national crisis.

    2: The south is the poorest region in the United States. I have been to New Orleans this past year, just prior to Mardi Gras. I was shown the real city, by a lifelong resident. The number of poor black citizens not only living in the city (at one point we took a wrong turn into what can only be described as a third world neighbourhood, with barbed wire fences enclosing it), but in the surrounding area, is amazing. Now then, heirs to slave legacies, and the target of racism over several centuries, is in any suprise that a large black population, even in a democratically controlled area, will have trouble climbing out of their financial difficulties? Poverty leads to poverty, and while some are capable of getting out of that, one's ability to have social mobility is often proportional to the capacity one has to be mobile at all. 3: Except for New Orleans, the rest of Louisiana is conservative, much like every state around it. Most major cities are liberal, if only because liberal solutions seem much better than leaving the poor and homeless to starve in plain sight. There are a lot more poor and homeless in cities. Hence, where there is a bit of excess money (found in any city, as trade is the generator of such), some of it is sprinkled on the poor, so as, maybe, to try and give them a chance. Define corruption. Define cesspool. I saw a beautiful city there, full of interesting and unique people. Good, calm, and loving people. I saw their orchestra play a suite by Mahler. I saw the French market. I saw the poor, and the homeless, and the starving artists that make any good city a cultural haven. You have no right, or ability, to criticize this city for a perceived lack of morality. What you're afraid of is the sexuality, the free spirit that New Orleans represents, even in its decimated state. These are threats to your way of life, and thought, and because so many people obviously enjoyed them (last I heard, Mardi Gras is fairly popular), I imagine that plenty of "social and moral concern" has been placed on the topic of New Orleans by you before. Stop being so frigging reactionary.

    Meanwhile, here's a new idea for all you wandering progressives, courtesy off the hot presses of the American Renaissance..

    Neo-liberalism. Enjoy!

    Posted by Megido at 09/08/2005 @ 11:45am

18. Katrina Van De Huevel/ORAIBI1952

    You piece is drivel using ultra-liberals to prove a false point, hence intellectually dishonest.

    Though it will appeal to the likes of ORAIBI1952.

    VRWC:

    They will never respond to a post like yours, not in their nature, it would violate the liberal code somehow, if it was ACTUALLY DEMS PRIMARILY responsible for this catastrophe, after all it was THEIR city.

    NO! It MUST be Bush's. fault, Scheer and Krugman(lol) have deemed it so,(what a surprise).

    I know of NO conservative outlet that is not laying at least SOME fault with FEMA, for moving slower than they probably should have, meaning they could have gotten there a day earlier realistically.

    But the mayor and governor, blameless, poor things, they were at the mercy of mean old Bush. What could they do, nothing without Bushs help.

    Funny how a man for whose abilities the NATION, and their fans, hold such little regard for, is now the only one who could have averted this Hurricane Katrina catastrophe.

    Let me ask you guys who adhere to this stuff the Nation peddles, does shame or that feeling of embarrassment due to the hypocritical nature and vast contradictions of many of its assertions ever enter your mind or body??

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 11:49am

19. Thanks MEGIDO. Just what I thought...Blame on Dems who ran the city and state 0. What a suprise.

    Posted by vrwc at 09/08/2005 @ 11:56am

20. MEGIDO

    Yes, Yes, thats it we conservatives are afraid of your sexuality, afraid of your "enlightened" art and culture.

    We are just ignorant of good tastes and the finer points of culture, which of course resides ONLY in the artistic mindset of enlightened liberal minds.

    And yes it OUR racism that is responsible for the poor being largely composed of black and minorities, being a minority myself.

    It couldnt possibly be those "sons of slaves" fault for their own condition. No it couldnt possibly be since I was in NO a mere two weeks ago, those same "improverished" people sitting on their cracked paint and peeling porches drinking a 40 and smoking a cigaretter at 2:30 in the afternoon. NAH!

    Its us who are to blame for the condition they are in, lets give them 200000 houses and cars and 80000 a year job, thats the solution. right?

    MEGIDO. STOP BEING SO FRIGGIN NAIVE! or utopian, whatever you call it

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 12:05pm

21. jeez, it is the same old thing with ALL of you people except for HMAN23 - blame the Republicans if you're liberal, blame the Democrats if you're conservative. I am sick of it.

    There is blame enough to go up and down the chain of command, state, federal and local, to make me embarrassed for our country.

    This is what happens when a nation becomes more interested in spending money to project power anywhere around than spending that money for advancing society.

    AT the risk of getting off topic I will take this opportunity to say that we need not just a WPA, but we need a fundamental change in our national philosophy. We need a shift away from military spending and overseas intervention, and towards maintaining and improving our domestic infrastructure, our educational system, and domestic emergency response capabilities. National health insurance should also be on the list.

    Basically it boils down to this: Do we want to spend money to kill people we don't know just because some rich white man who can't put together a coherent sentence tells us to go kill, or do we want to spend our money on investment and reinvestment in our country and our people?

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/08/2005 @ 12:10pm

22. I agree that the WPA will never materialize. See http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/sep2005/weal-s07.shtml

    Posted by Truefreshman at 09/08/2005 @ 12:16pm

23. CPT,

    Flattery will get you nowhere.

    I feel very pleased to be placed in the august company of Katrina Vanden Heuvel, and I look forward to the day when I will have an opportunity to shake her hand.

    It would be an honor and privilege to meet a beautiful lady, like Katrina whose fine attributes include, but are not limited to intelligence, compassion, and strength.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 12:18pm

24. vrwcpt;

    It's amazing that there are always more consevatives to replace the ones that have left because they have been reavealed to be partisan, pseudo-intellectual hacks!........

    Incidentaly, Fema published a report in 2000 called the PDM ( Pre Disaster Mitigation ) . It predicted the 3 most likely disasters - #1 a terrorist attack on New York, #2 a devastating earthquake in San Francisco and #3 a Flood in New Orleans! Obviousley the report made reccomendations for how to prepare for these eventualities. The Report died in Congress from lack of concern in the White House. In fact funding to Fema was cut when Bush made it part of Homeland security. So again they have failed us. And just like 911 when Condelleza Rice said they never could have predicted airplanes flying into buildings - They are now saying they could not have predicted the levees failing. Wrong again! It was predicted but again they had other priorities......

    Finally, certainly the locals have plenty of culpability, but the poor performance of the feds is much more consequential in regards to revealing the failure of Chertoff to prepare us for another major disaster. God help us if this is the best and the brightest Bush has to offer us! WE can be assured that the apologists for Bush will ignore the seriousness of what their failure really revaels about our ability to respond to another potential terrorist attack. Maybe they figure that it won't ever happen again (just like everyone forgot about the flood the sunk New Orleans in 1927 ). " Hey, there hasn't been another attack since 911" , they'll say!....

    Then when it happens they'll be saying - just like now - "we could'nt have predicted such a thing". What abunch of idiots! So much for the expectation of leaderhip and preperation. No one will be held accountable either - not if they have anything to say about it. In fact they'll pat the guys that let it happen again on the back and say, "GOOD JOB !"

    Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/08/2005 @ 12:34pm

25. "There is blame enough to go up and down the chain of command, state, federal and local, to make me embarrassed for our country."

    Your statement resonates with me, ILP. Red, Blue, they're all failing us. One group wants to have their way with us; the other is willing to remain prone until the act is over. Until the pleas for true compassion and cries of indignance are loud enough to drown out the "ch-ching" sound of our government in (in)action, we are doomed to relive these horrific events.

    Posted by drhammer at 09/08/2005 @ 12:47pm

26. ZERO:

    I cannot imagine that KVH or anybody could give you the specifics you want at this point. We do not even know the true extent of the damage, repairs, what will need rebuilding, where it will be built, and so forth. I read her piece as merely providing a starting point for discussing an alternative idea from contracting all the work to private corporations. I am sure as time goes on this will be able to be more accurately defined. That said, I think the idea has some positives (sense of solidarity, new social contract, job training, vocational education) that many who dismiss it out-of-hand seem to ignore. On the flip side, there would probably be appropraite questions conerning its efficiency, which will need to be addressed up front.

    This probably does not answer your question, and I agree the whole proposal would need to be fleshed out to make an accurate asseement of which way would be better, or maybe some combination of the two. However, just because we cannot hammer out a specific proposal at this point does not mean we should abandon the idea.

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/08/2005 @ 1:00pm

27. I think some form of mandatory national/community service is a great idea. (Sure, we can't seem to make a draft work, as No-Nonsense has stated, but I don't think that's because young people don't wish to serve their country.) How great would it be from a personal and national perspective to instill and reinforce real social values before they can be supplanted by our current model of greed and self-interest?

    Posted by drhammer at 09/08/2005 @ 1:23pm

28. I have a challenge for all you libs here ESPECIALLY Katrina and David Corn. What have you done for the victims except complain about GB? Sent money? Big friggin deal! Thats easy. Guess who is at the Astrodome actually helping? The people you so despise, redstate christians. Guess who is opening their homes to the poor black people you claim to care so much about? Those same redstate folks.

    So here is my challenge. For those of you who can afford it, and we know KVH and DC can, get off your lily white lib asses, fly to Houston and actually put some real actions in instead of just spouting off. Or maybe the reason I don't see any of you here is that you don't really want to get that close to poor blacks. Better to sit in NYC and write about them. There is plenty for you to do here if you just have the guts to show up.

    I won't hold my breath.

    Posted by vrwc at 09/08/2005 @ 1:43pm

29. Here's one for you...Our smart president's comments..."No one knew the levies would breach"...That a boy GW..show your true colors.

    Posted by djmarch at 09/08/2005 @ 1:45pm

30. VRWC:

    Your rant is pointless. Any lib could spew the same drivel about a war supporter needing to enlist.

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/08/2005 @ 1:49pm

31. Not even close. All you have to do is volunteer for a few days to help the victims, not sign up for two years. And somehow, I doubt the Army would take a 49 year old man, so actually your point is worthless. You CAN help in the Astrodome, I cannot join the military.

    Posted by vrwc at 09/08/2005 @ 1:52pm

32. Sorry in advance for the long post.

    There's a lot of talk here about poverty in NO and the conversative agenda of Bush, Reagan et al. exacerbating and even causing it. We need a new "New Deal", blah, blah, blah. The fact is that NO is run exclusively by Democrats and has lagged behind almost every other city in development and poverty alleviation. It is true that human incompetence led to more deaths in NO than the hurricane itself, including poor disaster planning and the almost criminal response of federal, state and local government to the aftermath, but bad local economic policy and governance in NO are as much to blame concerning the chaos and degradation exposed during the crisis. NO was a very broken city before Katrina, leaving it especially vulnerable post disasters, and it was not Washington's fault, Republican or Democrat, or the Conservative agenda but squarely the fualt of local NO government and the state of LA.

    Here's an article to that affect:

    A Two-City Tale New Orleans and Houston offer a study in contrasts. by Noemie Emery 09/06/2005 4:36:00 PM

    Late last week, as New Orleans was sliding into savage conditions, some talking heads were glowing with pleasure at the idea of a moral meltdown of such immense proportions that it would erode forever the country's self confidence. Or, as Robert Scheer would happily write, "Instead of the much-celebrated American can-do machine that promises to bring freedom and prosperity to less fortunate people abroad, we have seen a callous official incompetence that puts even Third World rulers to shame."

    Not quite. The reason New Orleans slid so quickly from civilization into Third World conditions was that it was pretty much a Third World city already, and didn't have too far to go. In its violence, in its corruption, in its reliance on ambience and tourism as its critical industry, in its one-party rule, in its model of graftocracy built on a depressed and crime-ridden underclass that was largely kept out of the sight and the mind of vacationing revelers, it was much more like a Caribbean resort than a normal American city. Its crime and murder rates were way above national averages, its corruption level astounding. The latter was written off as being picturesque and perversely adorable, until it suddenly wasn't, as it paid off in hundreds of buses--that could have borne thousands of stranded people to safety--sitting submerged in water, and police either looting or AWOL.

    In 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville defined a long set of traits that made Americans "different," and that remain today just as valid: Americans are restless, inventive, pragmatic, entrepreneurial, socially mobile, and so future-oriented they are ready and eager sometimes to let go of the past. None of these things defined what once was New Orleans; in fact, that poor destroyed city played them in reverse: It was socially static, fairly caste-ridden, non-entrepreneurial (read hostile to business), and wholly immersed in its past, to the point where its main industry is marketing ambience and nostalgia. "New Orleans's dominant industry lies not in creating its future but selling its past," wrote Joel Kotkin in the Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com. "Tourism defines contemporary New Orleans's economy more than its still-large port, or its remaining industry, or its energy production. Although there is nothing wrong, per se, in being a tourist town, it is not an industry that attracts high-wage jobs; and tends to create a highly bifurcated social structure. This can be seen in New Orleans's perennially high rates of underemployment, crime and poverty." New Orleans, in short, was the place you went to take a vacation, not to prosper in life and start a family, much less start a business. This lack of opportunity, or the upward ladder of social mobility, is perhaps one reason so many evacuees felt they were breathing fresh air when they landed in Houston, and are deciding to make it their home.

    Let us look now at Houston, for it is the second city in this cosmic drama, and one in which Tocqueville would feel right at home. Like so many cities in the Sunbelt, it is expanding, entrepreneurial, based on the future, and the place where the "much celebrated American can-do machine that promises to bring freedom and prosperity to less fortunate people" comes roaring to life. "In l920, New Orleans's population was nearly three times that of Houston," says Kotkin. "During the '90s, the Miami and Houston areas grew almost six times as fast as greater New Orleans, and flourished as major destinations for immigrants . . . These newcomers have helped transform Miami and Houston into primary centers for trade, investment and services, from finance and accounting to medical care for the entire Caribbean basin. They have started businesses, staffed factories, and become players in civic life."

    It is now no surprise that Houston is the place where in days they built a new city in and around the Astrodome, that has taken in 25,000 refugees from New Orleans, and is planning to feed, house, employ, and relocate most of them. Houston is the place where the heads of all the religious groups in the city--Baptists and Catholics, Muslims and Jews--came together to raise $4.4 million to feed the evacuees for 30 days, and to supply 720 volunteers a day to prepare and serve meals. If New Orleans was where the Third World broke through, Houston was where the First World began beating it back, and asserting its primacy.

    Posted by aganesan at 09/08/2005 @ 1:59pm

33. Sorry didn't mean to bold the whole second half above. My mistake.

    Posted by aganesan at 09/08/2005 @ 2:00pm

34. VRWC, You can drive a truck in Iraq. There are plenty of US civilians in Iraq.

    When I see that firefighters are playing football to pass the time because FEMA can't deploy them, I wonder "Even if I could leave my job (which I can't) and go down there to help, would I be idle too?" After all, if FEMA can't use trained experts who rescue people for a living, what am I going to be allowed to do?

    My answer? Send refugees to Silicon Valley! Bring 'em here! You will see me down at HP Arena (or whichever sporting venue is used) nights and weekends, doing whatever I can to help.

    So take your "holier than thou" attitude and shove it.

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/08/2005 @ 2:05pm

35. Thats what I thought. Libs are all talk and no do.

    Posted by vrwc at 09/08/2005 @ 2:07pm

36. Being disgusted with neocon priorities that place politics and corporate interest above the needs of our citizens is distinctly different from despising red state Christians.

    Implying that the fact that many of the victims are being assisted in majority conservative states means that liberals are not on the scene and helping is simply false.

    There seems to be a shortage of linear thought here.

    Posted by drhammer at 09/08/2005 @ 2:10pm

37. Then I suggest Drhammer, that you come down to the Astrodome and talk to the volunteers. You will find that a vast majority of them support the President. But then that would mean you would have to actually do something other than sit on your ass.

    Posted by vrwc at 09/08/2005 @ 2:13pm

38. Noemie Emery, who writes for the Weekly Standard and other right-wing rags provides no insight to the discussion, but the piece does provide great view on the failure of Bush and Republican public policy.

    The piece posted by Aganesan is just more illiberal and callous blather by the indifferent and insensitive right-wing bleaters.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 2:14pm

39. DRhammer,

    The reason that the volunteers at the Astrodome support Bush is that they are members of Pat Robertson's Operation Blessing and other radical, right-wing religious bleaters.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 2:17pm

40. You gotta love the social Darwinism of the right: "It's they're fault their poor!" (OK, not directly stated, but pretty much implied.) "Hey, I saw one poor guy drunk on his porch, so that means they all must be lazy! Their fault!"

    Irrespective of my views on such drivel, sure there's blame to go around, but I would say that most of it rests with the feds. Waiting several days to send the National Guard, for example, is criminal negligence. And it's not a cliche to say that a FEMA director that doesn't even realize that there are people left stranded in the convention center (for one example) is pretty damned incompetent and should be fired. I'm glad to hear that some right wingers recognize the ineptitude of FEMA. I don't blame Bush for everything, but let's see: Who was the one overseeing the appointments to the agencies that have failed? Who cut funding for various projects to address New Orleans vulnerability? Hmmm, I'm not sure, let me think.

    I would offer that many people are more inclined to give the mayor of New Orleans and other local politicians the benefit of the doubt is because they're on the front lines, helping people -- even assisting with rescue efforts and making themselves accountable. As opposed to posing for photo ops, spouting ridiculous platitudes that border on self-parody, or describing people without food and water -- who are doing no more than seeking those necessities -- as "looters." (Obviously, no one condones theft of non-necessities.) Yeah yeah, I know, they're Democrats and they haven't proposed a tax rate of zero so the magic service fairies can take care of schools, roads, police, and fire -- but they have shown their concern with action, not mere words and unacceptable responses (and that's putting it mildly).

    Those pictures of school buses underwater that the right wing seems to be in love with, incidentally, are a red herring. Sure it would have been good to utilize them. Common sense, however, should tell anyone that not only are there not enough to get everyone out, but it would be impossible given the traffic situation. There is no municipal road system in the country that's equipped to handle literally every citizen during an evacuation. I'm getting really, really tired of hearing that all of the poor neighborhoods "should have gotten out," as if (A) that was possible and (B) it's somehow they're fault. But it's probably hard to understand for those who've spent their entire lives in the 'burbs with access to a car.

    Posted by soulfinger at 09/08/2005 @ 2:18pm

41. I am off to the Astrodome. One last thought.

    You failed with the national guard story You failed with Clarke, Wilson and Woodward You failed with Cindy And you think this is going to work?

    Posted by vrwc at 09/08/2005 @ 2:20pm

42. Just trying to follow VRWC's logic here:

    Left-wingers are lazy and never assist in aid efforts.

    Right-wingers are assisting at the Astrodome and in providing housing for the displaced.

    Therefore, George Bush did one helluva job handling this hurricane and everyone on the left has no right to comment on his performance -- or that of his agencies -- unless they drop what they're doing immediately, book a flight to Houston, and volunteer.

    Just checking ...

    Posted by soulfinger at 09/08/2005 @ 2:27pm

43. VRWC:

    So you actually live in Houston! Hey - I appreciate that you are volunteering and all, but spare us the houlier than though bullshit as you drive, walk, or take a bus to the Astrodome and criticize everyone who is not jumping on a plane from every corner of the country to chip in.

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/08/2005 @ 2:35pm

44. VRWC, All talk and no action? Please back up your absurd claims with some kind of proof. And what do you mean "You failed with the national guard story You failed with Clarke, Wilson and Woodward You failed with Cindy And you think this is going to work?"

    Who failed? What did they fail to do? What are you talking about? Why are you so angry and bitter? What is wrong with you?

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/08/2005 @ 2:36pm

45. awful typos - holier than thou.

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/08/2005 @ 2:36pm

46. VRWC = Very Right Wing Christian, I suppose.

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/08/2005 @ 2:38pm

47. I don't want anyone to misread me. I'm not blaming the local government solely for the lapse in disaster planning and the response, much of the blame rests on the federal government and the Bush administration, no one can argue with that. What I was addressing was the implication many on the site have been making that NO is poor, destitute and mismanaged because of Conservative policies. That is false and that is all my post was trying to address. Hopefully, maybe Katrina can make us as a nation can take a hard look at structural poverty in many parts of our country and look at the policies that have improved regions around the world and created a lasting thriving middle class. Government largesse and central planning are not a recipe for a bright economic future for a rebuilt NO. Just my 2 cents.

    Posted by aganesan at 09/08/2005 @ 2:39pm

48. ORAIBI1952

    I agree with you on one point, there is something VERY alluring about an intelligent women, regradless if I agree with her or not.

    I would rather date a Maureen Dowd, KVH, or Ann Coulter than a Anna Nicole Smith any day.

    ILOVEPHYSICS

    Point of fact, even contractors must be able to pass a basic physical, most contractors are former military members. VRWC is correct.

    SOULFINGER

    Ok you give a pass to local officials and explain the difficulties of getting people out of the city, of which many have merit. But you do not give the same leeway to the FEDS who were faced with getting into the city AFTER the Hurricane had destroyed significant infastructure? How do you reconcile that paradox?

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 2:40pm

49. So the fact that I find fault with someone's argument means that I am not going to the scene.

    Such great leaps are usually the stuff of NBA stars.

    Posted by drhammer at 09/08/2005 @ 2:43pm

50. In retrospect, more the stuff of Evel Knievel...

    Posted by drhammer at 09/08/2005 @ 2:46pm

51. The response to Katrina has been a failure by local, state, and federal government, however we need to consider that a disaster this large may be impossible to respond to in manner that will satisfy all. From time to time we are abruptly reminded that with all our technology and all our intellect we can be humbled by "Mother Nature". Man is not all powerful. ---Len Mosse

    Posted by Len Mosse at 09/08/2005 @ 2:53pm

52. SOULFINGER

    Ok you give a pass to local officials and explain the difficulties of getting people out of the city, of which many have merit. But you do not give the same leeway to the FEDS who were faced with getting into the city AFTER the Hurricane had destroyed significant infastructure? How do you reconcile that paradox?

    Yet somehow, the news media got to New Orleans in droves within hours (most of them not stationed there, I might add), yet there were literally -- and somebody correct me if I'm wrong on this -- no National Guard there for at least 48 hours, in some cases even longer. And even if the infrastructure prevented that, the feds still knew that this was going to be a very destructive hurricane days in advance. They should have planned much better, particularly when people's lives were at stake. This stuff that Haley Barbour said about having no advance warning of the scale of the storm is pure B.S. meant to cover the administration's ass.

    Besides, if the roads are blocked, there other means of transport such as boats, helicopters, and planes. And there's a big difference between transporting several thousand National Guard troops into the city and getting several hundred thousand people -- including the frail and sick who require special attention -- out.

    The only thing I can sympathize with, with respect to the feds, is that you can't be everywhere at once. Otherwise, the feds did a terrible job and should be held accountable. It was not bureaucracy that failed down there, it was poor management of bureaucracy. The buck has to stop somewhere, though I'm not holding my breath.

    Posted by soulfinger at 09/08/2005 @ 2:59pm

53. SOULFINGER

    The buck will come to a screeching halt in the pocket of KBR, or the like. It may even happen before you asphixiate...

    Posted by drhammer at 09/08/2005 @ 3:05pm

54. Ok you give a pass to local officials and explain the difficulties of getting people out of the city, of which many have merit. But you do not give the same leeway to the FEDS who were faced with getting into the city AFTER the Hurricane had destroyed significant infastructure? How do you reconcile that paradox?

    Because the LOCAL officials did not evacuate completely BEFORE the storm. It should have been a MANDATORY evac as soon as NOAA said it was a CAT 4 storm...PERIOD.

    Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 3:05pm

55. Here's one for you...Our smart president's comments..."No one knew the levies would breach"...That a boy GW..show your true colors

    Taken out of context. He said he was surprised the levies breached AFTER the storm had passed (AS was everyone else for that matter). Sorry to let FACTS get in your way.

    Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 3:08pm

56. "Those pictures of school buses underwater that the right wing seems to be in love with, incidentally, are a red herring. Sure it would have been good to utilize them. Common sense, however, should tell anyone that not only are there not enough to get everyone out"

    Uh excuse me....Your Beloved DIM mayor said on record" He wasn't about to use School Buses and wanted every G-D greyhound around the country instead."

    When this all comes out in the open...New Orleans...and Louisiana, your jewel of liberalism...will prove itself a shining example of why this country can never be governed in the same way

    Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 3:18pm

57. SOULFINGER,

    Was that supposed to be a serious retort? News crews? well why didnt they bring in food and water? oh thats right, THEY ARENT CAPABLE OF CONDUCTING SUCH A LARGE AND COORDINATED RESPONSE.

    Are you at all aware of the process involved in mobilizing the NG? Yeah its the Governor, and by the way those "red herring" buses could have saved about 60000 people making 3 trips in and out. But a red-herring, right?

    And one question on mobilizing those assests you mentioned, who is coordinating them, fueling and re-fueling them, feeding them, and controling them

    I have said before, Amatuers talk tactics, Professionals talk logistics......The Mayor and the Governor in the end, will come out BEARING the BRUNT of responsibility, as they should.

    But not now, I give them a pass for now, after all they have to come to grips with letting their city drown

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 3:23pm

58. CPT, Until you see VRWC's physical exam results you cannot categorically state that he cannot serve in Iraq. Believe it or not, lots of 40-something people can pass physicals, as you very well know if you are in the service.

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/08/2005 @ 3:34pm

59. LIBSARENUTS, since when is NO the "jewel of liberalism," as you called it? I never got that memo...

    For that matter, since when is any red state or any part of any red state the "jewel of liberalism." I could nominate several cities for that moniker, and not one of them would be in a red state. Spare me the lecture about how the governor is a Dem - I am talking about to which presidential candidate the state's electoral votes went.

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/08/2005 @ 3:40pm

60. LIBSARENUTS (terrific name, BTW):

    It's probably not worth addressing something as off-point as your posts responding to me, but I can't resist, so I will:

    1) You missed the main point about my post, which was that it's impossible to do any complete evacuation -- and the school buses wouldn't have helped.

    2) I didn't say Nagin was without some blame. And you took his quote WAY out of context. That was made AFTER the hurricane, when school buses were proposed as a means to get people out. Perhaps he could have said it better, but I can sympathize given what he's gone through -- and besides, what's wrong with asking for that given that the people on them will be traveling for several hours in many cases to their relief centers? They've been sleeping on interstates or astroturf, for God's sake. Is it really gonna kill someone to have a minor upgrade in transportation?

    As for your apparent theory that liberal cities suck, I live here in Arlington, Va. -- which is almost 100 percent Democrat controlled. Roads are kept up well, crime is low, and business is always expanding. I could name plenty of other cities like that as well, so perhaps you could clarify how you reached your obviously well-researched theory.

    Posted by soulfinger at 09/08/2005 @ 3:42pm

61. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/07/AR200509 0702462.html

    how about you'all actually knowing the facts about why the levees weren't fixed before you go bashing Republicans and Bush? Read and weep.

    Posted by lamama at 09/08/2005 @ 3:51pm

62. ILOVE

    Yeah, but those 40yr olds have been in the Army since they were 20. But point taken.

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 3:57pm

63. Rio Bravo - Surprise surprise, your Institute for Policy Innovation and Free Enterprise Fund mouthpiece supports the administration. Are you presenting these two outfits as examples of objectivity? I am not intimately familiar with their positions but would place them pretty firmly in the neo-con camp.

    Please don't scan the blogosphere for more support for your position. If you have nothing to say yourself, get back to your neo-con circle jerk.

    Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 3:57pm

64. It doesn't matter what you want to show them. They'll just come up with, much like Rio Bravo there, long bullshit responses they didn't even bother thinking up themselves. That's the glory of being Republican, you don't have to do any independent thought if you don't want to. You just cling to your hot button issues, your gun, your bible, and your stream of wonk information created by wonks paid to create wonk information. "Institute for policy innovation"? "Free enterprise fund"? Yes, these sound like zones of thorough respect for all strains of information, and would never taint their responses by monetary or political bias. While this place is the same way, at least we don't have the gaul to charge people for our opinions. I've noticed something about you lovely anti-commentators out there. You have many cute catch phrases, most of which I'm willing to bet you heard somewhere and let stick. That you agree with such drivel is your own choice, but the assumptions that your leaders at the top have put America into a very sloppy place for a world power. We're enmired in numerous pan-continental wars, one of which completely blew our credibility as a world power. While that may mean nothing to you, that's because you probably don't spend time in any place where another person can criticize you to your face, much like our president. Our national debt is ridiculous. Our taxes are being cut at the same time, an act of fiscal irresponsibility even a child could point out. Our environment is more poisonous thanks to deregulation, cultural division tears our country apart, we're without a credible solution to the oil problem, and we're slipping in economic, educational, and health standards every year. Now, why, exactly, do you continue to support this agenda? Are you being paid off? Do you honestly think this is good for America? Stop apologizing for a failure of a federal administration, and allowing this one to slide. This was another national crisis, under the same government that saw one just a few years ago. It was an easily predicted problem, and yet federal regulations and federal actions failed to alleviate, or even contain the sworl of destruction for about a week or more.

    One of you speaks again of logistics versus tactics. What on earth are you babbling about? Logistics are numbers, pointed in certain directions. Helpful, but they do jack shit on the ground. They're just the supply routes, something that's relatively easy to plot as far as I've noticed. Tactics are what's done on the spot, improvised, sometimes faked, but always with the goal in mind. Logistics are for professionals who can't hack it in the field, Wonk. They're for the spineless managers who got bureaucratic positions because they're bureacrats. Stop trying to make your white class cushy middle level job sound so frigging noble.

    Posted by Megido at 09/08/2005 @ 4:04pm

65. VRWC - so now the debate is reduced to: if you don't directly help the victims than you have no right to criticize the administration. What kind of twisted bullshit logic is this? So red state christians are doing all the aftermath help? Again, what complete and utter bullshit. How does this add to the discussion? Are we liberals supposed to hold off on any Bush bashing because christians are behaving like christians?

    We've had some real wing-nuts on here, frothing at the mouth types, ranting about libs hating america, etc. - maybe we've got a new candidate here.

    Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 4:09pm

66. CPT: I thought your point was that infrastructure problems also prevented federal relief from getting in, and asked me to reconcile that, which is why I brought up the media getting in pretty damn quickly compared to the feds. My point concerned ability to access the city, not to coordinate relief. (Though yeah, the feds were mighty slow.)

    Thanks also for taking me out of context on the buses: In my original post, I acknowledged they could have assisted in evacuation. But again, there weren't enough for everyone -- and I gotta say your 60,000 figure sounds pretty high, to say the least. I never -- not once -- said the locals aren't blameless. But I stand by my belief that the feds' incompetence outweighed any on the part of the state and locals.

    Posted by soulfinger at 09/08/2005 @ 4:10pm

67. RIO BRAVO

    KUDOS, BRAVO! True!

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 4:12pm

68. CPT - What are you congratulating Bravo for? His cut & paste technique? I too am getting tired of your nonsensical logistics quote. It must do something magical for your manhood or something to keep spouting off on tactics and logistics. Hey, whatever turns you on - just try to keep that particular gem to yourself.

    Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 4:16pm

69. SOULFINGER, If I took you out of context, sorry

    FISHBITE Dont be so mean-spirited, relax brother, RIO BRAVO does make good points. In his long post

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 4:20pm

70. FISHBITE/MEGIDO

    In the spirit of clarity here are the doctrinal definitions so you can better understand the quote.

    logistics (JP 1-02, NATO) - The science of planning and carrying out the movement and maintenance of forces. In its most comprehensive sense, those aspects of military operations which deal with: a. design and development, acquisition, storage, movement, distribution, maintenance, evacuation, and disposition of materiel; b. movement, evacuation, and hospitalization of personnel; c. acquisition or construction, maintenance, operation, and disposition of facilities; and d. acquisition or furnishing of services. (See also combat service support (CSS).) See FMs 10-1 and 100-10.

    tactics (JP 1-02) - 1. The employment of units in combat. 2. The ordered arrangement and maneuver of units in relation to each other and/or to the enemy in order to use their full potentialities. (Army) - tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) - 1.

    Reference Field Manuel 101-5 Operational Terms and Graphics unclassified info

    I hope this clears it up, FISHBITE, relax man not trying to be insulting, dont take things so personal

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 4:34pm

71. CPT - I searched through the article RIO BRAVO posted and found nothing other than retreads. What I'm really searching for is one single conservative who is prepared to fault Bush and his admin for the Katrina response. Just a teensy weensy bit of fault. So far, I don't believe I've found a single one. Many of us libs have said that the local and state officials have a lot to be ashamed about, are responsible for a lot of the problems. I don't think I've read anything from a Bushnik that even begins to find any fault. Maybe I missed it and it was buried in the middle of some post somewhere.

    How about it? Any neo-con ready to voice even the tiniest concern with the Katrina response from FEMA et al?

    Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 4:56pm

72. The Red Cross was outside the superdome with all the supplies...food, water, etc..The State & Local Goverment said no.

    A BOMBSHELL awaits you liberals and everything you run...A shining example of liberal controlled state & local goverment at its worst

    Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 5:04pm

73. How come everytime you liberals hear something you dont agree with its a rant...but everything you say is brillient???

    Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 5:06pm

74. Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 5:07pm

75. sorry typo

    Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 5:07pm

76. CPT:

    I do not quite understand where you are going with the logistics angle. Are you saying FEMA and the Dept. of Homeland Security get a free pass because they were hindered by logistical hurdles? Shit, isn't that the sort of thing they are supposed to plan for, handle and overcome? That is like a surgeon killing a patient and saying, "Well, when I cut him open there were just so many damned organs in there. It got too complicated."

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/08/2005 @ 5:08pm

77. Clues to understanding the State of Denial that the Bush Administration finds itself in:

    1. Always discuss problems/issues as being in the future; never in the present.

    2. Always refer to administrative actions as 'coming' but not there yet; consequently failure cannot be clearly defined.

    3. Always claim incomplete knowledge of a self-evident problem; never admit there is a problem.

    4. Always answer a question with a question a la Bush's response to Nancy Pelosi's question about things going wrong with the Katrina recovery effort.

    5. Always keep critics at bay, and most definitely label them as unpatriotic and uncaring.

    6. Always spin the news information; never provide a frank and clear answer to any question to include the most innocent inquiry.

    These are a few elements of the State of Denial in which Bush and his cronies find themselves; there are other elements. Please add your own elements to this list. Recognizing these elements of the State of Denial will help us understand the dissembling character of the Bush Administration.

    The State of Denial is the fifty-fourth state; just behind the new American states of Israel, Great Britain, and Iraq.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 5:28pm

78. Do you mean me Zero?

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/08/2005 @ 5:30pm

79. Actually, from scrolling above, I think you may have meant libsarenuts (at least I hope so) :)

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/08/2005 @ 5:34pm

80. HMAN23

    ALL I am going with that is that the storm passed on Monday and everyone said, they dodged a bullet.

    The Levee broke and all hell broke loose, by Thursday afternoon that 10 mile long relief convoy got in there 4 days later.

    Now while FEMA could have reacted a little quicker and got in there a day before, they did a pretty decent job of pulling together all those resources and coordinating the effort.

    All the criticism, from my vantage point, is overblown, considering all they had to do.

    Its a little akin to saying my dog is not very bright, because I beat him 3 games out of 5 at chess.

    RELATIVE to the scope of area involved, FEMA, yes although slow, has performed a heck of a job.

    The quote I so often use, which is used around the Army, is applicable, because of the very detailed work involved, often it is thankless, until you dont have what you need, then it is awfully important.

    Bottomline, I use it to illustrate how silly I consider some of the criticism. Why?

    Because any AMATUER can say, "Move that supply convoy to the superdome, or drop food and water and med supplies at the convention center"

    PROFESSIONALS asks, and rightfully so for if they didnt supply drops would be ineffective and wasteful, how much water, how much food, what kind of medicines, where are we going to get it, how are we going to package it, how are we going to get it in, who needs it the most, how I am going to sustain it, how am i going to re-fuel and re-supply the suppliers?

    These are but a few questions that MUST be dealt with BEFORE any actual re-supply can take place.

    Thats why I think, a lot this criticism over FEMA is over blown, with regards to the recovery operations.

    While I do acknowledge FEMA was day or two slow, the local authorities in the end bear the brunt of fault for failure to execute their own plan.

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 5:42pm

81. We do need a new New Deal. The question is, are the cowardly Democrats going to propose it, or will they say "that's too liberal"? Sometimes I feel the Dems like being in the minority, and have a great desire to be humiliated by the Republicans....

    Posted by assbaby at 09/08/2005 @ 5:45pm

82. ZERO>>>You gave me a great idea!!!I'll just put all you nutty liberals on my ignore list and then this will turn into a wonderful thought provoking CONSERVATIVE blog....what a great feature

    Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 6:11pm

83. LIBSARENUTS - You gave me an even greater idea. How about you take your right wing crap and return to shallow water. Remember: breath out, then in, then out then in, keep going, I know you can do it.

    Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 6:16pm

84. Zero,

    Here are a couple of links regarding Chertoff and what he said when.

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/02/katrina.response/

    http://hereswhatsleft.typepad.com/home/2005/09/incompetence_1.html (nice "transcript" prepared from an NPR interview with link to NPR).

    I'm all for being fair and waiting until the crisis is over before pointing fingers... but the evidence of federal incompetence already available is overwhelming.

    Posted by wkseattle at 09/08/2005 @ 6:18pm

85. ZERO>>>You gave me a great idea!!!I'll just put all you nutty liberals on my ignore list and then this will turn into a wonderful thought provoking CONSERVATIVE blog....what a great feature

    Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/08/2005 @ 6:18pm

86. CPT:

    I see your points. However, accepting that it took four days to get in there, and you acknowledge that it should have been at least a day sooner, that still leaves three days to discuss. You are right that I do not understand the fine details of what is necessary logistically, but you really think that with all of these resources at the federal government's disposal, including the U.S. military, it simply was not possible to get any semblance of aid for three days? From what I have read, the military seems to be the only entity who has done anything right in this mess. However, I thought the problem was that they were not asked to do anything for several days.

    Also, your assumption seems to imply that the effort to mobilize aid did not start until Monday (after the levees broke). If that is what you meant, it seems to me that this process should have been much sooner. I saw an article indicating that Brown did not dispatch 1000 from FEMA until 5 hours afterwards. If you mean that the process was started before the storm, but needed to be expanded because of the levees, this highlights the incompetence in federal planning. The massive flooding was not a freak event that nobody thought could happen. FEMA ran an exercise on it in 2004; Director Brown, Chertloff and even Bush were briefed on the likelihood beforehand, in many pre-storm interviews, Brown said FEMA was preparing for the worst-case scenario. Just because some news sources made it seem like N.O. dodged a bullet on Monday morning, was there some kind of order that reversed everything put in place prior? If those resources were truly planning for the worst-case, they should have still been ready and there later in the day when it became abundantly clear things were heading the other way.

    I guess my main takeaway is that even given the logistical problems that came to bear, there seems to have been a problem with preparation, at all levels. However, if everyone was indeed planning for the worst case scenario, someone at the federal level should have recognized that local officials would not be able to handle this - indeed, Blanco even said so in her Aug. 27 request to Bush. Now, maybe it was due to bureaucratic issues at FEMA, or the recent weakening of the authority given to FEMA to pro-actively address natural disasters. However, I cannot see how you get to the conclusion that the sole blame will fall on the laps of the governor and mayor.

    Posted by Hman23 at 09/08/2005 @ 6:20pm

87. Another reason for a WPA-type program:

    The media reported that 1.3 trillion cords of lumber was lost in Mississippi alone as a result of Hurricane Katrina.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/08/2005 @ 6:31pm

88. .

    It's Time for a New "New Deal"

    KVH wants a new New Deal for New Orleans. Right. But let's glance at the Old Deal that turned that legendary city into a mountain of failure. Bob Herbert, in today's NY Times gives us an idea of just how low New Orleans had fallen well before Katrina struck. It was overrun with political corruption, crime in the streets, unemployment, disease and illiteracy. What caused that?

    The marvelous city we remember dated to the 19th century and grew iconic in the first half of the 20th. It was then that the town developed its delicious aroma, its jazz, its laughter, the mix that made the Big Easy so palatable. Part of that time was also Jim Crow, and however relaxed its segregation, a white, racist establishment ruled the roost. That came to an end forty years ago. Out went segregation. Out went the white sheriffs, out went the white establishment. In came Civil Rights, one man one vote, we shall overcome, black power.

    The result is what? That Katrina vanden Henden is pulling out her hair and demanding a new New Deal.

    KVH and Krugman and Sheer want to repair a breach that predates the hurricane. They speak of a breach that began when govt stopped serving the public good. But the deteriorations of New Orleans spans a time that included the administrations of Carter and Clinton. Just as the problem of the levees was not specific to the GW Bush administration. In fact the section of the levee that broke had been brought into first class shape under GW Bush. We are talking of repairing a breach unrelated to the current administration.

    By "using govt to serve the public good" they mean using the federal govt to repair urban disasters like New Orleans, Newark, Washington DC. Their new New Deal would turn the United States from fifty largely self governing jurisdictions into a unitary state under a central regime which would not tolerate incompetent or corrupt local administrators.

    That really is the challenge facing the Republic. Will the inability of some local populations to govern themselves force the entire country to abandon local democratic self govt.

    That is what the statists want. The socialist countries of Europe are their model. They mean to use the failure of local black administrations, and sympathy for their mis-served populations as a moral shoe horn for turning the US into a centralized socialist state.

    .

    Posted by nacl at 09/08/2005 @ 6:32pm

89. HMAN23

    Sorry for not clarifying in detail, but I check back from time to time and I dont explain in detail for brevity sake.

    It takes at least 3 days (too many variables depending on circumstances)to mobilize FEDERAL active-duty troops and send them anywhere, and even then it would only be a marginal bare minimum force. An additional 2-3 days for troops to get there in sizable numbers, now certain units are always standby, but for this, it is near impossible to prepare for every contigency, we prep for most likely.

    What we should take away is that in terms of "response" for a Hurricane, the ACTIVE FEDERAL troops responded as best they could. Remember we are arrayed to FIGHT wars, natural disaster we are not structured to respond, the way many want us to, I believe it was 2days BEFORE it hit, that they knew it was coming, over the weekend, so you call troops in and tell them to get ready would take even longer, REMEMBER we cant respond until we KNOW what the extent of the damage is , in order to start planning appropiately. Thats why the National Guard under the Governor is better able to respond first, why bc they are simply closest.

    Posted by CPT at 09/08/2005 @ 6:43pm

90. I'm a subscriber and avid reader of The Nation and I blog at www.mediacurmudgeon.com. Here is my latest blog sheds some light, perhaps, on Bush's incompetent response to Katrina:

    "Bush Has an MBA

    W is the only president in U.S. history with an MBA, which not only says a lot about Bush but also a lot about MBAs.

    I try to keep this blog focused on management, business, and strategic issues in the media and be, well, a media curmudgeon. I'm interested primarily in media management, but I couldn't help think of the type of media management we've seen by the Bush administration in the last five years and, especially, in the last week in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina. The Bush people are trying to manage the media the same way most large corporations try to manage the media--send out polished press releases that contort information in their favor, only talk in tightly scripted messages that put only the most positive spin on things, never take responsibility, and make excuses in convoluted, fact-filled language. It's MBA Speak.

    MBAs love spread sheets, numbers, and "facts." Bush is notorious for wanting numbers and facts, and when he speaks he uses MBA Speak to spit out numbers (5.6 million meals, 65 million bottles of water, etc.). But the main stream media (MSM), blogs, reporters, and folks are wondering out loud why it took Bush and the federal government so long--several days--to respond to the New Orleans disaster. I think the answer is that Bush thought like the MBA he is. He probably said to himself, "Let's gather all the facts and information we can so we can see how bad it is so we can respond with adequate resources but not over-respond and waste resources, especially money." That's what an MBA bean counter would have done, and that's more than likely what Bush did.

    I believe that this type of MBA risk-benefit analysis was behind the cutting of FEMA's budget and not giving enough money to the Army Engineers to secure the levees near New Orleans for a Category 5 hurricane, just a Category 3 hurricane. I can hear the bean-counters now, "too expensive to prepare for a low-probability event." These iceberg cynics, as Oscar Wilde said, know the price of everything, but the value of nothing, especially the value of human life (other than their own, on which they place an exorbitantly high value).

    In one of my favorite books of the last several years, titled Managers Not MBAs, author Henry Mintzberg argues that the approach of most American graduate business schools to educating leaders, particularly Harvard, where Bush got his MBA, is "undermining our leadership, with dire economic and social consequences." Mintzberg believes graduate business schools teach that analysis is everything, make graduates into number crunching calculators, not people managers, teach them to be mercenaries, and teach them that with analysis and numbers they can manage any organization. He writes, "MBA graduates who believe they can manage anything are quite simply a menace to society." It seems his criticism is valid when applied to Bush.

    Another book I enjoyed about Bush was psychiatrist Justin Frank's Bush on the Couch: Inside the Mind of the President. Frank writes about how Bush consistently downplays his previous problems as unimportant or harmless college pranks and writes, "And his denials might be less troubling if they didn't fit so neatly into his lifelong pattern of implying that he has never done anything wrong." It seems Frank's analysis is valid when applied to Bush's recent behavior in the aftermath of Katrina.

    If we look at major media companies through the same MBA eyeglass as we look at the Bush administration, some interesting parallels become apparent. The Bush government is full of MBAs, lawyers, and ex-business people (mostly white males) who run the government by cold numbers and for the benefit of themselves and the rich (contributors). The major media companies are run by the same type of people, by the cold numbers, and for the benefit of themselves and the rich (stockholders). Bush and his henchmen run the government by pandering to voters, not serving them, so they can stay in power. Media moguls run their companies by pandering to their audience, not by serving them, so they can stay in power. In both cases, the motive is greed for power and money. The motive is not to serve the public, especially a poor, black public.

    If you are poor and black (poor is probably worse than black), the MSM don't want you because advertisers don't want you. The Bush government doesn't want you, and is cutting welfare, social security, and health benefits ("starving the best") so you will disappear. If the right-wingers and Bush don't want you, why in the world would they want to rescue you?

    Mintzberg believes MBAs have no soul. We know MSM moguls have no soul (but many of their reporters we now know do). We have seen clear demonstration that the Bush government has no soul. But I believe the images on television this week and reports in the press and on the Web will wake up America to the absence of soul and compassion in many MBA-run media and in the Bush government. I believe this realization will translate into lack of support for the soulless and into support for returning soul to the city where the soul of America was put to music in America's only original art form, jazz. Let's hear it for more jazz and fewer MBAs."

    Posted by CHWarner at 09/08/2005 @ 6:50pm

91. Sigh...

    second article now from Katrina....trying to turn "Katrina" into political rallying point for a "New New Deal"....

    and what was the first thing she said, that she thought was "shameless"....the fact that Rush Limbaugh predicted that people on the Left, like her...would use "Katrina" for political purposes!

    Oddly, this isn't that UN-familiar....if you'll remember the calls for "sacrifice" after 9/11...i.e. tax cut repeals....and more foreign aid, more "international co-operation", and even "gas conservation"....all Hot Ticket items for the Left that never got the light of day in the 1990s, but which "9/11 shows are needed now!"

    Win some elections, Katrina....THEN you get to tell us we need a "New New Deal"....but don't try to get it passed during a national crises. "Sell it" during an election campaign!

    Oh...wait....sorry, forgot....THAT is too hard!

    Posted by Mask at 09/08/2005 @ 7:02pm

92. VRWC and all, how typical. If people call for public works, their expectation is the stalinist states of eastern europe. Actually, it is the right who upholds such a model, with their endless ideological defense of the party line, regardless of what mayhem it is responsible for. Yes, good buddies, the "democrats" in Louisiana helped you all and your speculating ruling class buddies ruin the lives of people down there, just as the "democrats" ran interference for you creeps back when you all were disenfranchising voters in Florida and using brownshirt tactics in election offices to get your punk fratboy into the white house back in 2000. Their error is that they're more afraid of the working poor then they are of you, and so they continue to feed you raw meat in the hope you'll go away. That won't be going on too much longer, I don't think, since both factions of you are soon going to be feeling some real heat on your over fed asses.

    By the way, anybody notice some heckler down in New Orleans told Cheney to go fuck himself today? Ah yes, the American way. Soon it will bloom in ways neither ruling class party will be expecting, provided we all work hard and insightfully.

    Bottom line: Cuba,some pissant communiss country, does a better job of protecting its population during storms then the mighty U.S. does. Clearly there's something to be learned there, and the best can be taken and the dross left behind, just like any other idea. Bottom line two: The population of New Orleans has a right of return, and new deal or what have you, the so-called left had better get behind their right of return with all the environmental caveats they want, but support the right of return of the black population to New Orleans. We know the right won't support it. Fuck them. They and their kind are almost through. A few more disasters like this, and they'll be lucky they don't end up a theater of heads on sticks. But the left better get its shit together, and support the rights of the people of New Orleans to rebuild their lives.

    Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/08/2005 @ 7:14pm

93. MASK and all you right wingers out there: It is only a matter of time before the neocon philosophy in action comes to its fruition. It is a philosophy marked by selfishness for the benefit of the powerful, increasing the wealth of the "haves and have mores", lack of interest in the public welfare and the greater good, social darwinism etc. All of it was shoehorned into power by appealing to the warped morality of the religious zealots in order to cobble together a coalition of the greedy and the control freaks.

    Once entrenched its demise unfolds ironically from the very policies and actions which sold it to begin with. Only the mechanism that enlightens the masses to throw off their chains remains to be revealed. Will it be the quagmire of war? Will it be more needless deaths during the inevitable next disaster? Will it be cataclysmic climate change from piggish gorging on the fossil fuels tha cause global warming? Will it be economic upheaval caused by reckless and irresponsible fiscal policy coupled with massive debt?

    Or will it be some other unforseen yet inevitable consequence of the shortsighted and foolish neocon philosophy? The answer is as yet unclear, only the inevitable collapse is visible on the horizon. Too bad that those who did not vote for this have to endure the crisis spawned by the neocon cabal before they can be free of its odious and backward looking policies.

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/08/2005 @ 8:10pm

94. JR jr.

    Seriously, if I agree that the people of NO have a "right of return", though I don't see it in the constitution, what remains to be demonstrated is that they have a right to have you pay for them to rebuild their cesspool.

    If they want to live there, I can understand that. But why you, through your tax dollars, should have to pay for their misadventure escapes me.

    If they want to rebuild, and if they have the means and will to make NO a reasonably secure place to live, good for them.

    But why do you feel you are obligated to pay for it?

    Posted by jonb at 09/08/2005 @ 8:14pm

95. Or did you think somebody else should pay for it?

    Posted by jonb at 09/08/2005 @ 8:15pm

96. ILP

    Reading your post, I see strong reminders of the class warfare of Marx.

    DO you see what I mean?

    Posted by jonb at 09/08/2005 @ 8:16pm

97. The problem with a WPA type of organization today to serve the poorest of our citizens, by providing them with work, is that it wouldn't work.

    The character of the american poor is quite different than it was when my father worked for the CCC planting trees.

    This change is due to the corrosive effects of public welfare, among other things.

    Posted by jonb at 09/08/2005 @ 8:31pm

98. Guess what, guys. I'm a property owner just like you. Own a house, own a car, etc and so forth. I pay taxes just like you. You know what? I don't care. Unlike you, I don't identify myself with the things I am lucky enough to own, view them as tools, in fact. They are not me. Do you understand that? Probably not. But I'll go slow, because I understand the right wing needs an IEP, okay? NO, I don't mind paying taxes. Do not care. La de dah. Okay? When I was a kid, I lived on the street. I had nothing. And I survived, because I grew up in an era when people trusted the public sector, and supported it. Communities were tighter knit, because everybody wasn't working their damn asses off just to keep food on the table, because the infrastructure wasn't cut to ribbons. Oh yes, it posed it's own difficulties, same old racist classist shit, but nothing like now. Do you understand that?

    And unlike you, I've made myself understand that it's my ass in the crosshairs, for simply daring to breathe, for wanting an idea of freedom that moves past commodified existence. Are you following me? Probably not. Look it up if you don't understand the term. But I've been watching you "libertarians" argue for a version of liberty in which people are chained to what they own since I was a member of your moron party back in 1976- Roger Macbride and Paul Hospers days-, and if I still believed your sillyass notion that capitalism will just let people who aren't interested in the market alone, I'd be down with you. But you're full of shit, okay? People drive economy, or it drives them. We're going to have a healthy public sector in this country, whether you want it or not. And if capitalism can't live with that, then we'll just have to live without capitalism, okay? Okay.

    As for the constitution, it is subject to amendment. I don't care if there's a right of return in it or not, and further, as you make plain, if it was your stuff we were talking about, we'd be talking about a right of return, wouldn't we, phonys? Now, go on and pick an easier opponent.

    Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/08/2005 @ 8:33pm

99. Resident told VP Dick Cheney to go F* himself. Priceless !!

    http://www.nocloo.com/Cheney_090805.wmv in Windows Media format. Fox News has edited out this part from their online news feed.

    Posted by nocloo at 09/08/2005 @ 8:57pm

100. I would like to point out the difference between blaming and demanding accountability. The Bushies are doing everything they can to avoid accountability while at the same time trying to direct blame everywhere else. It's shameful.

     Posted by bookmanjb at 09/08/2005 @ 9:12pm

101. You missed my point, Jr.

     My point was simply that building a city in a place where it makes no sense to build a city is not something I would spend money on. Yours or mine.

     Move the silly thing upstream 20 miles or so, and it would make sense.

     If you are going to talk about "rights", you need to clarify what you mean.

     A legal right is something established in the laws of the land. For example, the right to elective abortion.

     This should not be confused with a moral right.

     I was going to list some examples of moral rights, but I realized there is no concensus.

     When people assert a moral right, they do so within a moral framework agreed to by the parties.

     It is, I suppose, a moral right you were referring to.

     On what basis do you assert a moral right for people to live in places which are extraordinarily expensive to make safe, and not very pleasant? With (I think) the implied moral right to be provided with funds to make such places safe, without limitation.

     BTW, I would make a poor libertarian. I think government at all levels should provide opportunities for and support of all lawful arts and endeavors.

     Posted by jonb at 09/08/2005 @ 9:12pm

102. Results of latest Pew Research Center poll:

     The American public is highly critical of President Bush's handling of Hurricane Katrina relief efforts. Two-in-three Americans (67%) believe he could have done more to speed up relief efforts, while just 28% think he did all he could to get them going quickly. At the same time, Bush's overall job approval rating has slipped to 40% and his disapproval rating has climbed to 52%, among the highest for his presidency. Uncharacteristically, the president's ratings have slipped the most among his core constituents ­ Republicans and conservatives.

     However, the public also faults state and local governments, as well as the federal government, for the response to Katrina and its aftermath. While 58% think the federal government has done only a fair or poor job in reacting to the devastation along the Gulf Coast, about half (51%) give sub-par ratings to state and local governments in Louisiana and Mississippi.

     The storm and recent spike in gas prices have triggered a major shift in public priorities. For the first time since the 9/11 terror attacks, a majority of Americans (56%) say it is more important for the president to focus on domestic policy than the war on terrorism. While most Americans are already feeling the pinch from higher gas prices, nearly half (46%) say they are very concerned the hurricane will send the nation into an economic recession.

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 9:15pm

103. Zero: I know the links I'd posted weren't quite what you sought. I've heard similar anecdotes about how Chertoff learned about the hurricane but can't confirm them. I suspect those anecdotes are embellishments of other comments he made.

     I agree that it's hard to single out someone specific and assign blame just yet. However, I do feel strongly that leadership and accepting responsibility go hand in hand. Moreover, when a part of the US looks like a third world country for much of a week due to a predicted event, it's clear that mistakes were made. While these mistakes likely occurred at every level of government, the arguments that shift much of the burden of the blame to local officials is inherently disingenuous. These arguments typically suggest that poor local utilization of emergency plans made the situation worse and thereby impeded the ability of FEMA et al. to respond quickly and effectively. However, the role of federal emergency response is by definition to take up the slack for local authorities in a situation of national significance. If the scope of the event was too big for FEMA in the first few days, then surely it was also too big for the locals. FEMA is supposed to have plans for worst case scenarios of national significance (http://www.fema.gov/pdf/ofm/9mis_031103.pdf -- a vague mission statement, but there's a telling bullet on pp.3). Yet Chertoff admits that they did not consider the case in which the levee would suffer more than a small breach. Why not? This argument to deflect blame from the feds can only make sense if the full breaching of the levees is not considered nationally significant. Yet it was considered one of the top three "issues" of significance in a FEMA report that I see often quoted these days. The logic required to shift the lion's share of responsibility to local officials is faulty. It only works in an ideological framework wherein the federal government is not ultimately responsible for responding to natural emergencies even if they are of national significance. Personally, I disagree with this view of the role of gov't.

     What I really want to see is someone near the top of the federal food chain stand up and take some responsibility for shortcomings in the overall response. I'd have more respect for whoever did so. To me, national leadership implies responsibility at the federal level.

     Posted by wkseattle at 09/08/2005 @ 9:28pm

104. Freiheit - Are you saying that there are not a lot of people in this country who have to work hard just for the basics (unless substance abuse is involved)? Or are you reacting to the specific word choice (food on the table)?

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 9:34pm

105. It's you who misses the point. "Move the silly thing upstream". Does right of return preclude the right to a state sponsored, informed discussion on how to rebuild the city? No, it doesn't. Those folks have lived in that city, that's where their home is. Obviously environmental adjustments have to be made. The question is- do you involve them in the dialogue and the rebuilding, or is it done for them? Now, you know that if capitalist developers go in there and call the shots, those folks are going to end up with nothing except a casino riddled oceanfront hideout for the wealthy. So right of return is not a moral question. It's a concrete question. That city is where they've made their home, some for generations. It has to be rebuilt. After what they've been through, do you think people are going to have all that hard a time adjusting to a public works program that takes their needs into consideration? Yeah, it's going to be expensive. Yeah, mistakes are going to be made. But they aren't going to be as numerous, or as murderous, as they are if the speculator classes get ahold of that city. And that's what's on the agenda right now. Watch and see.

     Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/08/2005 @ 9:35pm

106. As for Freiheit, I contend that you need to get out and look around a little more. There are lots of people in exactly the situation I described, working their asses off just to keep food on the table. What's "few"? Three million? Five million? They're out there, pal.

     As for capitalism and the discipline it imposes, how it works people away from substance abuse, that's an argument that's made at a time when deregulation and destruction of the public sector has seen alongside it a steady growth in drug abuse. Believe me when I tell you there are a lot more damn junkies in the streets of this city then there were when there were adequate social programs that addressed their needs back in the late 1970s. I was there.

     Socialism doesn't force people to all think the same. You've not been to any socialist country. Go to Cuba. Go to the countryside See if you can find ten people who think the same outside the party. It's just as diverse in expression- maybe more so- than this country, much of which can't even abide the idea of a bare breast on television. And my tendency, which I won't bother to mention here, constantly hosts seminars in which we are accosted by recruiters and whoever else wants to show up. It's a democratic tendency. Learn about socialism before you make generalizations like that.

     Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/08/2005 @ 9:43pm

107. JonB, Dude!!! What is a "lawful art"? I am sitting on my hands in anticipation. Also, as a bonus request, I really need for you to share with us all, about how the character of the poor has changed since your daddy planted trees for the CCC. Do they talk funny? (or funnier now?)Are the dietary habits different? Hey Jon... you, better than most of us, are a supremely qualified, cultural anthropologist. My wisdom receptacle awaits.

     So glad you are back!!!

     Bloppy

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 9:45pm

108. Interesting..

     JAYAR in a previous post asks why people fear a Stalinist state resulting from following his political ideology.....

     and then compliments CUBA!

     LOL!

     Posted by Mask at 09/08/2005 @ 9:48pm

109. Just got done watching C-span which had an interview with the Louisiana National Guard. After hearing the testimony of these brave men I believe that people may have gotten an incomplete picture of what happened in New Orleans. Telvision cameras, nor reporters can give a complete and accurate picture. They are narrow in their scope. For example did everyone on this board know that 400 Louisiana National Guard, as well as some New Orleans police officers were at the New Orleans Superdome? Did everyone on this board know that the a ranking member of the New Orleans police department who was at the Superdome has said that there were two (not 10 or 20) reported attempted (emphasis on attempted) rapes and that the culprits were apprehended? Did everyone on this board know that FEMA, which is a coordinating unit of government with only about 2,500 people working for it, was on the scene before Katrinia hit? Did everyone on this board know that the Convention Center was never supposed to be an evacuation center? Did everyone on this board know that the Superdome was surrounded by water,and a bus evacuation route was not immediately obvious to officials? Did everyone on this board know that to evacuate people from the Superdome they had to go over a ramp, through a hotel and on to another street in order to load people on buses? Did everyone on this board know that there have been more air rescues in this disaster as compared to any other disaster in American History? I could go on at nauseum. I think most of us our familiar with the term "fog of war" well I would like to submit a new term "flood fog". The television camera is a fantastic instrument but it can not tell the complete/whole truth. It can only focus on one thing at a time. It will take time to figure out what exactly happened or didn't happen. After hearing some interviews, with people who were there and part of the rescue effort,I contend that too many of us have been jumping to conclusions that are unwarranted---Len Mosse

     Posted by Len Mosse at 09/08/2005 @ 9:52pm

110. Mask - Did you actually read Jayarjunyah's post? To take what he wrote and summarize it as he "compliments CUBA" indicates either that you lack any discernment or are willfully misrepresenting the point.

     This is such a typical neo-con game: take some position, misstate it, then attack the misstatement, oh and attribute it to all liberals.

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 9:58pm

111. Man Kind wants to control the environment around him/her. It is extremely frustrating for everyone when the environment consistently shows us our limitations.We want to lash out and blame someone or something, when in fact the blame is with all of us to foolishly think that we, because we are Americans, are immune to such disasters.---Len Mosse

     Posted by Len Mosse at 09/08/2005 @ 10:00pm

112. Mask, A big tough guy like you worried about Cuba? Hey Mask, they gave us the Cuba Libre, (not to mention the offer of a bunch of doctors to help with the Katrina mess). What in hell is wrong with that. So what if they are a little bit "pink". Don't you cook your steaks the same way.

     With concern,

     Bloppy

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 10:01pm

113. Hey Freiheit, Do you have a problem with conformity?

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 10:15pm

114. Freiheit - your travel agent must love you!

     You should probably work on your word choice a bit. I think that when you say socialism, you are referring to various states that have implemented certain components of socialism, what is often called state socialism. This is NOT socialism. In the DDR, you saw state socialism, the failure of state-controlled planning. Socialism is an ideology.

     How on earth are you connecting Cuba, Vietnam, China (communist countries) with Saudi Arabia - that they have a controlled press? Kind of confused thinking going on here.

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/08/2005 @ 10:18pm

115. Hey Freiheit, My dad says it's ok to spar with your ass on his computer because you are kind of arrogant, and maybe out of touch with reality. So fool, bring it on.

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 10:28pm

116. Where is that NACL?

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 10:30pm

117. WOW! THIS IS RIGHT ON. MAYBE THE TIDE WILL START TO TURN SOON. TOO BAD IT ALWAYS SEEMS TO TAKE A CATASTROPHY THAT HURTS A LOT OF INNOCENT PEOPLE BEFORE A CORRECTION FOR THE BETTER BEGINS. TOO BAD THAT WHEN THE "BETTER" GETS HERE EROSION TOWARDS THE WORSE STARTS ALL OVER AGAIN. GUESS THE BRAIN POWER JUST ISN'T UP TO THE JOB!!!

     Posted by Wilder Foote at 09/08/2005 @ 10:35pm

118. Freiheit, Please , Is that it punkass? I expected better. (My dad said that you are a bit of a pussy and a loser, besides. I think that he may be right).

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 10:41pm

119. Hey ladies, Coulter is a washed-up crack head. Ms. Necrophilia 2005. What a "hot" babe. Leave it to wingnuts to worship at her altar.

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 10:44pm

120. Zero, yeah, I do mind "piping down"

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 11:01pm

121. Zero, Did this stuff come to you via Ken Mehlmans culo? I'm not buying for one second. You have epic cheek to make excuses for the buttheads who are currently running this country. Apologia for incompetence is just the same as having blood on your own hands. Don't ever forget that, asshole.

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 11:16pm

122. Zero, Did this stuff come to you via Ken Mehlmans culo? I'm not buying for one second. You have epic cheek to make excuses for the buttheads who are currently running this country. Apologia for incompetence is just the same as having blood on your own hands. Don't ever forget that, asshole.

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 11:22pm

123. Sorry about the repeat post. But, I am not sorry about the content.

     Nighty-night wingers, (unless, of course, you have the balls to spar)

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 11:25pm

124. NaCl, Come on loser, show us all how tough your really are.

     I await

     Posted by bloppy at 09/08/2005 @ 11:38pm

125. Hey Frank, Love to all of you.

     regards,

     Posted by bloppy at 09/09/2005 @ 12:01am

126. VRWC I suppose you also believe that all the troops in Iraq are red state christians. Get your head out of your ass, help is coming from all directions.

     Posted by Friscodog at 09/09/2005 @ 12:05am

127. Frisco, VRWC is a stinking, f-head, idiot. Better to get some sleep or take a dump, than respond to this pendejo

     Posted by bloppy at 09/09/2005 @ 12:13am

128. Attention Wingers, Let's meet tomorrow night. I will destroy you.

     Posted by bloppy at 09/09/2005 @ 12:15am

129. FRANKGRITS: I've been having anxiety attacks just thinking of what is happening to our country, especially as it relates to this illegal and immoral war in Iraq. I can't begin to imagine how you must feel, having a child being sent over there.

     Posted by rain man at 09/09/2005 @ 12:22am

130. Zero:

     Your comments are well taken. Perhaps a bit of hyperbole on my part---catastrophes can happen that will put all authorities at a loss. However, as I understand it, the hurricane event itself was not the immediate cause of much of the suffering in NO that garnered so much attention. It was the flooding caused by failure of the man-made levees. Such an event can and should be planned for both locally and nationally. The resulting conditions can be and were anticipated. All engineered structures have a design basis and when the public safety is at issue, disaster and failure scenarios are a part of that design basis.

     I don't mean to ignore the damage and suffering in other locales that were due directly to the hurricane. Nor do I excuse local failures in planning in NO or anywhere else. But in NO, the conditions were predicted as a result of the failure of man-made structures. Hence, I don't believe that nothing could have been done better when a lack of planning is admitted at the highest levels. That said, I agree that there are still many unknowns.

     As a last thought, in a time of crisis I think everyone is thirsting for leadership and accountability---and there are shortcomings on that front as well.

     Posted by wkseattle at 09/09/2005 @ 12:28am

131. .

     BLOPPY

     Where is that NACL? . . . I await.

     Hi. Here I am.

     I'm a human being. What are you?

     Are you visiting this planet?

     How did you get here? Did someone leave your cage open?

     If you are asking when will I make a contribution to this thread, I already made one, at 6:32PM. Moreover, in KVH's previous thread, "Have You No Shame" I riposted to you at 12:04AM.

     You made no reply. Not that I expected or wanted one. So, good night. I'll see you in my dreams - if I've eaten too much.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/09/2005 @ 12:42am

132. Frank:

     I'm a 62 yr old vet, but my eyes still well up with tears & I get a strange feeling in my throat when I read stuff like SGT. Jefferies wrote. I know what 1st sgts. are like , & I guaranty they are NOT soft sentimental people. When they say things like he did, it comes from the bottom of their heart & soul.

     Frank, may God protect your son & all the other sons & daughters over there, (assuming She cares,) because we know our government doesn't.

     Posted by Chuck at 09/09/2005 @ 12:49am

133. Nacl, Wake up after your "hot pockets" and syrup induced torpor.

     I am calling you out because you fucked with a friend of mine a few posts back..All of this threatening crap about urine samples, and " I know where you live" is the stuff of a pussy man, extremist, winger clown. I have read your ranting, butthead stupid posts, and I ain't even worried about your ass.

     you are the biggest, punkass out there.

     Sleep well, pussy man

     Posted by bloppy at 09/09/2005 @ 01:06am

134. For Zero and anyone else interested in the interplay of the LA guard, federal assistance, etc., here's a new story at the NYTimes website. The URL is too long to paste here, but the title of the article is "Political Issues Snarled Plans for Troop Aid." It clarifies some issues mentioned here. As the title suggests, it looks like political considerations trumped the immediacy of the disaster in LA. Perhaps not surprising, but a sad state of affairs if the article is fully accurate.

     Posted by wkseattle at 09/09/2005 @ 01:47am

135. .

     BLOPPY

     you fucked with a friend of mine a few posts back..All of this threatening crap about urine samples, and " I know where you live"

     I very much doubt that you have a friend. And I know I haven't told anyone I know where they live, except perhaps with reference to a septic tank.

     That is where you might take a dip, to cool off. If that doesn't lower your blood pressure, slit a wrist.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/09/2005 @ 01:52am

136. NACL

     "I'm not just a member of warmongerer's anonymous, I'm also the president"

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 02:15am

137. Excellent! Every popular movement must have a common goal that describes us, elevates and unifies us. An interesting article in the new Christian Science Monitor, "America: Hungry for Spirituality", http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0830/p13s01-bogn.html differentiates between orthodoxy and spirituality, tracing it's history in America from the early 1800s through the first World Parliament of Religions, carried forward by "thought leaders" up to the present. The "Spiritual Left" embraces the unifying components of all of the world's religions, instead of the divisiveness of historical circumstances. It embraces creative free will and the investigation of life for oneself, instead of by one's adherence to a code of laws. It embraces a love of God as the result of experience, mistakes made and wisdom gained, instead of as a matter of course. It is an internal awareness instead of an external garment.

     "Perhaps a striking illustration of its cultural influence came last week in a Newsweek/Beliefnet survey, which revealed that 79 percent of Americans - and a remarkable 68 percent of evangelicals - said they believe good people of other faiths can gain salvation, a position contrary to Christian orthodoxy," the article reads.

     Hearts have been blown open and the flag of humanity may be raised. What we do for one another has never been more important.

     Posted by dmbones at 09/09/2005 @ 02:29am

138. As long as political parties behave as economic interest groupings, and political representatives behave as prima donnas, the low quality (or lack) of public service in the USA will continue, if americans dont believe in national solidarity, why should they blame this "Katrina" situation, it simply is the consequence of what americans fundamentally believe, covering their own individual needs while ignoring their fellow co-citizens. It will not work..............and you will pay even more in the future if you dont change this "Only the fittest will win" philosophy.

     Posted by areyouok at 09/09/2005 @ 03:30am

139. Great! Katrina Van...finally sees an opportunity to turn over everything to the Federal Govt. Then some of you have the nerve to say that's not socialism...

     It's really getting to be a stretch to find any honest or intelligent dialogue from people who think Cuba is a role model.

     I will start the "Help a leftist-send them to Cuba" fundraiser first thing tomorrow. Jayar I know will be happy to lead the immigrant delegation. Bloppy may have trouble though as Castro doesn't tolerate children who can't fall in step with their leaders. ILP, you are going to have to join them given your inability to accept a society with conservative Christians (Castro will love it as you proclaim your atheist mantras he loves so much). Some of you lefties will not fare well at all as Castro imprisons or kills those who can think. Those who believe they can think but are actually deluded will simply wind up working for pennies per day in the sugar fields.

     And because Castro knows just how much you revile the evil "big oil companies", he will probably let all of you spend some time with his boyfriend Chavez. I know the 12 cent per gallon gas will seem appealing, until you find out that the state gets all of your income.

     I keep coming back to the Nation only because it is fascinating to watch the total disintegration of the left.

     As for Dmbones, the name says it all unfortunately.

     Posted by love liberty at 09/09/2005 @ 04:27am

140. How about a WPA program that focuses on alternative energy - building wind farms, developing better solar cells, fuel cells etc. That industry has jobs from engineers to maintenance people - and needs to be implemented in every state. Maybe Mississippi could attemt to become the first state off the grid.

     Does anyone think this is all Bush's fault? Of course not. Just mostly. I am shocked by conservatives ability to twist an issue for their gain. And by liberals' desire to be sensitive and correct! We should take a page from their book and simply become shrill and hysterical until we are placated.

     Posted by Lisa_Gloria at 09/09/2005 @ 08:17am

141. A Republican Governor would have handled the situation better? NO - they can't use that argument. I live in Ohio with a Republican Governor and well, need I say more?

     Posted by Thirdparty at 09/09/2005 @ 08:28am

142. Fact...

     Both catastrophees happened under the Bush administrations' watch. 9/11 and now Katrina, in which they were well informed of happening prior to the horrid events....Nothing but pure incompetence through and through....

     Posted by djmarch at 09/09/2005 @ 09:33am

143. Although the Federal response was sluggish in both Louisiana and Mississippi, the Federals now are blaming officials in Louisiana but not those in Mississippi. Hard to see this as anything other than retaliation against those who had the temerity to complain.

     Posted by barbara_ann at 09/09/2005 @ 11:21am

144. Where to Point the Fingers

     By Charles Krauthammer Friday, September 9, 2005; A25

     In less enlightened times there was no catastrophe independent of human agency. When the plague or some other natural disaster struck, witches were burned, Jews were massacred and all felt better (except the witches and Jews).

     A few centuries later, our progressive thinkers have progressed not an inch. No fall of a sparrow on this planet is not attributed to sin and human perfidy. The three current favorites are: (1) global warming, (2) the war in Iraq and (3) tax cuts. Katrina hits and the unholy trinity is immediately invoked to damn sinner-in-chief George W. Bush.

     This kind of stupidity merits no attention whatsoever, but I'll give it a paragraph. There is no relationship between global warming and the frequency and intensity of Atlantic hurricanes. Period. The problem with the evacuation of New Orleans is not that National Guardsmen in Iraq could not get to New Orleans but that National Guardsmen in Louisiana did not get to New Orleans. As for the Bush tax cuts, administration budget requests for New Orleans flood control during the five Bush years exceed those of the five preceding Clinton years. The notion that the allegedly missing revenue would have been spent wisely by Congress, targeted precisely to the levees of New Orleans, and that the reconstruction would have been completed in time, is a threefold fallacy. The argument ends when you realize that, as The Post noted, "the levees that failed were already completed projects."

     Let's be clear. The author of this calamity was, first and foremost, Nature (or if you prefer, Nature's God). The suffering was augmented, aided and abetted in descending order of culpability by the following:

     1. The mayor of New Orleans. He knows the city. He knows the danger. He knows that during Hurricane Georges in 1998, the use of the Superdome was a disaster and fully two-thirds of residents never got out of the city. Nothing was done. He declared a mandatory evacuation only 24 hours before Hurricane Katrina hit. He did not even declare a voluntary evacuation until the day before that, at 5 p.m. At that time, he explained that he needed to study his legal authority to call a mandatory evacuation and was hesitating to do so lest the city be sued by hotels and other businesses.

     2. The governor. It's her job to call up the National Guard and get it to where it has to go. Where the Guard was in the first few days is a mystery. Indeed, she issued an authorization for the National Guard to commandeer school buses to evacuate people on Wednesday afternoon -- more than two days after the hurricane hit and after much of the fleet had already drowned in its parking lots.

     3. The head of FEMA. Late, slow and in way over his head. On Thursday, Sept. 2, he said on national television that he didn't even know there were people in the convention center, when anybody watching television could see them there, destitute and desperate. Maybe in his vast bureaucracy he can assign three 20-year-olds to watch cable news and give him updates every hour on what in hell is going on.

     4. The president. Late, slow, and simply out of tune with the urgency and magnitude of the disaster. The second he heard that the levees had been breached in New Orleans, he should have canceled his schedule and addressed the country on national television to mobilize it both emotionally and physically to assist in the disaster. His flyover on the way to Washington was the worst possible symbolism. And his Friday visit was so tone-deaf and politically disastrous that he had to fly back three days later.

     5. Congress. Now as always playing holier-than-thou. Perhaps it might ask itself who created the Department of Homeland Security in the first place. The congressional response to all crises is the same -- rearrange the bureaucratic boxes, but be sure to add one extra layer. The past four years of DHS have been spent principally on bureaucratic reorganization (and real estate) instead of, say, a workable plan for as predictable a disaster as a Gulf Coast hurricane.

     6. The American people. They have made it impossible for any politician to make any responsible energy policy over the past 30 years -- but that is a column for another day. Now is not the time for constructive suggestions. Now is the time for blame, recrimination and sheer astonishment. Mayor Ray Nagin has announced that, as bodies are still being found and as a public health catastrophe descends upon the city, he is sending 60 percent of his cops on city funds for a little R&R, mostly to Vegas hotels. Asked if it was appropriate to party in these circumstances, he responded: "New Orleans is a party town. Get over it."

     Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/09/2005 @ 11:31am

145. Excellent work as usuals Frankgrits. It will be interesting to see if any wingers can even try to defend Brown's lack of credentials. Funny, in 2000, some questioned whether or not Bush had the credentials to take on the role of president. Many Republicans (my father for example) admitted that Bush may not be a sterling intellect, but he would "surround himself" with the best people. 5 years later, I question whether this came to pass. Slotting Brown for FEMA chief is just another example of the rampant cronyism in the Bush Administration - get a "yes" man/woman as opposed to the one best qualified for the job.

     Posted by Hman23 at 09/09/2005 @ 11:33am

146. JONB, Funny, but I see class warfare in your posts! LOL.

     Do you know who Warren Buffet is? He was interviewed on Nightline a couple years back, shortly before the Bush cut in dividend taxes. He spoke out against the cut. When Koppel asked if opposing tax cuts was class warfare, Buffet replied "If it's class warfare, my class is winning."

     I am not interested in class warfare, nor warfare in general. I was simply making a prediction, a rather simple one to foresee: Neoconservativism contains the seeds of its own demise, or more accurately, it works towards its own destruction by the very policies it promotes. Sadly, those in this country (and other countries) that oppose it will suffer along with those who promote it when the fall inevitably arrives.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 11:36am

147. FREIHEIT, Sorry, but you are wrong. Capitalism actually exploits abuse of self interest. Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming the capitalists this time. In case you haven't noticed, ours is a consumption-driven economy. Many are adicted to their excessive consumption (a "substance abuse" you may not have had in mind when you wrote your post), so much so that they have helped to elect a president whose attitude towards energy conservation is that it should be "voluntary."

     Like it or not, the day will come when energy conservation will be mandatory, even if it isn't imposed by the government. This is because we can't get significant investment in developing alternatives to fossil fuels. But the earth doesn't give a damn about your politics, it will cut you off when the wells run dry no matter who you vote for.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 11:46am

148. LL,

     I'm not going to Cuba any way other than as a tourist, so you better make my ticket "round trip." Besides, seeing how much "liberals" bother most right wingers, I will live out my life in my native USA if for no other reason than to iritate them :-)

     I guess it will do no good to point out that JAYAR wasn't complimenting Cuba, he was noting how open-minded some of its citizens are. You righties need to stop setting up straw men to knock down...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 12:02pm

149. Until the left faces the depression of wages caused by illegal immigrants (in conjunction with the criminals who pay them substandard wages) and the taking of "menial" jobs by these same immigrants,conversations about the WPA are moot: does Katrina really believe that the poorest of NO's ppor could compete for real jobs? Some of these folks have not worked in years or never worked at all - generation after generation of impoverished welfare recipients who lack even the basic initiative to get out when the water starts rising above their knees - any WPA would instantly be populated by immigrant workers - legal and not, as well as traditional blue-collar types (i.e., white). So what Katrina really implies, I suppose, would be massive job training BEFORE a single brick was laid - and you can already smell the corruption implicit in that!

     Posted by jabelson at 09/09/2005 @ 12:03pm

150. Some of the journalists at the scenes of horror could not help but breech the levees of corporate media deception. But don't let that fool you....the shilling for Bush is alive and well, and the blame game that Rove has designed is being cheered on.

     Good read: Shaming the Devil: Imagine the People Who Would Still be Alive...

     CLICK HERE [tvnewslies.org]

     Posted by Reg at 09/09/2005 @ 12:16pm

151. FREIHEIT, put your helmet on before your bike ride, not after. Get my drift???

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 12:24pm

152. "conservyournuts" - (LIBSARNUTS):

     Still not one of you hacks can acknowledge that this all reflects on the failure of Homeland Security and Fema to prepare properly for any disaster since 911. Brown is the archtypal, inept appointee of the BUSH administration......

     Chertoff must have been following the lessons of Rumsfeld!

     YOU GUYS ARE A BUNCH OF SQUIRRELS!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/09/2005 @ 12:26pm

153. Libs

     Interesting article but to stray from your point why is it that this administration and their followers in Congress repeatedly make horrendious blunders that they say they will be investigated.

     Investigations that are still under investigation. What happened to the WMD claims, Halliburton's misapropreation of funds, Colalition Authority's imbezzelment of @ 9 bil, DeLay fund raiseing & racketeering, CIA leak, and now the latest incompentancy fest in dealing with Katrina ( yes there is enough blame on both sides to go around). It still amazes me that they can convect Martha and yet Ken Lay is still out there waiting to be tried. Once again the friends of the right have a pass or at least a stall till it becomes the lessor of the current evil and swept under the rug.

     When will we see these " Investigations" 2010 after the pres gives blanket presidential pardons to all, who is going to give him one?

     Posted by dycel8r at 09/09/2005 @ 12:29pm

154. Cuba and Castro stalinist. An interesting claim. Granted, Cuba have a lot of problems that the party is responsible for, and I have no doubt that the Cuban people have held and will hold them accountable for those errors. Well, there's no room to discuss that point by point here, but I'm sure we can make arrangements whenever you'd like to get trounced in a one on one discussion of this issue. But if I were you, I'd stop talking about stalinism, which was a far more horrendous phenomenon then anything that's going on in Cuba. You sound like those many on the so-called left, who cry "fascism" at every shade of right wing reaction, and have so numbed people to the actual organic and distinctive curve of that development that we're going to have a hard time convincing people of the threat when the real thing comes along. Second, you'd best stop talking to people like me as though we're some wet-behind-the-ears idealist kid from the suburbs who just happened to come across marxist theory and practice. As implied earlier, I will cheerfully mop up the floor with you in any point by point discussion of the validity of the marxist method anytime you'd like to exchange in depth emails. Here and now is not the place, I'll give you a handicap.

     By the way, the richboy screwball in the White House refused help offered by Cuban doctors who are skilled in dealing with precisely these conditions. Scott McLellan says he wants Castro to offer his people "freedom". Sure. The freedom of New Orleans. The freedom to sleep under bridges and wade through rivers of excrement and rotting corpses. No problem.

     Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/09/2005 @ 12:36pm

155. This just in. Brown has been removed from hurricane relief but NOT FIRED. He's been sent back to Washington

     Posted by proudlib at 09/09/2005 @ 1:16pm

156. JABELSON:

     I do not usually bother with posters like you, but your 12:03 post is a huge pile of crap.

     Posted by Hman23 at 09/09/2005 @ 1:47pm

157. HMAN23 - You don't have to bother with me - because I'm not here for you! Which part is crap, BTW - the whole thing? Part of it - or are you just a knee-jerk reactionist who spits without thinking?

     Posted by jabelson at 09/09/2005 @ 1:59pm

158. Jayar,

     If Bush had accepted "help" from Castro and Chavez, millions of conservatives would be marching on Washington and LA to first take Bush's head off and then to LA to kick the Commies out.

     You think only those on the far left are capable of insurrection? We're better at it because we know how to use our weapons (hint, they aren't words or molotov cocktails). It's the primary reason we fight to keep the 2nd Amendment alive and whole.

     Posted by love liberty at 09/09/2005 @ 1:59pm

159. LL, You are becoming detached from reality, I'm afraid... Millions? Maybe dozens, mostly wackos, but not millions.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 2:08pm

160. LL:

     If alive today, what would Jesus' choice of gun be?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 2:08pm

161. Colin Powell will be blasting the government, at all levels (yes, his former boss's people too) for their failures in dealing with Hurricane Katrina.

     LL - now that a federal official as respected as Powell has admitted the level of government under Bush's control failed just as much as the other levels of government in dealing with the hurricane, can you admit that Bush didn't deal with the hurricane the best way he could? Or, are you going to say Powell doesn't know what he's talking about?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 2:14pm

162. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said today, "In two years, there will be no need for American forces."

     We shall see soon, if our media follows up on that comment with President Bush, if he says 2 years is now the timeline, or if he finds a way to say Talabani shouldn't be setting deadlines.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 2:18pm

163. Freiheit:

     so he would drown people?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 2:19pm

164. LL, Another question: What atheist mantras have I been proclaiming? I got a kick out of reading that in your post - I wasn't aware I had been proclaiming any. I don't think I even know any.

     Although I don't expect an answer, you rarely answer my rebuttal posts....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 2:24pm

165. LL - I'd appreciate if you went back to KVH's Sept 5th blog and answer the questions I asked you 4:17am - 4:48am posts.

     Or not, if you can't handle the heat.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 2:27pm

166. LL, I found this:

     In fact, I too do not trust most of what I read about evolution yet, astonishingly, I hold to that old Atheist Mantra that Oliver Reed spoke "Don't eat meat. Don't Drink. Don't smoke. Still die."

     posted at abusivechurches.org

     But I partake in all three of those prohibitions from time to time... :-)

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 2:33pm

167. http://www.wiseass.org/files/katrina1.swf

     Posted by Salunga at 09/09/2005 @ 2:33pm

168. JABELSON:

     "the poorest of NO's ppor could compete for real jobs?" - Crap

     "Some of these folks have not worked in years or never worked at all - generation after generation of impoverished welfare recipients" - Crap

     "who lack even the basic initiative to get out when the water starts rising above their knees" - crap

     "traditional blue-collar types (i.e., white)" - crap

     Satisfied?

     Posted by Hman23 at 09/09/2005 @ 2:33pm

169. ILP:

     LL doesn't explain his reasoning. I get a kick out of him saying athetists believe in "circular logic" because they don't believe in a god.

     How do you know Jesus is god?

     Says so in the bible.

     You realize that's a book written by humans?

     Bible says you'd say that, but to ignore you and trust the words in the bible.

     And he tries to convince everyone that atheists believe in circular logic, but he doesn't? That's a joke.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 2:34pm

170. You DIMocRAT liberals have no shame at all do you...

     Dems Used Katrina to Raise Funds Friday, September 09, 2005

     WASHINGTON -- A new Democratic effort to whip up indignation about the Bush administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina (search) also tried to raise money for Democratic candidates.

     Sen. Charles Schumer (search), a New York Democrat and the head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, issued an appeal Thursday urging people to sign an online petition to fire the Federal Emergency Management Agency's director over his handling of the Katrina response.

     After an inquiry from the Associated Press, the DSCC quickly pulled down the page and said they would give the Red Cross any money raised by the anti-FEMA petition.

     When recipients clicked on a link to the petition, the top center of the screen -- above the call to "Fire the FEMA director" -- had asked for a donation to the DSCC.

     Since Katrina, Democrats have contended the GOP administration badly botched the response, and some have called for the firing of FEMA chief Michael Brown (search).

     Republicans hit back by accusing Democrats of trying to use the human tragedy for political gain. The DSCC letter, the GOP said Thursday, was proof.

     "It's a disgrace to exploit Hurricane Katrina to raise political funds," said Brian Nick, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

     DSCC spokesman Phil Singer said: "While the content of the letter is totally valid, it should never have been linked to a Web site that asks people to contribute to political campaigns."

     Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/09/2005 @ 2:38pm

171. Yeah - I noticed that old Brownie has been kicked back to Washington. For this administration this is about as much of an admission of responsibility or show of accountability as we can expect.

     But of course, according to Chertoff, "Other challenges and threats remain around the world," like .... [please bloggers fill in the blank here]

     Posted by Hman23 at 09/09/2005 @ 2:38pm

172. Who knows what other cutbacks are waiting to kill us.

     Posted by Salunga at 09/09/2005 @ 2:39pm

173. URMYGYRO, Yeah, I saw that a week or two ago from LL. He will respond to my original posts, but usually not respond to my responses. Maybe he's busy....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 2:43pm

174. Libsarenuts:

     breathe. you can do it. take some deep breaths.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 2:43pm

175. one hears a lot these days about how we should be united as a nation during these times of crisis in New Orleans and Iraq.

     of course those calls come mostly from the right which has done much to foster this climate with their smash mouth policies and political style.

     But this has never really been the american way, in fact democracy requires a healthy struggle between the right and the left. this was always so.

     during George Washington's second term, political parties, which had not been anticipated by the constitution writers, divisiveness and party "politicising" was in full force, to the chagrin of the then president. his disappointment in being reviled by the opposition after 40 years of exemplary public service, was seen as the major cause of his not standing for a third term.

     So let's resist the pleas for unity coming from those who have done much to undermine the common weal, and push ahead with our progressive, humane agenda, torpedos be damned, full speed ahead, to forge an america that we and the world can again be proud of

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/09/2005 @ 2:43pm

176. ILP and Urmygyro.

     I will respond later this evening; am departing to earn some $$$$. I promise not to dodge!

     Posted by love liberty at 09/09/2005 @ 2:48pm

177. FREIHEIT, Please don't call me that name.

     Top answer your question (sort of) I think it is irrelevant. The job of elected leaders is to lead, not to ignore problems until the problems get so expensive that it becomes economically profitable to avoid complete upheaval. yeah, sure the profit involved might allow us to escape with only partial upheaval, maybe, when oil gets scarce and today's prices look cheap. But in the meantime lots of working class stiffs get screwed, and that is not even the main problem! The main problem is the production of greenhouse gasses, but don't get me started on that..

     Peak oil for the south central US oil fields was predicted in the 50's and became reality in 72. Since then production in TX and OK has declined and will continue to do so, proving the "theory". Global warming has been confirmed, more recently. It is time NOW, actually it is past time, to act in the best interest of civilization and PUBLICLY FUND research into alternative energy in a significant way.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 2:50pm

178. LL,

     Your original comments about Cuba are the kind that are most upsetting. Not many people, here or elsewhere, would like to see the US converted into North Cuba (though Miami is making a run as N. Havana). The issue is simply learning and improving. One of the reasons I come to this site is to learn. None of us here is a genius, but we benefit from the diversity of opinion present here. This is the current problem with our government. The ranks of opinions is so tight, so small that progress cannot happen. If we look at Cuba, it isn't because they're all that; it's because they do things differently than we do. They might be wrong. Maybe in every instance. But if we don't study they're methods of governing, we can't honestly say we're better.

     It's easy to simply rebuff challenges to "traditional American values" by stating that it is this or that form of evil thinking. But why not throw a little imagination into the mix and see what comes out? Those of us on the left are good with creativity--aren't we all basically actors, musicians, beat poets, and installation artists?

     As for Libsarenuts,

     Take a poll, sir/madam. Find out how many of us on the left are democrats. Then you can address us as such. You might find out that many of us are as despondent with the democrats as you are disgusted by them.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/09/2005 @ 2:51pm

179. hey bible dudes, that thing was written by the best minds of the bronze age

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/09/2005 @ 3:03pm

180. Asked if he was being made a scapegoat for a federal relief effort that has drawn widespread and sharp criticism, Brown told The Associated Press after a long pause: "By the press, yes. By the president, No."

     The balance between strong leadership and caving into outside pressure is so complex, sometimes. So the press forced Brown back to his desk job? I hope the press is prepared to give him a good reference if it ever decides to fire brown completely.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/09/2005 @ 3:05pm

181. tjb:

     so that's an admission by the administration that they govern by public opinion.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 3:10pm

182. ...or maybe god told bush to take brown off the task.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 3:12pm

183. Those of us on the left are good with creativity--aren't we all basically actors, musicians, beat poets, and installation artists?

     Posted by TJBEHRENS1 09/09/2005 @ 2:51pm

     I'm not any of those things (except maybe creative) - I'm a physicist. Lots of physicists are lefties.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 3:13pm

184. Frei, Yup, basically. I would just add that just as the space age added the aerospace industry sector to the economy, an initiative for alternative energy would similarly benefit.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 3:15pm

185. frei-

     you mean the government can be used to help the private sector?

     isn't that blasphemy in your circles?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 3:30pm

186. where's the rugged individualism of our best corporations?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 3:31pm

187. Where are all the true conservatives complaining about the federal government being the guarantor on a ridiculous amount of mortgage loans in this country?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 3:40pm

188. If Bush had accepted "help" from Castro and Chavez, millions of conservatives would be marching on Washington and LA to first take Bush's head off and then to LA to kick the Commies out.

     You think only those on the far left are capable of insurrection? We're better at it because we know how to use our weapons (hint, they aren't words or molotov cocktails). It's the primary reason we fight to keep the 2nd Amendment alive and whole.

     Posted by LOVE LIBERTY 09/09/2005 @ 1:59pm

     Well, the help offered was a large number of physicians. So you scorn doctors because they come from Castro? And you would want to forcibly remove them from the country at the point of a gun if they were here? What would you do for the patients under their care after chasing away the physicians? Are you really so stupid as to react like a nutjob to sincere medical aid and relief from Cuba simply because of an irrational fear of "communism"?

     Do you realize that right now there are communists living in this country? You act as if it is the same as leprosy or the bubonic plague. And you accuse the liberals who post here of being irrational? You sound like a 17th-century pilgrim talking about witches. No offense, LL, but I'm shocked that an adult could think that way...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 3:49pm

189. There will be no new deal of any sort so long as the American public live in its bubble of disinformation. So long as the corporate media remains complicit in supporting and cheerleading for every crime committed by the Bush/PNAC administration, this country will continue to go downhill. The awakening will only come when we all hit rock bottom.

     Don't be lulled into complacency by the momentary aberration of real journalism resulting from first hand contact with the real horrors of Katrina. Profiteering has already begun with no outcry from the media and no investigation into the corruption that continues.

     For how to deal with this: SHAMING THE DEVIL: Imagine the People Who Might Be Alive Today... CLICK HERE [tvnewslies.org]

     Posted by Reg at 09/09/2005 @ 4:22pm

190. Address the idea that the social fabric of N.O. was to rob and steal while people were suffering. Lets also put out there that until people understand who and what they are voting for, nothing with ever change!

     There were millions of poor people that came or where in this country before this "social breakdown". The difference was in the concept of education by all means and work your fingers to the bones for your kids. There was also a heck of a lot more ACCOUNTABILITY, something that is never mentioned in liberal blogs when it comes to social and economic differences here in the US and globally. Until you can grasp the fact that IT IS THE FAMILY or COMMUNITY that makes it work...NOT THE GOVERNMENT. Our government has grown so far out of control, we will never be back to the great country we once were.

     This country is founded on the principle of INDIVIDUAL freedoms and INDIVIDUAL responsibility.

     People choose to make their children go to school. Parents guide their children to make sure they are DOING their work. IT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENTS job to hold our hands.

     The N.O. disaster reminds me of Darwinism. I know most of you hate religion, so I will use this analogy. This is also not a racist statement, so get off your high horse, because white red necks are a part of this as well... The city knew a class 5 hurrricane was coming their way. A survivalist would say, GET OUT. The rest stay, not because they don't have buses running, because they don't get the aspect of responsibility of reading the newspapers and understanding their environment that they are living 10 Feet below sea level and have been warned numerous times that the levies would not protect the city. They had time to leave. Newspapers are sold in stores at .25 a day. READ!! Education!!! There were plenty of poor black people that heeded the warning and left town without the "proper federal evacuation plan".

     When you can get off the idealistic notion that WE as a NATION have to provide and that it first comes with the individual responsibility to WANT to make the COMMITTMENT and have FULL ACCOUNTABILITY, then we are talking.

     There are many successful new PRIVATE SCHOOL programs that are flurishing in the inner cities. They have no unions involved, they have both the students and parent(s) sign a contract that they will follow the strict rules and will hold them accountable. These people want to learn, but the problem is the idealistic get involved and don't have the proper discipline to help others out in this manner.

     One such school just had their 1st year program graduate from the 12 year program...remind you, this is an all black school...99% graduated on time and over 90% are going to college. THIS IS IN one of the POOREST cities in the US.

     Stop blaming Republicans and start telling everyone to look themselves in the mirror and realize that the 60's movement destroyed this country!

     Posted by dancall at 09/09/2005 @ 4:42pm

191. Damn, love liberty, sure wish I knew how to spell Phhhpppptttphhhtt. You don't need to tell me you nuts have guns, my people have been on the receiving end of your version of "liberty" since 1619. As for whether you know enough to accept help when it's offered, even if it comes from people you don't agree with politically, I think we've already established that you and the party you support think it's quite acceptable to triage people who aren't of your racial background or income level. I think we've already established that you are your property, and that you can't think in terms outside of the sixteenth century. As for firearms and the left, I'd just advise you not to speak of that which you do not know. Not everyone is waiting to quietly watch you all shoot your way into power. Claro?

     Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/09/2005 @ 4:46pm

192. Brown was obviously not qualified and he is gone. Now lets get to the issue of the mayor of New Orleans and Governor of Louisiana not following thier own policies and not taking Bush's advice to make it a mandatory evacuation. That Zero is a serious ACCOUNTABILITY issue. It could be said that they marched thier citizens into a death march. THEY DID NOTHING WHEN THEY HAD DAYS TO PREPARE!

     Posted by dancall at 09/09/2005 @ 4:55pm

193. Zero, I think this is the first time I have ever agreed with you 100%. It is sad to hear Howard Dean spouting off that this is a race issue.

     Posted by dancall at 09/09/2005 @ 5:04pm

194. Dancall - "They did nothing when they had days to prepare". Is this hyperbole or your understanding of the facts?

     So the reason so many poor people didn't leave New Orleans is because they are uneducated and irresponsible? I'm going to guess that you're a Republican.

     Also, you're going to have to refresh my memory regarding the destruction of the country in the 60s. Again, I think you're resorting to hyperbole, but maybe not.

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/09/2005 @ 5:04pm

195. Yeah, Houston is a freakin' paradise -- by Republican standards anyway.

     "For Texas, the poverty rate, median household income and percentage of people without health insurance were unchanged in 2004. The state lagged most of the nation. Texas continued to have the highest portion of uninsured of any state, 24.8 percent, the sixth-highest poverty rate and the 35th-highest median household income." -- Houston Chronicle, Aug 31, 2005

     Almost 1/3 of Houston's children live in poverty. Houston's drop out rate is at least 25% though they try not to count them all (as shown on 60 Minutes)

     Posted by masussman at 09/09/2005 @ 5:05pm

196. dancall:

     if you're going to argue darwinism saying those who remained in New Orleans only have themselves to blame, then the same should be argued about the Iraqis.

     Why stay in Iraq under a dictator like Saddam Hussein?

     you wrote:

     "When you can get off the idealistic notion that WE as a NATION have to provide and that it first comes with the individual responsibility to WANT to make the COMMITTMENT and have FULL ACCOUNTABILITY, then we are talking."

     Apply that statement to Iraq. Tell GWB that same thing about the Iraqi citizens. Or is it ok for the U.S. to take care of Iraqis who can't fend for themselves? Hypocritical as usual.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 5:12pm

197. Zero - I hear what you've been saying in numerous posts. There is a risk of a backlash, sympathy building for Bush and his minions, as they are accused of spawning the hurricane, destroying the levees, abandoning poor blacks, etc. On the other hand, so much of what we're seeing played out now is such a vivid demonstration of everything that is wrong about this administration. For once, the media has stopped being a complete lap dog and is actually asking some tough questions. If we can keep the focus on what Bush is doing and not doing, what his people are saying, maybe all the folks out will actually begin to wake from their trance. If we sit back, shut up, let the dust settle, guess what - the Bush clowns will pick themselves back up, invent some new distraction, adjust their teflon and keep on driving our country into the sewer.

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/09/2005 @ 5:14pm

198. DANCALL, You've had your entire life to build your own roads, open your own fire department, and staff your own police force. So I expect that if you ever have need of any services from publicly funded police, fire departments, roads, and any other infrastructure, I expect you to hold true to your beliefs and not ask for help even if you have to die for what you believe.

     In that case I will gladly do my part to help you by ignoring your suffering, if that's what you'd like me to do. Just let me know...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 5:19pm

199. Cancall is it to much acountability to ask why the head of Homeland securitys head is not on the line after all he was suppose to oversee his subordinates.

     Posted by dycel8r at 09/09/2005 @ 5:30pm

200. zero:

     stop pretending like you're actually accomplishing something on this anonymous blog.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 5:30pm

201. ops thats to Dancall

     Posted by dycel8r at 09/09/2005 @ 5:31pm

202. FREIHEIT, sieg heil! :-) just kidding...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 5:31pm

203. I would like to take a giant stop back from this disaster and look at why the Democratic Party always seem to be 2 to 3 steps behind the Republicans for the last 5 years. Before we embark on a "New Deal", we might want to understand where the Democratic Party is today and why they don't enjoy more support from the electorate and media.

     Remember the line "What We Got Here Is a Failure to Communicate!" from the movie "Cool Hand Luke."

     Democrats at the national and local level have this problem. Why is that? Whereas Republicans seem to be calling the shots from the same play book, the Democrats constantly contradict themselves to the point of seeming petty.

     The 25 year old Republican machine easily rips to shreds any lone voices and makes caricatures of the loudest opponents. The SCLM doesn't exist anymore, yet the Republicans still pin the label "Liberal"/"Unpatriotic" on anyone who opposes them.

     The power of this Republican media machine is immense. Consisting of a network of 1,200 Clear Channel radio stations - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Channel_Communications, bible thumping Christian Network and TV Channels with the likes of Pat Robertson and his ilk., Fox Network – part of the Murdock empire - http://rightweb.irc-online.org/ind/murdoch/murdoch.php, the talking heads – Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, conservative talk shows on MSNBC, CNN, PBS and even the SCLM, the Democrats have been literally outflanked and outmanned.

     When you examine on how this could have happened, look no further than the passage of the recent Telecommunications act.

     "RD: Were the Republicans and Democrats equally interested in suppressing debate about the Telecommunications act? Or was it a kind of collusion of the press that automatically happens?

     DB: There's a lot of self-censorship that goes on. This was seen as a business issue, not related to the public. It was of interest to a certain class, to the elite owners of the media, a handful of major corporations that were going to benefit from the passage of this bill. And it was treated entirely as a financial issue. It wasn't treated as a major public issue, which it really is, just as building a highway system is, just as building schools are, as water purification plants are, etc. It's a public issue. The air waves are owned by the public. Our political representatives gave away the public air waves to private entities. These private entities, corporations, don't even pay rent for it. They get it for free.

     Who are these corporations? They're Westinghouse, Disney, Time-Warner. They are Rupert Murdock's Fox Network, General Electric, Viacom. These are the major media corporations. They have enormous amounts of capital. They give money to both political parties. Not one or the other; both. Liberally. And it's not surprising, therefore, that they can influence legislation, and the outcome of the legislation will serve their interests. I mean that's a perfectly rational system. The people are only involved in terms of rhetoric. They're not involved in the process, because the process is run and fueled by money. Ordinary people don't have money. Large corporations, rich individuals, have money. They're able to play the game. The rest of us are bystanders.

     RD: So it's not a democracy in the sense of one person/one vote.

     DB: It's a plutocracy. Demos means "people" in Greek, and "crocy" is a system of government. To what extent do the Demos rule in the United States? They don't. People don't have much say in important areas of decision-making." http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:EFYT-1QQZLgJ:www.nexuspub.com/articl es/1999/may99/control.htm

     The Republican Party is a more disciplined bunch when it comes to towing the party line. Rarely do they contradict each other in public. Dissention means termination and character assassinations. If you're a Republican, expect immediate alienation from the party and the "goodies" it offers. You can stand up, but don't do it publicly and don't do it often. Bill Frist got crucified for standing up for stem cell research yet he played the game for Teri Schiavo. Clearly then, Republicans will eat their own and lose little sleep.

     What can the Democrats can do to counter this machine? It seems many in their party are Democrats in "name" only. This is true for the Republicans as well. The radical right-wing fringe has hijacked the agenda from the more moderate "true" conservatives. But overall you don't hear from these lone voices or they are simply dismissed like John McCain.

     So what is it going to take to get this opposition/revolution rolling? And that means keeping it in the public's eye not for 6 months, not for next year but in the back of people's mind for the next 3 years. If the Republican Party can re-frame/re-channel the anger or redirect the focus, then they've won again. Keeping this in public's eye requires a catalyst, conduits to carry the message, daily messengers, money, a point person but more importantly it's going to require a clear message people can understand and relate to. Framing the issue(s) is a key to success.

     What group or constituency can carry this load? Will they carry the load? And are there risks involved?

     Is it going to be AARP?

     They have a powerful voice and lots of wealth. What they are missing is the laser like focus and the agility of the Republican Party to shift gears on a dime. This group can be very vocal when it touches subjects they care about. Unfortunately, these topics are not always what the general population wants and vice-versa.

     Puerto Ricans?

     They are a growing voting block in many cities. Without key players and experience at all levels in the government, this group needs more time to establish their connections.

     Unions?

     They have grass roots and historical ties in many communities. Currently some unions are re-prioritizing their focus on rebuilding their membership instead of backing the Democratic Party. They have limited amounts of money and their political clout is waning.

     Places of higher learning?

     This may be one of the last bastions of liberal thought. They have the money, strong built-in network and many voices. Unfortunately these voices cover the whole spectrum and are not easily disseminated and consumed by the general public. Respected by their colleagues, opinions outside this circle tend to fall on deaf ears.

     Christian Network?

     They have money, grass roots ties, leaders in high places and most importantly have a communication network in place to get a constant message out. Of course, issues like gay marriage, abortion, and stem cell research have to be resolved. Moderate Republicans have co-existed with them because of the power and influence they wield. Could the Democrats do the same? Is the schism so wide that a bridge can't be built? At what future price will the Democratic Party pay without even trying?

     Discounting the current crisis, the Republican machine shows no signs of weakness. The strength and tenacity of this Administration has been tested: Stonewalled the 9/11 commission giving them limited funds to investigate, BSed their way into an illegal war with Iraq (costing at least $300 billion) with little planning for the aftermath, bungled the pre and post management of Hurricane Katrina, allowed the horrors at Abu Graïb and Guantánamo in violation of the Geneva Convention, created the largest budget deficits, unfunded programs like "No Child left behind", and let gasoline/oil prices skyrocket (Cheney has close ties to the Energy industry – hmmm).

     No amount of ineptitude/scandals seems to affect them for extended periods of time. In addition, this Administration along with the Democrats have pushed through 3 tax cuts benefiting the wealthy and corporations, tougher bankruptcy laws for households benefiting corporations, less stringent pollution laws benefiting corporations, Patriot Acts I & II, most pork barrel spending than any other president benefiting corporations and wealthy individuals, cuts in veterans disability compensation and pensions, shenanigans at the FDA until the Vioxx and Celebrex calamity broke that partnership, etc…

     Why has all this happened without sustained opposition? And if there is some opposition why does it always disappear into the ether? Where is the public discourse? Where is the congressional discourse? Why is there no accountability? No firings? Is this a Democracy?

     This Republican machine (White House, Neocons, religious right) set the agenda. The president has the bully pulpit of the Presidency.

     Once the agenda has been set, be it talking about Social Security or defending the war, the proverbial media outlets (major networks, newspapers, magazines, cable, radio, internet, Congressman and other leaders) hammer the message day-in and day-out until it hits a bump from the opposition or goes off track and loses steam. How do you explain this phenomenon? This isn't a fluke and it won't go away.

     Only 13% think Bush is doing a terrible job on Hurricane Katrina given the wall-to-wall coverage of the deaths, destruction, lies, human emotions and close to 70% think Al Qaeda has something to do with 9-11 -http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm .

     Certainly there's an Opposition and that Opposition seems to be getting stronger. Is this public rage having any impact on the general populace or are they preaching to the choir? Will the steely impunity and visible arrogance this Administration has shown towards the middle and poorer classes really going to lead to their demise? The battle lines have been all but drawn since the 2000 election yet the Republican Party and Administration continue to dominate the agenda and discussion on a daily basis. The president and VP could disappear tomorrow (actually the VP popped up over a week after the crises unfolded) and not much will change because of their built-in infrastructure - Christian network, the conservative media/communications outlets, the White House staff, CEOS, corporations, lobbyists on K street, wealthy individuals and money. All these components work together like a well oiled machine.

     Will the current crisis slow it down? The chinks in the Republican Party's armor are bigger this time, but are they still temporary? Eventually, most people outside the region will forget unless someone or something keeps it alive. It takes a lot of energy to stay mad at someone. Maybe Bush knows this and thus pays little attention to the polls. Keeping a message alive takes a working infrastructure. Holding a message on track takes a working infrastructure. Changing a message requires a working infrastructure.

     Has the tide turned for the Democrats? Is there a paradigm shift in the making? Do the Democrats have the momentum on their side including prominent Republicans (CYA) and the MSM. Do they have enough energy to carry a daily message for the next 6 months, let alone for the next 3 years? Where is this working infrastructure for the Opposition; be it Democrats, MSM or other? Unlike the Republicans machine, certain pieces are still missing: Christian network or something like it, liberal/progressive media/communications outlets, no bully pulpit and no designated leader to carry these messages. With these gaps, it's hard to compete, let alone win the day-to-day battle for the public's conscience. If nothing is said by the Opposition, a news vacuum arises. This will be exploited by the other side.

     With damage control in full swing, the Bush Administration is on the defensive. Cheney is now leading the charge protecting/covering for number one. It's only a matter of time before Bush scapegoats FEMA to mitigate the damage and clear his name - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9261552/. With unlimited funds of the US Treasury (which we will all pay), this disaster along with Iraq will be swept under the rug and Bush may escape with few political bruises.

     Unfortunately, cronyism and incompetence exist at all levels of the government. The blame should follow the party in power and hold them accountable. Has true accountability happened over the last 5 years with lasting effects? This Republicans Party won't/can't police themselves because they know they control both the internal and external forces which make things happen.

     Certainly, the Democrats have to speak with one voice and frame their messages. They also need a big megaphone and "friendly" conduits to be heard. The complete infrastructure just doesn't exist today. Money alone will not solve this shortfall and neither will taking pot-shots at the other side. Without this infrastructure in place, trying to exert a full-court press for reforms at all levels of the government (local and federal) may be difficult. 9-11 was supposed to be the catalyst to rebuild the Federal government to meet the needs for the 21st century like global terrorism, stream-lining the bureaucracy and reducing the turf battles and in-fighting between departments (CIA and FBI). After this disaster, it seems the priorities of the Administration are still not in-sync with the public. Guerilla warfare may work in the short-run, but in the end it comes down to who has the bigger guns and most ammunition. Until then, the American public will either hear noise, the right-wing fringe or just tune-out all together.

     Posted by Infiniti at 09/09/2005 @ 5:33pm

204. URMYGYRO, Just think of this blog as a place to plant seeds. I used to be a right-wing, Republican, conservative, government-hating, liberal-despising evangelical christian. Eventually, by being exposed to facts and intelligent ideas, I "saw the light" as it were, and now I am none of those things I once was. You never know what might happen...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 5:34pm

205. zero:

     here's a high-quality idea.

     Let's ban nascar. That would save a lot of gasoline. Not only from the race cars themselves but from the fans who drive to and fro the racetrack.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 5:36pm

206. freiheit:

     apples and oranges can be compared. They're both fruit; one's red and non-spherical, the other's orange and spherical.

     That wasn't so difficult.

     If anyone wants to make the argument (broad based or specific) that people should have to fend for themselves, then it's perfectly legitimate to point out situtations in which a governmental authority is looking out for people. Iraq fits that situation. We can't force democracy down the throats of other people. If we could, Cuba should've been forced into democracy long ago.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 5:42pm

207. FREIHEIT, I am disappointed in you, dude. Haven't you read a word I've written? Here is the message (briefly):

     National health insurance, balanced budgets, protection of civil rights, protection of the environment, intelligent priorities for spending federal funds (such as "apollo programs" for education, infrastructure, and alternative energy sources), ending corporate welfare and wars of aggression, returning to fair tax policy, and reversing media consolidation. This is just for starters

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 5:46pm

208. Wow, I am amazed at how you conservatives are all "hung up" about Cuba. I hardly ever give it any thought, but you righties seem to obsess about it.

     FREIHEIT, LOOK OUT!!! I SEE A COMMUNIST APPROACHING. Sorry, false alarm. You can relax now...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 5:49pm

209. freiheit:

     this administration tied iraq into al-queda. They could've tied cuba too.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 5:51pm

210. " Infinitigriti " :

     Perfect handle for you pal! I just had to shave the beard I grew while reading your F'ing post! If you took the time to type that just for us you have way too much time on your hands.

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/09/2005 @ 5:57pm

211. Freiheit - lap-dog media topic

     I guess I'm remembering a time when a vigorous independent press fearlessly pursued their stories, asked tough, embarrassing questions, kept at it, kept probing. Remember when there were multi-part stories, long, investigative pieces? That era seems like its gone for good for many reasons. A combination of corporate consolidation, tabloidization, focus on profits and fear of being denied access to sources (e.g., White House press rooms) has got us to the place where the MSM has watered everything down to the lowest common denominator, playing back press-release sound bites and pandering to the ever-shrinking attention spans of the public. Add to that the antics, propoganda disguised as news, wild rumor mongering and general wackiness of the blogosphere, the Faux News parrot-the-party-line phenomenon, the direct from the TV camera lens to your eyes without benefit of any perspective video heroin of the 24/7 cable news, the hate-spewing Father Coughlin grotesqueries of Limbaugh, Coulter et al...

     OK, ranting mode off.

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/09/2005 @ 6:00pm

212. to those arguing the poor of new orleans (who are mostly black) should have simply up and left new orleans are ignorant of the problems of poverty in our country.

     The most marked trait of present life, economically speaking, is insecurity. It is tragic that millions of men desirous of working shold be recurrently out of employments; aside from cyclical depression there is a standing army at all times who have no regular work. We have no any adequate information as to the number of these persons. But the ignorance even as to the numbers is slight compared with our inability to grasp the psychological and moral consequences of the precarious condition in which vast multitudes live. Insecurity cuts deeper and extends more widely than bare unemployment. Fear of loss of work, dread of the oncoming of old age, create anxiety and eat into self-respect in a way that impairs personal dignity. Where fears abound, courageous and robust individuality is undermined. The vast development of technological resources that might bring security in its train has actually brought a new mode of insecurity, as mechanization displaces labor. The mergers and consolidations that mark a corporate age are beginning to bring uncertainty into the economic lives of the higher salaried class, and that tendency is only just in its early stages. Realization that honest and industrious pursuit of a calling or business will not guarantee any stable level of life lessens respect for work and stirs large numbers to take a chance of some adventitious way of getting the wealth that will make security possible: witness the orgies of the stock-market.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 6:00pm

213. ZERO, It's been a long week, eh? You've got 30 people driving 49 vehicles... But I know what you meant :-)

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 6:00pm

214. Freiheit - How can you say 'S' - this is the kind of total bullshit we've come to expect from you. Any other letter, fine, but 'S' - you've gone too far now.

     P.S. Agree with you on CSPAN

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/09/2005 @ 6:16pm

215. It is not fantastic to connect our excited and rapacious nationalism with the situation in which corporateness has gone so far as to detach individuals from their old local ties and allegiances but not far enough to give them a new cetner and order of life.

     The most militaristic of nations secures the loyalty of its subjects not by physical force but through the power of ideas and emotions. It cultivates ideas of loyalty, of solidarity, and common devotion to a common cause. Modern industry, technology and commerce have created modern nations in their external form. Armies and navies exist to protect commerce, to make secure the control of raw materials, and to command markets.

     Men would not sacrifice their lives for the purpose of securing economic gain for a few if the conditions presented themselves to their minds in this bald fashion. But the balked demand for genuine cooperativeness and reciprocal solidarity in daily life finds an outlet in nationalistic sentiment. Men have a pathetic instinct toward the adventure of living and struggling together; if the daily community does not feed this impulse, the romantic imagination pictues a grandiose nation in which all are one. If the simple duties of peace do not establish a common life, the emotions are mobilized in the service of a war that will supply its temporary simulation.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 6:29pm

216. Michael Brown lied on his resume.

     Shocking!

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 6:33pm

217. FREIHEIT, Of course I was referring to the fact that you asked what the Democratic message is; the fact that you had to ask made me feel like I wasn't getting the word out. I stand corrected!

     But please take your labor-exploiting, greedy letter S somewhere else. While I respect your differing views and your willingness to read my differing views, your half-aSSed attempt at exploiting the proletariat is too much! (tongue firmly in cheek)

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 6:41pm

218. ZERO, I was just having fun. No offense intended.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 6:44pm

219. FREI, In short URMY is trying to explain why so many people support the war and are glad to go fight in it. The war is a substitution for what is no longer provided by the "homefront": A struggle in cooperation with our neighbors for the advance of our communities, our society. His assertion is that we have been disconnected from that by "corporateness."

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 6:50pm

220. Freiheit:

     You believe in personal initiative, enterprise, energy and reward, no?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 6:50pm

221. A little food for thought for you liberals:

     Iraqi soldiers donate to Katrina victims: (Hat tip:ITM reader).

     "On behalf of myself and all the People of Tadji Military Base; I would like to console the American People and Government for getting this horrible disaster. So we would like to donate 1.000.000 Iraqi Dinars to help the government and the People also I would like to console all the ASTs who helped us rebuilding our country and our Army. We appreciate the American's help and support. Thank you".

     These were the words of Colonel Abbas Fadhil, commander of the Taji military base. The donated money is little, less than 700 $ and it can do practically nothing but the spirit and and words mean quite a lot.

     Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/09/2005 @ 6:54pm

222. ILP:

     yes. corporateness creates a "disconnect" (to use the parlance of our times) that allows indiviudals to convince themselves they are fighting for a greater community good instead of being agents of a government that is securing it's short term and long term financial needs.

     Here's a probing question:

     How many people who join the military do so at a time when they are making more than the median national income?

     I don't know the exact answer, but I'd bet the percentage is small.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 6:56pm

223. URMYGYRO, I joined the navy when I was in college, making nothing (literally). Most of the people I met had joined right out of high school or college, so it was the same situation. Other than anecdotal evidence, though, I have no more info on the subject.

     LIBS, Yeah, that was a really nice gesture by the Iraqi police. Did you know that over 60 countries (as of this past weekend) have offered aid to the US? The number is probably higher by now. I really appreciate it, and I'm sure most americans do.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 7:07pm

224. Frei:

     Aggregated corporate capital, mass production and distribution, impersonal ownership, and ownership divorced from management all breed an environment where indiviuduals are dehumanized.

     If public policy was only concerned with promoting capitalism, there'd be no protections in existence for the individual from corporations, and corporations from each other. America practices a capitalistic socialism, but by no means is it truly capitalism. You argue, and perhaps rightly, that public socialism is too large a detriment to capitalistic adventures.

     But simplifying the argument to capitalism v. socialism is infantile (which explains why it's so prevalent in American politics). The argument should be more appropriately labeled: capitalistic socialism v. public socialism.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 7:10pm

225. FREI, Have you ever read Das Kapital?

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 7:54pm

226. LL &/or LibsR

     (I don't recall which of you took exception tot he claim) re: "We didn't realize the levees would breach (after the hurricane)" I assure you that any competent Earth scientist could have told Bush or FEMA that is EXACTLY when you expect a levee to break - after the rain feeds the streams that drain into the leveed water body/stream. Not DURING the event. The fact that Bush doesn't seem to have much need for science (as his approval of ID as science shows), and that his FEMA head doesn't seem to know where to find a scientist seems to wander again towards incompetence. We have lawyers and MBAs making decisions that need a bit of science in them....

     JAYAR

     While I emapathize with you that the city is rich in culture and history, as a scientist with some knowledge in this area, in practical terms "20 miles upstream" makes a lot of sense. "Environmental adjustments" are the problem, not the solution in this instance. It is the removal of the river from natural systems by constraining the channel over decades in conjunction with building a city on unsuitable substrates that has caused New Orleans to sink...and it will continue to do so. No amount of engineering, nor levees, nor anything else can stop this sort of tragedy from happening again. As hurricane intensities are strengthening...it will likley be worse next time.

     Posted by leftofcenter at 09/09/2005 @ 8:29pm

227. capitalism needs to grow or it will die. in order to grow it needs two things, cheaper commodities and cheaper labor(.this according to karl Marx, who incidentally had nothing to do with marxism)

     we have seen what that hath wrought, outsourcing of jobs overseas, and an increase of illegal immigrant labor, both depressing wages. also a globalism that prevents the producers of the commodoties from getting a fair price

     Frei, you left out the most important half of the equation, labor. without labor there would be no capitalism. it is organized labor that has brought us week ends, the eight hour work week, safe work places, for some, etc etc. incidentally the ten hour workweek, down from sunup to sundown, was the result of a presidential order by Martin Van Buren.

     unbridled capitalism has been tried, it brought us the age of robber barons, sweatshops, troops firing on strikers. not a good idea, evidently

     corporations are by definition amoral. and immoral as we have seen with Enron, and wallstreet and the rest. things are not as simple as you would have us believe or believe yourself

     class warfare has been going on for a long while and lately the people have lost big time, and under Bush, double big time. when the people fight back they are accused of class warfare. funny when the government slashes workplace protections, doesn't raise the minimum wage for a decade, removes bankrptcy protections etc they claim that isn't class warfare. don't believe the hype

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/09/2005 @ 9:06pm

228. JOHANNESROLF:

     VERY good post. I agree with it 100%.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 9:21pm

229. johannesrolf:

     Many people, Bush included, believe that the economy is driven almost entirely by people's incentive to get rich, which in turn is primarily determined by their tax rate. Cut taxes, especially for the rich, and incalculable prosperity will follow. Supply siders, unlike traditional conservatives, consider deficits unimportant.

     They buy into a single-factor-to-explain-everything theory of economics.

     The dangerous part of republican dogma, especially in Reagan and Bush's administrations, is their claim that tax cuts create so much growth that they pay for themselves.

     They don't believe the economy is a fairly complicated thing and that numerous factors affect its growth.

     Simple-minded politicians convincing simple-minded voters that their simple-minded platforms about the economy are correct.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 9:25pm

230. URMYGYRO:

     Stop assuming that the people who promulgate these cockamamie economic policies are as simple-minded as you believe. That somehow almost exonerates them, and I am not willing to do that. Remember, most of these guys have higher degrees from mny very good graduate programs, econ, business, public policy, etc. By implying they are somehow not intelligent or just doofuses is to not look at the more insidious nature of this process.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 9:39pm

231. I don't agree with Johannesrolf that all corporations are by definition amoral. But I do believe all large corporations, in spite of efforts to otherwise not be (if the efforts are made) are dehumanizing (not for those at the top of the structure, of course).

     If you want to say that supply side economics are not put forth by simple minded people, that's fine, I'll buy it, if you mean the handlers. But the two major spokesmen, an actor-turned president, and a silver-spoon attendee of the two most prestigious schools in america-turned president are not intelligent and conscientious students of economics.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 10:03pm

232. FREIHEIT:

     I usually would not quote your post in such detail, but I felt you brought up some points that are simply too off-base not to point out specifically.

     You said: In order to grow capitalism needs to expand markets. During the 20th century we saw how socialism grows. I've seen with my own eyes the impact of regulated capitalism on China and my friends' standards of living in Shanghai today.

     My retort: Capitalism is specifically a system built on the concept of using economic commodities in an ever more economically efficient way. Note, I said economically efficient. There is no attention to social efficiency, i.e. the good of society at large.

     My sister lived in China for 3 years. I myself have spent time thrhoughout China, and if you have spent as much time as you say you have, and actually understood their system of government/economics, you would know that:

     1: China is not communist or socialist. It is a totalitarian tyranny organized to enrich the people in power. It is a kleptocracy.

     2: Go check out Russia. There you will find rampant unbridled capitalism. There is a popular saying in Russia. I heard this in 1997, so forgive the dating.

     "It took capitalism 7 years what communism couldn't do in 70... make communism look good."

     I think that says it all.

     You said:

     The bad old days. Movements evolve. Perfection isn't really possible. And you certainly don't want to compare body counts between competing philosophies of capitalism vs socialism, do you?

     My retort:

     I am amazed how you are willing to swep the ills of capitalism under thr rug, but are unwilling to countenance the same for anything not capitalism. As to body counts... Allow me to proffer a quote.

     Fascism is capitalism plus murder. Upton Sinclair

     And again, if you are truly familiar with the Nazi regime, you would know how true that is. So, comparing body counts on THAT ALONE, you are wrong. Add to that the untold millions who have died throughout the centuries, the slave trade, the Native Americans, the people in Third World nations which have been invaded for the mineral wealth under their feet (Iraq comes instantly to mind). You are simply wrong. If you want to sit down and compare body counts, I would be happy to do that. Communism had only 80 years to create death. Capitalism about 350. You do the math.

     You said:

     Disagree that corporations are by definition immoral. Many humans are immoral and corporations are made up of humans. And, thanks to the regulations and laws in our nation's capitalism, many of those immoral human corporate thieves are in jail or court.

     My retort: JOHANNESROLF said that corporations are by definition AMORAL... a big difference from immoral. AMORAL means "without morals." Which, since a corp is not technically alive (except under the definition of law) then it by definition can have no discernable morality. By your own admission, corporations are made up of people. When you remove the personal responsibility on people by creating a legal shield of the corporate veil, you allow the latent immorailty of humans run rampant. Hence, the immorality of corporations. Again, you are wrong.

     You said: But how many of us are enriched by our work? Iloveliberty, as a physicist in the Silicon Valley, you workin' a 40 hour week? Feeling oppressed? Again, things are not perfect. I never contended capitalism is perfect.

     My retort: The issue is not whether we are enriched by our work or not. We live in a system in which our ability to provide for our families is based almost entirely on how much money we can manage to bring home. We no longer live in a barter system. Hence, when you trade time for money, as is the basis for the commodification of labor, and you place pressures on that cost of production, which capitalism certainly does, as it wants to limit its production costs, you create a system ill-suited for wide-spread economic health in a society. Instead, the people who control the means of production and access to commodities over time tend to control more and more, whereas the mass of people control less and less. It's a simple matter of power. power begets power, hence the royal families in Europe and the wealthy families in western capitalist societies remaining basically the same over their histories.

     The point is, full-on capitalism is bad. It creates massive disparities of wealth, which creates power assymmetries (especially in an ostensibly democratic country as our own). Hence, our elections continue to spiral out of believable levels of cost. Your theory simply doesn't pass the smell test. As Shakespeare once said, updated to our current state of affairs...

     There is something rotten in the state of Louisiana. And Texas. And Washington, DC...

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 10:13pm

233. Hey Nacl, (aka Nathan the Bad-ass)

     For the record pal, I cite your posts of 9/05/2005 7:49 AM and, the incoherent, (must be a cut and paste from some KKK thing) on 9/06/2005 at 5:51 PM. So, it is proven that you are the "toughest, baddest, winger out there. And it is also proven that you are not above threatening people with purported knowledge of where they live.

     I have news for you, "tough guy", You are little better than a shit stain on the landscape. Real Americans still know your type for what you really are.

     Your vague "mission" is an exercise in self-indulgence, and pointless, because the majority views things differently. But, I expect that you and your "fellows" will press on longer; maybe because you simply have nothing better to do.

     Nathan, you are toothless, (most probably dickless), and losing whatever relevance you thought you may have had with each passing minute.

     Hope you can still make Gay Paree. The foods great,the culture wonderful, with the notable exception of their rock music.

     Kiss my ass always,

     Bloppy

     Posted by bloppy at 09/09/2005 @ 10:20pm

234. Jorcheim:

     Impressive post - you have been added to my "do not challenge" list.

     :)

     Posted by Hman23 at 09/09/2005 @ 10:22pm

235. on a lighter side...

     at least we'll be distracted next week with John Roberts' senate confirmation hearings.

     Should be decent theater.

     He'll get in though. Then Bush's next nominee will get in. Then bye-bye lots of rights.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 10:22pm

236. HMAN23:

     Please challenge me. I live for this. Without discourse, we cannot sharpen our arguments into pointed sticks and prod one another. :D

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 10:24pm

237. jorcheim:

     You left out an important factor.

     It's more than simply trading time for money.

     Different people have different skills to offer the market. Most would be glad to put in 60 hour work weeks if we could make a living playing baseball! The time wouldn't matter so much. The time only becomes an aggravating factor when you're doing something you'd rather not be doing (which is the true definition of "work")

     ;)

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 10:29pm

238. Sorry - you'll have to be content beating up on the Righties. It was a true compliment.

     Posted by Hman23 at 09/09/2005 @ 10:31pm

239. URMYGYRO:

     In the modern context, I am wont to agree with you. However, I was referring to specifically the academic definition of the commodification of labor. The traditional definition of capitalism didn't foresee modern accoutrements such as professional sports. Those are essentially hyper-lucrative examples, but they still hold to the definition. When you can't get a regular job that you want, is that any different from you wanting to play baseball professionally, but not being able to? The point is, commodification requires a standard of measure. That standard for labor is typically time.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 10:35pm

240. HMAN23:

     I know... I was just trying to add a bit of levity, as you were. Methinks I failed... hehehe

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 10:36pm

241. jorcheim:

     My example was clearly extreme. But it still matters, because not all work is created equal. 40 hours as an accountant is not the same as 40 hours standing at a work station assembling a product and not the same as 40 hours pulling people over for speeding on the highway...etc, etc, etc.

     You'd prefer to label work simply as time exhanged for money. It's too simplified in our system of economics. And it doesn't take into account the psychological effects on the people performing the work.

     I know people perfectly happy to work in a coffeeshop, even though they have college degrees. I know other people who barely graduated high school but bust their asses working two full time jobs, making three times as much as my friends with the college degrees.

     Point is: the type of work and satisfaction with the work matters; probably not as much as the money paid, but it matters. Actually, most old people I talk to give the same advice: do something you like. Money isn't everything. Seems that many people take work that will pay them the most based on the skills they have to offer, and aren't always pleased with the quality of their lives.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/09/2005 @ 10:44pm

242. URMYGYRO:

     You are ABSOLUTELY correct that the type of work you do and the enjoyment or satisfaction you get are important factors. My point is, there is no economic component there. You don't get financially compensated for it.

     I would actually not label work as time for money at all... unfortunately, most of capitalism does. I simply am using its own definition against it. I prefer a much less production-intensive economic. If you had 3-4 hours, I would love to discuss it with you. It is a non-market-based almost tribal economic. As to capitalism... it is broken, proven destructive, and should be terminated with unrepentant truculence.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 10:50pm

243. Also, keep in mind that in a capitalist system, certain tasks are considered worth more than others. I know you are trying to get at the the vagaries of valuation in th system, which, I agree are critical to understanding our system. I believe they simply point once again to the failure of the system for the vast majority of people in the system. It leaves very few REAL winners.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 11:00pm

244. JORCHEIM, excellent post at 10:13. The only thing I would add is that true capitalism didn't really come along until the 1800's, so the evils of slave trade should be blamed on the forerunner of capitalism, mercantilism. Other than that, right on! You subsequently followed up with a post wanting to end capitalism. Can't quite agree there. Just modify it with some aspects of socialism, environmental protections, and the golden rule and I think it can turn out ok.

     FREIHEIT, I wonder who is more offended by your freudian slip - me or LL? I am not offended at all, merely LOL, so my $ are on LL. A bit of advice: Capitalism can grow through division of labor as well as market expansion. A minor point.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 11:10pm

245. Oh yeah, FREIHEIT, to answer your question, I am working more than 40 hrs a week (but I've don that most of my life - one of the reasons I am a liberal!) but you won't hear me complain about the pay.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 11:13pm

246. But how many of us are enriched by our work? Iloveliberty, as a physicist in the Silicon Valley, you workin' a 40 hour week? Feeling oppressed? Again, things are not perfect. I never contended capitalism is perfect. - FREIHEIT

     Let me make that clear - more than 40 hours a week most of my adult life, not less!

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 11:14pm

247. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     You are absolutely right that capitalism as we understand it really hit its stride in the 1800's. However, as you know, capitalism did not spring fully formed, as Athena, onto the world stage. You're right, mercantilism, the precursor of modern capitalism was to blame for slavery. However, that simply illustrates that the foundation of capitalism is built on naked exploitation.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 11:20pm

248. JORCHEIM, Point taken. I've been known to split hairs, and the distinction is a minor one in this case.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/09/2005 @ 11:22pm

249. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     Regarding my desire to eliminate capitalism...

     I am a Christian. First and foremost, that determines my economics and my politics, although apparently that is in direct contravention to most other so-called Christians in this country. Christ was not a capitalist. Honestly, he was not a socialist (as socialism requires marketism to exist) either. He would be disgusted now as he was in his time. If you want to know how a true Christian thinks, peruse these, and not the 10 Commandments.

     Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Verse 3) Blessed are the meek: for they shall posses the land. (Verse 4) Blessed are they who mourn: for they shall be comforted. (Verse 5) Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill. (Verse 6) Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. (Verse 7) Blessed are the clean of heart: for they shall see God. (Verse 8) Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. (Verse 9) Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Verse 10)

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/09/2005 @ 11:54pm

250. JORCHEIM, Thanks for the very thorough response. I will take a moment to save you time in the future by letting you know that I was a christian for 13 years. I read the entire New Testament straight through 4 times, and read all 4 of the gospels about a dozen times each. Some books, like Ephesians and Galatians, I read upwards of 50 to 100 times simply because they were my favorites.

     If Christ is not alive, He surely must be rolling over in his grave about the right-wing evangelicals in this country....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 12:03am

251. jorcheim:

     I agree with the impulse to blame capitalism, because it's an easy scapegoat. That said, it's far superior to socialism. But, like I said before, neither truly exist, it's really capitalistic socialism or public socialism.

     Wealth is created on the backs of others. It's inherently unequal. Most bosses in our system make money by keeping actual costs below projected costs. They get rather large bonuses for keeping the real costs down, in most cases the bonus can be the same size or higher than the base salary. In most businesses, the largest variable cost is employee pay, so it's no wonder that most bosses try to squeeze the most effecient work out of employees as possible, and for as little pay as possible. The phrase "most people work just hard enough to not get fired and get paid just enough to not quit" comes to mind. Many employees don't like being used to build wealth for others, so they resist working as hard as they could (which would actually create more job satisfaction).

     The system is created to be unequal. It's created that way because not everyone has the same skills to offer the market. Someone who can put on a top on a widget at a machine for 40 hours a week is probably making $8/hr or so. The shift supervisor who can get those people to work as efficiently as possible and can put out unexecpted fires every day is going to make a lot more. And the boss of the shift supervisors is going to make more for being able to handle the shift supervisors, and up the line it goes. With more responsibility for employees and capital comes higher pay.

     You can dislike how people on the bottom, or even in the middle, of the totem pole are treated by those at the top. Hopefully that's where government comes in if owners can't regulate themselves morally. But, people have different morals. The pure capitalists on this website clearly think unregulated owners are what makes the system work. I would claim otherwise, but I wouldn't agree with over-regulation, because I think that creates a system where owners end up acting as if they're free of regulation (meaning complete greed becomes the overwhelming motivator)

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 12:08am

252. Everyone, (especially LL and OKSG): Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful;

     5: it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;

     6: it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right.

     7: Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

     8: Love never ends;

     as for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.

     9: For our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect;

     10: but when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away.

     11: When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man, I gave up childish ways.

     12: For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood.

     13: So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 12:11am

253. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     Thank God I'm not the only Christian on here who disagrees with the way this country is headed.

     I believe if the evangelicals actually READ the gospels as oppsed to quoting the Old Testament fire and brimstone all the time, they'd realize just how backwards they are.

     Back to the point of this blog:

     Vanden Heuvel is recommending something I have been proposing for years. I would add that we should focus on a nationwide transit system, based around maglev technology, as well. First off, imagine the jobs it would create, both for construction and for maintenance.

     Second, I can't remember who it was, but someone mentioned a single-payer system for our health care system. Yet another top-flight idea. However, you must also add that ALL advertisment for drugs should be eliminated. Drugs should be produced with disease eradication in mind, not maintenance. Not "living with it."

     Third, we should have a mandatory national draft in this country, with mandatory public service. 2 years minimum. The requirement would be fulfillable with Peace Corps service, domestic service i.e. non-military. This would at very least create a much greater sense of responsibility among EVERYONE. Hopefully, if run properly, rich kids would be forced to be around those not nearly as well-off as themselves. Then we wouldn't have a presidential candidate who doesn't know how a supermarket scanner works. For example. Maybe it's pie in the sky. But hey, this has just as much of a chance of occuring as a revamped WPA or single-payer system. That is, exactly zero.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:14am

254. URMYGYRO, Well said! In reply to the following: You can dislike how people on the bottom, or even in the middle, of the totem pole are treated by those at the top. Hopefully that's where government comes in if owners can't regulate themselves morally.

     I think that most capitalists want to treat their workers well, actually. Some do not. But even those that do are in a quandary: Squeeze every penny out of the workers so that I am more competitive, or treat them well and reduce profits. Throw in the fact that by law corporate directors are required to maximize profits, and it results in the very same amoral (even immoral) system to which JORCHEIM and others alluded.

     Thanks for the thought-provoking post.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 12:18am

255. JORCHEIM said: Second, I can't remember who it was, but someone mentioned a single-payer system for our health care system. Yet another top-flight idea.

     Ah, several people on this site, including me. BTW, love your maglev idea. Actually, it could have been hydrogen-powered buses and I'd still love it. Point is, this country would be so much better off if we focused our significant intellectual and financial capital on public transportation.

     Alas, I must inform you that I was a Christian. I renounced the church in 2000, but I never renounced Christ and I try to live by the golden rule. So whatever that makes me, apostate or infidel, fine. I can live with it - just would like to see more of Christ's teachings practiced by everyone....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 12:25am

256. URMYGYRO:

     Just curious... on what basis is capitalism superior to socialism? When you compare the social democracies of western Europe to our own country, they meet or exceed numerous measures of our country for what I would consider as aspects of a good society. They work less, make more, are just as productive as we are, and and generally happier (lower suicide rates).

     I blame capitalism not because of some knee-jerk reaction. Rather, I disagree with the very basis of the system, as you rightly recognized as exploitation. Exploitation does NOT have to be the cornerstone of modern society. To make that claim is simply a cop-out. You are not thinking 4th dimensionally (sorry, had to say it).

     Also, socialism would not exist had not capitalism. Socialism is by definition a reactionary system to address the ills of capitalism. The simple matter of fact is, Marx and Engels were writing in specific response to the industrialization of Germany and England, at which point the commodification of labor becomes necessary, as mechanization lowers per unit production cost to the point where fuedalism is economically inefficient vis-a-vis the alternative production process. Hence Marx's point that the fundamental precursor for a socialist revolution was the proletariatization of the workforce (a combination of the urbanization and commodificatoin of labor), which is the precursor of modern capitalism, as ILOVEPHYSICS pointed out earlier.

     Hence, I deny capitalism on the basis that it dehumanizes through the proletariatization process, among other things. It is not good for the human spirit, even if it does grant us big screen tvs and suvs. Yes, that was sarcasm.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:26am

257. jorcheim:

     the medical profession is only now beginning to concede that maybe, just maybe, nutrition has something to do with good health. And that maybe, just maybe, the mind is somehow mysteriously linked to the body. Of course, there's not much money in such thinking.

     And ILP: absolutely hear the "keeping up with joneses" argument by owners and management all the time as reasons why salary freezes take place for years, or paycuts for employees after they do everything employer asks of them, or benefits are being cut, or asking people to work longer hours or come in on weekends, etc, etc, etc.

     It's unprovable that all of those are needed for them to "keep up", and it's especially not believable when bosses seem to never be taking cuts, or indeed be making large bonsuses during the same time.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 12:28am

258. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     Right there with you on renouncing the church... or at least mostly. Although, I will point out that in order to be truly in communion with Christ, it requires a community. Unfortunately, it's had to find one I can live with. So, call me apostate as well.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:30am

259. URMYGYRO:

     Isn't it funny that the profit motive when applied to health care and food production it creates precisely the opposite of what we want?

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:32am

260. capitalism is superior in creating wealth. Those who get hold of the wealth don't share well (or well enough), but socialism doesn't produce the amount of wealth capitalism does.

     I would disagree that the countries of western europe are socialistic. They are capitalistic socialists, same as us, except they tax their citizens more to allow universal health care and free education through college. The key difference is college and hospitals for profit here, versus state-sponsered there. But all in all, they are much more similar to us than they are to many other countries discussed on this thread.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 12:35am

261. URMYGYRO:

     Agreed that capitalism creates more conspicuous wealth than any other system around. But... why do we need so much wealth? If we have less people to support, you don't need as much wealth to support them, hence a much more sustainable economic system.

     And, you are correct in saying that western European countries are not purely socialist. And they are getting less so every day due to the same phenomenon that holds this country's politics in thrall, namely the ascendancy of wealthy politicos (or politicos supported by the wealthy) who represent the interests of their benfactors.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:41am

262. I agree that farmers need to be taken off the government payrolls. You can't show me a larger group of beggars and whiners than farmers.

     They only get a pass from the American public because their product is food. Everyone likes the bearer of food. Who doesn't love a waitress or delivery man?

     I agree that healthcare system, and drug companies in particular, have a vested interest in seeing you be a customer first, versus patient first. What business doesn't want repeat customers?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 12:45am

263. well jorcheim:

     people like stuff. it's one of the traits of being human. some would say one of our weaknesses. but people like to amass stuff, it makes them feel more complete.

     I think a keeping up with the joneses effect snowballs when desire to have stuff takes precedence. But let's not get off into a tangent of vapid materialism, because I won't be kind to the poor of this country if the discussion veers that way.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 12:50am

264. URMYGYRO:

     Actually, I believe farmers (and by farmers, I mean actual farmers, not corporate agribusiness conglomerates) should be supported by the government, a la France (but a less wasteful system, granted). When a country loses its agrarian base, as we have, it loses its economic base. I grew up on a farm. Real farmers are one of the best things in this country... unfortunately they are going the way of the dodo. They should be supported to grow the crops society actually needs, not what sells. By what we need, I mean whole foods, without chemicals, without genetic modification. You wnna know why our health is so bad? It starts with our food.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:51am

265. URMYGYRO:

     People like stuff they are told to like. Hence advertisement.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:52am

266. There is a reason Christ referred to people as his flock... it's because people are sheep.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:54am

267. advertising works, no doubt, but i'd argue for most the most part it just convinces people to buy one brand over another, doesn't really convince people to buy stuff they wouldn't otherwise.

     and of course the food is bad. farmers are guilty of trying to make as much as possible, so they pump their food (animals too, not just fruits and veggies) full of chemicals that make them grow faster and/or bigger. More stuff to sell, more $$$, in theory, at least. But, like a lot of sectors in the business world, there's an abundance of competition, so the government actually pays people to not produce as much (so they won't quit altogther). I think that system is bogus because they increase their profit predictions then get paid more for doing less.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 01:00am

268. I bid you adieu, for the night.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 01:07am

269. JORCHEIM, per your 12:51 post: Like the computer programmers said, GIGO. Hell yeah, our food supply is important. Have you seen The Corporation? A disgusting little tidbit in that documentary is the puss in our milk supply as a result of rBGH. Ah well, FOX killed the investigative report, so ignorance is bliss...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 01:19am

270. Oops, JORCHEIM, one thing I left out. You may enjoy my grandmother's take on philosophy/theology. She embraces Christian philosophy (help the poor, the golden rule, etc.) but doesn't agree with the theology (she is an atheist.) I suppose I've headed in that direction as well... Anyway, what better way to help victims of HK than to follow the golden rule and help the poor? Gotta love Christ!

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 01:23am

271. ILP:

     LL doesn't explain his reasoning. I get a kick out of him saying athetists believe in "circular logic" because they don't believe in a god.

     How do you know Jesus is god?

     Says so in the bible.

     You realize that's a book written by humans?

     Bible says you'd say that, but to ignore you and trust the words in the bible.

     And he tries to convince everyone that atheists believe in circular logic, but he doesn't? That's a joke.

     Posted by URMYGYRO 09/09/2005 @ 2:34pm

     The fact is that belief in Jesus as the Christ and as God in the flesh as He declared is based not on circular logic but examination of the evidence, experience, and faith.

     On the other hand, because the atheist must attempt to prove a negative, circular reasoning is the only avenue available.

     Some of the Greatest legal minds have examined the evidence for Jesus as having resurrected as He promised (therefore validating His claims).

     Dr. Simon Greenleaf, the Royal Professor of Law at Harvard University, was one of the greatest legal minds that ever lived. He wrote the famous legal volume entitled, "A Treatise on the Law of Evidence", considered by many the greatest legal volume ever written. Dr. Simon Greenleaf was an atheist who believed the Resurrection of Jesus Christ was a hoax. And he determined, once and for all, to expose the "myth" of the Resurrection. After thoroughly examining the evidence for the resurrection -- Dr. Greenleaf came to the exact opposite conclusion! He wrote a book entitled, "An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice." In which he emphatically stated:

     "it was IMPOSSIBLE that the apostles could have persisted in affirming the truths they had narrated, had not JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY RISEN FROM THE DEAD, . . ."

     Greenleaf concluded that according to the jurisdiction of legal evidence the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the best supported event in all of history! And not only that, Dr. Greenleaf was so convinced by the overwhelming evidence, he committed his life to Jesus Christ!

     Professor Thomas Arnold, former chair of history at Oxford, and author of the famous volumes, History of Rome, was skillfully educated in the study of historical facts. Professor Arnold, stated, "I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is PROVED BY BETTER AND FULLER EVIDENCE of every sort, than the great sign which God has given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead."

     After investigating the evidence of the resurrection, Lord Darling, former Chief Justice of England, stated, ". . . there exists such overwhelming evidence, positive and negative, factual and circumstantial, that no intelligent jury in the world could fail to bring in a verdict that the resurrection story is true."

     With Thanks and credit to John Ankerberg:

     Irwin Linton, who in his time had represented cases before the Supreme Court, and who wrote "A Lawyer Examines the Bible" in which he stated:

     So invariable had been my observation that he who does not accept wholeheartedly the evangelical, conservative belief in Christ and the Scriptures has never read, has forgotten, or never been able to weigh--and certainly is utterly unable to refute--the irresistible force of the cumulative evidence upon which such faith rests, that there seems ample ground, for the conclusion that such ignorance is an invariable element in such unbelief, And this is so even though the unbeliever be a preacher, who is supposed to know this subject if he know no other

     Hugo Grotius, the father of International Law and the author of "The Truth of the Christian Religion".."Arguing against the theory that utility makes right, Grotius says that men may not simply seek their own advantage because we are social creatures and need one another. He then shows that we are also bound to limit our behavior because of God:

     "Since we are assured [of the existence of God] partly by our reason and partly by constant tradition, confirmed by many arguments and by miracles attested by all ages, it follows that God, as our creator to whom we owe our being and all that we have, is to be obeyed by us without exception, especially since He has in many ways shown himself to be supremely good and supremely powerful. Wherefore, he is able to bestow upon those who obey Him the highest rewards, even eternal rewards, since He himself is eternal; and He must be believed to be willing to do this, particularly if He has promised to do so in plain words; and this is what Christians believe, convinced by the indubitable faith of testimonies."

     Perhaps the greatest legal mind today in human rights and Christian legal Apologetics, John Warwick Montgomery:

     http://www.jwm.christendom.co.uk/

     John Warwick Montgomery (Ph.D., Chicago; D.Théol., Strasbourg; LL.D., Cardiff; Dr. [h.c.], Institute for Religion and Law, Moscow) is Emeritus Professor of Law and Humanities, University of Luton, England, and Director, International Academy of Apologetics, Evangelism & Human Rights, Strasbourg, France. His legal speciality is the international and comparative law of human rights and he regularly pleads religious freedom cases before the European Court of Human Rights. He is a U.S. and U.K. citizen, the author of some fifty books in five languages ( www.ciltpp.com ), and is included in Who's Who in America, Who's Who in France, the European Biographical Directory, Who's Who in the World, and Contemporary Authors.

     JOHN WARWICK MONTGOMERY is considered by many to be the foremost living apologist for biblical Christianity. A renaissance scholar with a flair for controversy, he lives in France, England and the United States. His international activities have brought him into personal contact with some of the most exciting events of our time: not only was he in China In June 1989, but he was In Fiji during its 1987 bloodless revolution, was involved in assisting East Germans to escape during the time of the Berlin Wall, and was in Paris during the 'days of May' 1968. Dr. Montgomery is the author of more than forty books in five languages. He holds ten earned degrees, Including a Master of Philosophy in Law from the University of Essex, England, a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, a Doctorate of the University in Protestant Theology from the University of Strasbourg, France, and the higher doctorate (LL.D.) from Cardiff University, Wales. He is an ordained Lutheran clergyman, an English barrister, and is admitted to practise as a lawyer before the Supreme Court of the United States and inscrit au Barreau de Strasbourg, France. He obtained acquittals for the 'Athens 3' missionaries on charges of proselytism at the Greek Court of Appeals in 1986 and won the leading religious liberty cases of Larissis v. Greece and Bessarabian Orthodox Church v. Moldova before the European Court of Human Rights. As a result of his victory in the latter case, he was presented with the Patriarch's Medal by the Patriarch of the Roumanian Orthodox Church (October, 2003).

     He is internationally regarded both as a theologian (his debates with the late Bishop James Pike, death-of-God advocate Thomas Altizer, and situation-ethicist Joseph Fletcher are historic) and as a lawyer (barrister-at-law of the Middle Temple and Lincoln's Inn, England; member of the California, Virginia, Washington State, and District of Columbia Bars and the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States).

     John Warwick Montgomery once told Contemporary Authors: "My world-view was hammered out at university; there I became a Christian. . . . Like the late C. S. Lewis (one of my greatest heroes), I was literally dragged kicking and screaming into the Kingdom by the weight of evidence for Christian truth."

     Montgomery asks people to consider several things: the "ancient documents" rule (that ancient documents constitute competent evidence if there is no evidence of tampering and they have been accurately transmitted); the "parol evidence" rule (Scripture must interpret itself without foreign intervention); the "hearsay rule" (the demand for primary-source evidence); and the "cross-examination" principle (the inability of the enemies of Christianity to disprove its central claim that Christ resurrected bodily from the dead in spite of the motive and opportunity to do so). All these, writes Montgomery, coalesce directly or indirectly to support the preponderance of evidence for Christianity, while the burden of proof proper (the legal burden) for disproving it rests with the critic, who, in 2,000 years, has yet to prove his case.13 We must, then, emphasize that to reject the New Testament accounts as true history is, by definition, to reject the canons of legitimate historical study. If this cannot be done, the New Testament must be retained as careful historical reporting.

     I had the great privilege in the early 80's of taking some courses taught by Dr. Montgomery at the Simon Greenleaf School of Law.

     For a truly objective legal review of the facts supporting Jesus as God and Savior and the evidence for the resurrection, I recommend some of his books such as:

     1. How Do We Know There Is a God? and Other Questions, Bethany Fellowship, 1974.

     2.Law and Gospel, Christian Legal Society,1978; second edition, Canadian Institute for Law, Theology and Public Policy.

     3. Faith Founded on Fact, Thomas Nelson, 1978.

     4. Evidence for Faith: Deciding the God Question, Probe Ministries International, 1991.

     5. Where Is History Going? Essays in Support of the Historical Truth of the Christian Revelation, with a commendatory letter by C. S. Lewis, Zondervan, 1969.

     I think I can drum up some logical and legal basis for my beliefs, and not just "because it's in the bible".

     Posted by love liberty at 09/10/2005 @ 02:35am

272. .

     BLOPPY

     For the record pal, I cite your posts of 9/05/2005 7:49 AM and, the incoherent, (must be a cut and paste from some KKK thing) on 9/06/2005 at 5:51 PM. So, it is proven that you are the "toughest, baddest, winger out there. And it is also proven that you are not above threatening people with purported knowledge of where they live.

     All that you are proving is that your mouth is too big for your muzzle. Not how you got this way, whether via inbreeding, or insufficient oxygen at birth, or a diet of paint chips. But whatever made you so dumb, it really works.

     Moreover, you are not interested in the record. You throw around dates to unnamed threads. Paste up the post or at least the paragraph spelling out the threat that has wet your pant, and let's also see that "incoherent" post! Let's see what you are talking about.

     But I do want you to know that if I said anything to hurt your feelings and should be sorry for, I'm glad. There are decomposed bodies in New Orleans less offensive than you.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/10/2005 @ 02:51am

273. BLOPPY CORRECTION

     My fitst paragraph should read,

     All that you are proving is that your mouth is too big for your muzzle. I don't know how you got this way, whether via inbreeding, or insufficient oxygen at birth, or a diet of paint chips. But whatever made you so dumb, it really works.

     Posted by nacl at 09/10/2005 @ 02:56am

274. In the finest tradition of Jeffersonian Democracy, we can say, "That goverment which governs least, governs best." We have fulfilled the mandate and turned loose the product of our philosophy in the form of uneducated, underpaid and under-employed slaves which the South has managed to keep in perpetuity. Why should government care for people who can't take care of themselves? We must understand that there are limitations to what the top ten percent of this nation, which makes 95% of the money, can do. I say the future involves bridges to nowhere and Halliburton/Kerr/McGee should use its knowhow to siphon off enough for Cheney's retirement. This seems only fair because Cheney made it possible for inaction by disarming our nation and closing our bases while putting Rumsfeld in the "Shock and Awe" business. Thus ever with enlightened government which provides for the uncommon weal. After all, it was uncommon men who made this nation what it is today: A divided cesspool, presided over by paid puppets for the oligarchic society we now are. Republicanism forever! Let the people eat cake. Bread is not available.

     Posted by PeaceGopher at 09/10/2005 @ 06:31am

275. PEACEGOPHER:

     Good post. Much in agreement. While we're at it, too bad we can't take away Congress's and former Presidents' golden parachute.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 07:45am

276. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     RE: Your post on our milk supply

     That's one of many reasons I only drink soy juice. As an aside, I am loathe to call anything squeezed from a bean milk... I have as yet never seen a soybean with teats or nipples.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 07:58am

277. LOVELIBERTY:

     Belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior is not based on historical fact. Belief that he is divine cannot be borne out by the evidence, as it is, according to the scientific method. If an occurrance cannot be replicated, it is therefore unprovable. While there is anecdotal evidence of a man called Jeshua ben Joseph, the man to whom e refer as Christ, aside from the bible there is little in the historical record to prove his existence.

     Why is a Christian posting this? Simple. To believe in Christ as Savior is what is called a leap of faith. To quote the Apostle's Creed:

     I believe in God, the Father Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:

     Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.

     He descended into hell.

     The third day He arose again from the dead.

     He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.

     I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting.

     I believe this because I do. Simple. And in case you are wondering, trying to prove any of this forces you to fall into the rut of circular logic. However, I don't see where that is a bad thing. Religion has never been, and honestly probably should not be, the realm of rationality and reason, as the very nature of religion describes a world in direct contravention of the one in which we live. So... who cares if your religion proves its own existence. It is a personal matter, and while open for discussion, is not something that can be challenged by non-believers, unless you allow them to challenge it.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 08:11am

278. why is it that the god freaks pollute every thread? are there not enough religious blogs out there? I suggest you start some and leave us heathens to our politics, again, include me out.

     we have heard a lot from the right about the entitlement society, people relying on the government to do what they should do for themselves. what goes unmentioned is corporate welfare. the biggest and most profitable corporations have their snouts firmly planted in the public trough. and the ones screaming the loudest about smaller government are the worst abusers.

     the song about organized labor goes like this, the gains made for the workers, well that was all so long ago.now things are different. Wrong. we have seen spectacular rollbacks of the gains made, vide Bush's order to allow contractors in N.O. to pay substandard wages. No Martin Van Buren he. could we have some outrage please.

     by the way I am completely non partisan in the political sense in this, I think they all stink. the socalled democrats are complicit. the founding fathers, by the way, all rich guys, not a farmer or tradesman among them, would be astonished how he congress is for sale. they all have been bought and sold, by a system of legalized bribery.

     The absurdity of posturing politicians saying, sure I took millions from this or that industry, but this certainly will not affect my vote on matters regulating that very industry.

     when people speak of the american revolution I always reply that it would be a good idea. that 1776 thing certainly was no revolution. the same rich guys were in charge after than before.

     when you don't get a raise for five or ten years, that means your boss is stealing from you, yes stealing. he is paying you in money that is worth far less for the same or more work. and stealing is immoral, isn't it.

     I am always totally amazed how people of the working class have been so brainwashed, as to defend the advantages of the rich and corporations, vide the estate tax for instance, and the tax cuts for the super rich which the repeal of the estate tax is one. it is in people's minds and attitudes that the class war is fought, and the people have lost.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 08:57am

279. may I offer a bit of advice to those who submit gargantuan posts. no one reads them. you increase your chances immeasurably by brevity.I want to read what you have to say, but these lengthy missives strain my eyes.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 09:01am

280. LL:

     You didn't just quote lawyers as reasons to believe in Jesus, did you?

     LOL, the levels to which you will stoop.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 09:11am

281. JOHANNESROLF:

     Good post regarding corporate welfare, institutional thievery, and the American Revolution. Someone finally said it.

     As to your views on religion, unfortunately, we live in an era of burdensome religiosity. You are correct, many on the right feel the need to couch their heartless policies in pompous important-sounding speech invoking their interpretations of their creator. It unfortunately falls to people such as myself to attempt to defend the honor of what Christianity ACTUALLY stands for, and snatch it back from the greedy, bloody, dripping maw of neo-conservative realpolitik.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 09:47am

282. LL:

     I'll make a deal with you: no more religion talk from you on the threads (unless the topic of the thread is religion) and I won't make you have to witlessly defend yourself.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 09:49am

283. Jorcheim, that moniker reminds me of some of the villages in Germany I grew up in, what does it mean to you?

     as for defending religion against those who abuse it is surely a worthwhile endeavor, I still feel this is not the place for it.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 10:29am

284. JOHANNESROLF:

     My handle on here... long story. Ironically enough, I came up with it when I was living in Berlin, back in 1997. If I told you what it meant, you would think me an even stranger bird than you already do. Think of it now as my nom de guerre.

     As to religion, I would agree, this is probably not the place. But as long as our friendly neighborhood neo-con fundamentalists feel the need to brandish their religious fervor like a broadsword, I will continue to dull their blades.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 10:33am

285. Blacks fault lack of local leadership

     By Brian DeBose THE WASHINGTON TIMES September 10, 2005

     Some in the black community are beginning to question what happened to the black leadership during the Hurricane Katrina disaster, especially in the city of New Orleans. While a few black leaders, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson, the Rev. Al Sharpton and the Congressional Black Caucus, have singled out the president for blame, others say Mayor C. Ray Nagin, who is black, is responsible for the dismal response to the flooding that stranded thousands in the city's poorest sections. "Mayor Nagin has blamed everyone else except himself," said the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, founder and president of the Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny. "The mayor failed in his duty to evacuate and protect the people of New Orleans. ... The truth is, black people died not because of President Bush or racism, they died because of their unhealthy dependence on the government and the incompetence of Mayor Ray Nagin and Governor Kathleen Blanco," he said. As news and images of the dead, stranded, sick and hungry waiting days for help inundated Americans over the last two weeks, public officials at every level have sought to deflect blame. Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael D. Brown and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff have pointed their fingers at the first responders in New Orleans and Louisiana, while the mayor and the governor have sought to tag the Bush administration with botching the emergency response. The New Orleans mayor has criticized the president for the slow response and the resulting loss of life, but recent reports show he failed to follow through on his own city's emergency-response plan, which acknowledged that thousands of the city's poorest residents would have no way to evacuate the city. He took a second hit when an Associated Press photo showed 2,000 school buses under water and parked in a lot, unused in the evacuation. Reports say those buses could have ferried thousands of residents to safety outside New Orleans had they been deployed. Black political analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson, author of "The Disappearance of Black Leadership," said the problem lies with the current focus of black leadership, in both the elected and activist crowd, away from the poor and toward the new majority of middle-class black Americans. "In the past two decades, there has been a middle-class-focused leadership," Mr. Hutchinson said. "It is one thing to talk about affirmative action and moving people into top management positions in corporate America, but that does not do anything for the black poor." Julian Bond, chairman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said there is plenty of blame for all governments -- local, state and federal. "Something like this has been predicted for years and years, and it seems none of [the government officials] did anything about it to stop it, not simply for people who had nothing before the storm and now have less than nothing, but for everyone there," Mr. Bond said. But taking a cue from prominent black leaders, Rep. Charles B. Rangel, New York Democrat, put the blame on Mr. Bush and his record as commander in chief. "The president's policies in Iraq contributed to the slow response of federal troops who should have been on alert even before the hurricane struck." "Now, as bedlam reigns in New Orleans, 35 percent of Louisiana's and 37 percent of Mississippi's National Guard troops are in Iraq. The hurricane is clear evidence of how the war directly affects the domestic security of our country," he said. Mr. Peterson, however, chastised those who would lay all the blame at the feet of Mr. Bush. "If black folks want to blame someone for this tragedy, they only need to look in the mirror. Hopefully, this will help black people realize the folly of depending on the government or leaders and serve as a notice to avert future tragedies in other cities," he said.

     Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/10/2005 @ 11:11am

286. JORCHEIM

     What many of you who call us conservatives hypocrites for apparently contradictory polices not in lock step with our religous belief ignores a fundamental reality.

     That being that we do not allow nation-state policy to reflect personal religous ethics.

     In running a nation, the state is mortal thus it has no immortal soul to save. Thusly things must be done to preserve it, that often conflict with Christian theology.

     As Jesus said "Give to Ceaser that which is Ceaser and unto God the things that are God's."

     In addition, "My kingdom is not of this world" "Mans ways are not Gods ways"

     Hope this clears it up, and when ever people in the mind set of JORCHEIM attempt to dull blades in that manner, I will be here to re-sharpen them.

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 11:15am

287. CPT:

     Swords into ploughshares... always remember that.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 11:22am

288. Now, enough of the religion... please keep it on point.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 11:24am

289. JORCHEIM

     "Swords into ploughshares... always remember that"

     Not in this world, bc there will always be Saddams, UBL, Pol Pots, Hitlers, Mussolinis, and Tojos

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 11:36am

290. jorcheim, nom de plume is more accurate.

     libsrexalted, to post quotations from the wash. times speaks of an intellectual laziness I have become accustomed to from the right wing nuts. donnez moi un break, that's not a respected newspaper, it's the phony reverend Moon's rag. why you think that anyone who reads the Nation would be fooled or interested is completely beyond me.

     come let us hear your loony and loopy posts, so that we can take issue with them. also your handle is an insult to the readers whom you are trying to reach. maybe I should make my handle "hangBush"

     very interesting that Colin Powell, finally, regrets his lying UN speech. Look for a tear filled, McNamara like speech, about the war, "we were so wrong", oh maybe in ten years

     I am presently reading the NYTimes article on Bin Laden and Tora Bora, and my question is this? as this was well known for years, why did the Times not print this story before the election. I think the nation would have been glad to see Bush's phony war in Afghanistan exposed.

     Bush could not be elected dogcatcher now. again, his approval ratings will approach his american shoe size before long, you heard it here first.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 11:44am

291. JOHANNESROLF:

     Oh no, it's a war, bro. :D

     CPT:

     You forgot to add to that list George Bush (I & II), Andrew Jackson, Ronald Reagan, and essentially every other president, secretary of state, and CIA chief since WWII.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:09pm

292. Here we go again... RIO BRAVO you are just BEGGING for me to destroy your arguments one by one again, aren't you? Geez, could you please keep your posts to a manageable length so that when I lay waste to them, I don't have to write a tome?

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:12pm

293. ZERO:

     Their cynicism knows no bounds. You should have known that by now.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:19pm

294. Cpt;

     Are you so stupid that you don't realize what you just insinuated? Jorceim responed to your thuggish, " I will be there to sharpen them" with " his quote "turning swords into ploghsares " to which you brilliantly replied, " there will always be Saddams, Hitlers....." !

     Do you realize that this syntax implies that you include yourself with these Historical figures! What a genious!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 12:20pm

295. JORCHEIM,

     You are only the second Christian I have ever met who seems aware of what religions truly are and should be: the most beautiful methods of conceiving the world we are capable of.

     Anyway, the posts yesterday were phenomenal. I would love to have participated except The Man had me working my second straight 15-hour day. And I'm posting this before heading the office for the afternoon, in the hope of actually being able to enjoy a little football on His day tomorrow.

     And with that I now issue a "Ramble Alert" as I detach my fingers from my brain and begin to type. I hope this won't go too long, but I'm afraid.

     URMYGYRO has things, I think, exactly right. The issue of captitalism v. socialism is in some ways a non-starter. They deal with the same puzzle pieces in a sense, but they are not working toward the same result. Capitalism defines rational members of the labor force primarily as capital. There are some modes of capitalist economic theory that bring in "pursuit of happiness" issues but mostly it assumes we pursue money, our own capital. It all seems fair until your society becomes so large and so diverse. With nearly 300 million people from a dizzying variety of backgrounds, fairness goes out the window since some have a tremendous headstart in the economic race while others start well behind.

     One of the issues lurking behind the scenes seems to be technology. FREIHEIT is astute in many ways in his defense of Capitalism and much of it has to do with standards of living via technological advances. What is unclear is how this is connected to pure Capitalism. Would Bell, Edison, Orville and Wilbur, etc. failed to make their discoveries if their country had been more socialistic at the time? You might be able to argue this. You might be able to argue that the digital revolution could not have occured within a system that relied to heavily on government support and guidance. But why is it that so much of our technological breakthroughs end up being produced better and more efficiently elsewhere? Labor and environmental laws? Tax structures and subsidies?

     Technology has made our lives so much better in many ways. And yet there is such staggering poverty here and elsewhere. New Orleans, Houston, and other locations have poverty that is usually unseen, but we have had a glimpse in this last two weeks. Capitalism has nothing to say to these people because it has no use for them beyond whatever current purpose they might serve. Capitalism would most likely choose to leave them behind rather than waste federal funds on their housing, health, education, etc.

     One of the frequent questions posed on this site is "Have you read Das Kapital? Good leftie and German descendant thought I am, I have not. Could someone tell me what Socialism has to offer to the morbidly impoverished of this country other than a small check each month?

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 12:20pm

296. Adding to your posts Zero...I thought I heard on a newsbreak at some point yesterday that the Feds were trying to exclude N.O. contracts from the usual minimum wage standards. I have not searched for evidence of this so it could be a bunch of dootie, but it seemed perfectly consistent with other steps taken over the last couple of years with fed. contracts.

     Is there a reason why the feds are lining up these contracts rather than the state and local govts.--after all I thought that the New Orleans mayor and the LA governor were to blame for this. Shouldn't they have first dibs in trying to rectify their cock-up?

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 12:26pm

297. Thursday night I registered here and posted in response to the Editor's cut on a new WPA with reference to an article in the Christian Science Monitor ("America: Hungry for Sprituality"). Following the thread since that input, I've gotten some idea of the level of consultation here. As usual, the advancement of civilization is seen as hindered by innate human short-comings, hindered or helped by self-serving corporations and economic systems, and distracted by failures of the world's major religions to accomplish the vision of their various Prophets.

     Since the industrial revolution, materialism has failed as a substitute for religion as the levener of the people. While this substitution was more embraced in the western world than the rest, it's failure has ushered in an era of religious based problem solving as difficult times push many toward easy answers in written codes of law. The acsendency of orthodoxy is addressed in the CSM article in opposition to a "spiritual left" which sees unity in the voices of the Prophecies, creative inventiveness in the exercise of free will, and an anthropromorphized collective body analogous to adolescence in the indiviudal.

     I reference this article as an early offering in the evolution of understanding and consultation on the nature of religion in modern human society. It promotes a "spiritual" path of inner development which is the core of Prophecy over adherence to a mere code of laws of earlier ages. It reduces the "learned man" of the clergy in favor of the individual's own investigation of life. It simply makes each person the eyes of the world, trusting in a process which self-evidently manifests salvation.

     If we can assume that this point in human history is a tipping point for collective humanity, moving from self-serving adolesence into early maturity, then the institutions of our day become more clearly helpful, or not. How can global capitalism, by giving corporations the rights of individuals without the responsibilities of good citizenship, justified by a "if we build it and they buy it, then it must be good" mentality, be responsible? Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun magazine has developed the idea of public holding of corporate charters, granted by public vote, as a means of ensuring corporate public good.

     If we look at institutional religion, whether fundamentalist neopolitical Christianity as in America at present or fundamentalist Wahabism of Islam, we see how such adherence to orthodoxy fails to serve the collective public good. Such fundamentalist orthodoxy completely misreperesents the sympathetic unifying core of all Prophecy.

     As to the innate nature of humanity, are we not self-evidently capable of angelic or animal behaviors? Is this not the choice before each of us as we gain experience with life? Is not developing the capacity of individuals to better bring forth our angelic natures a primary collective responsiblity? Do we suffer by avoiding universal education to all? Is this not the proving ground of all Prophecy: the stage upon which we each choose angel or animal moment to moment? If we are to believe the Prophets, humanity is a single organism, inter-dependent upon the whole for our mutual survival.

     This line of thought calls for an inner awareness that allows the head and the heart to be united. How could the heart possibly embrace that which the head refuses to accept? We are informed both by science, the observer of the laws of nature, and by our inner faculty for organizing experience in a collective social environment that sees ourself as a part of a larger whole. Both wings are needed for the bird of humanity to fly.

     Simply stated, I believe a time has arrived for a deepening of the conversation on the nature of orthodoxy versus sprituality, and that the CSM article takes a step in that direction. I would recommend it and encourage consultation on it's impact on every aspect of current life on the planet, and on the advancement of civilization which must be our collective hope.

     Posted by dmbones at 09/10/2005 @ 12:36pm

298. jorcheim, the war metaphor has been exploited by the Bush gang so much that I am hesitant to add it to my arsenal of rhetorical devices.

     also don't add president Andrew Jackson to the list of Reagan, he was one of the good guys, as president if not as general. I urge everyone to read "the age of Jackson" by Schlesinger Jr. published in 1945 but written during the war years, many parallels with our time.your local library surely has a copy

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 12:41pm

299. I do not approve of mandatory public service, which has been suggested by some. Just like I do not favor a draft. any job worth doing is worth doing for money. I will not give my son, age 15, to the moloch of the war machine, and I do not favor a press gang approach to solving our nation's problems.

     my mother as a young woman was forced to join the "Bund deutscher Maedchen", the female version of the Hitler youth, and she was required to go to the countryside to help with the harvest. no thanks

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 12:49pm

300. I checked a little. It is not the minimum wage that was suspended. It is the "prevailing wage," whereby federal contractors are required to pay (obviously) the prevailing wage for a particular job/task. So if a carpenter's prevailing wage in a particular parish might be $12/hour, the contractor or sub-contractor need not follow that as would usually be the case and can choose to pay, say, $9/hr. A pretty dirty little augmentation to standard contracts considering that we are dealing with a disaster instead of simple road construction project. The term class warfare comes quickly to mind.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 12:49pm

301. JOHANNESROLF:

     Trail Of Tears ring a bell? Jackson was a genocidal warlord, anything else of good is of little import in the face of that. It's like saying that despite the Holocaust, Hitler did a lot of good things for Germany. I am not buying. And yes, I am comparing Jackson to Hitler. Not because invoking the spectre of Hitler is en vogue at the moment, but rather Hitler himself, and the architect of the Endloesung himself, Reinhard Heydrich, pointed to the US treatment of the Native Americans as their inspiration for thier ideas. Honestly, what is a reservation, but a large ghetto?

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:50pm

302. JOHANNESROLF:

     Not to sound curt or impolite, because this is not meant as such, but war has already been declared on those who disagree with the powers that be. Whether you like it or not, it's a war. I'd rather it not be, but hey... if wishes were fishes.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 12:56pm

303. America: Hungry for Sprituality [csmonitor.com]

     Posted by dmbones at 09/10/2005 @ 12:57pm

304. NO NONSENSE

     Thanks for your sharp analysis, but I am telling you what the world is really like. It is the natural state of man. I love it when you guys, who are most likely students, try to read inferences and derive ulterior messages when none exisit

     I know you and JORCHEIM actually believe that a lasting "World Peace, forever and ever" is attainable. But sadly it is not. You would do well to recognize that fact, naive wishful thinking along the lines of some Nation writers, who beleive that "if only WE didnt offend anyone in the world, they wouldnt hate us or want to kill us"

     JORCHEIM: Thanks for demostrating why you idioitology will remain in the realm of the fringe, but as a consevative, I fully encourage you to make your views known to the mass populace. Please, Please

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 1:08pm

305. CNN= CADAVER NEWS NETWORK....you liberals proud of this???While at the same time bitching about showing 9/11 photos or beheaded journalists???Hipocracy flows through liberals blood

     United Press International

     CNN said a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order Friday heading off a federal ban on showing photos of people left dead by Hurricane Katrina.

     The Federal Emergency Management Agency this week asked news agencies to refrain from airing or publishing photos of dead bodies, and excluded media from some recovery missions in New Orleans.

     The recovery of victims is being treated with dignity and the utmost respect and we have requested that no photographs of the deceased by made by the media, said FEMA in a statement.

     CNN announced the suit Friday afternoon, saying that prohibition of airing the pictures would prevent full and fair coverage of the story.

     The government cannot be allowed to hinder the free flow of information, said CNN journalist Anderson Cooper. That's what we say in the lawsuit.

     CNN talk show host Larry King announced late Friday a federal judge in Texas issued the restraining order and scheduled a hearing for Saturday to hear arguments in the suit.

     Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/10/2005 @ 1:16pm

306. cpt, world peace may indeed be unattainable in the long run, that does not mean we should not strive for it in the short run. immortality is surely unattainable, but that doesn't mean we should not strive to live as long as possible. and in order for everyone to live as long as possible I and many others prefer to be on the side of peace, and to negotiate and compromise with our enemies instead of just dropping 15 000 pound bombs on them.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 1:20pm

307. So, LIBSARENUTS, you support the government serving as a filter between facts and the public? Maybe it would be better if we'd never known about 9/11. Then there would have been not outcry for attacking Afghanistan, no venture into Iraq, no Abu Ghraib, no Gitmo issues...

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 1:21pm

308. Bush's proclamation to void U.S. law on prevailing wages should be posted in every Labor Union hall in America.

     Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/10/2005 @ 1:21pm

309. CPT:

     First off, ad hominem remarks simply prove that at the very root of your arguments lies nothing greater than dust.

     Second, I don't believe, as you erroneously proffer, that "world peace, forever and ever" is possible. Perhaps if you actually READ my posts instead of assuming what they might say, you would know this. But just because something is impossible does not automatically preclude our trying with all our energy to achieve it. A fool's task, perhaps, and certainly a thankless one... but one I am willing to work for.

     Again, had you actually read some of my posts, you would know I never presumed that it is solely our fault that many in the world dislikes, even hates us. But to blithely pass the buck of responsibility of our actions onto the victims of our foreign policy only illutrates your unwillingness to think critically and consider that we, may, bear some responsibility for the current morass in which we find ourselves.

     Thirdly, I think you overestimate the number of people who believe, anymore, that it's "America, my country, right or wrong" anymore. Nationalism has been proven to be so destructive over the past 200 years, from the Napoleonic era to our current strain of hyper-nationalism, that is strains credulity that you could be so blind. Instead of throwing missives about how irrelevant progressives are, consider why you are on this board. I think you are scared that progressives are no longer (and never really were) the fringe that you try to paint us as. Methinks he doth protest too much.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 1:23pm

310. JORCHEIM

     You know not all Native Americans in the 1800s were like the movie "Dances with Wolves"

     Yes, I know we treated them poorly, but have EVER considered why? Other than the standard liberal line of "our Racism and intolerance"

     As an "enlightened" liberal you should take a look at WHY there was so much distrust of Native Americans.

     You never hear about how the Indian Tribes of the east coast would burn prisoners alive to "honor" the Tribe

     Or about how Commanche/Apache would remove the skin of captured whites while still alive. hmmmm

     Though I am not trying to offend anyone, just a simple truth, the Naive American Tribes were not ALL peaceful/nature loving Sioux

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 1:24pm

311. TJBEHRENS1, entrepreneurship can flourish under many forms of socialism and does so in several countries. Capitalism does not automatically imply individual entrepreneurship. Just try starting out with little money and a great idea in the good ol' USA. If you look, you'll find more instances of the rich person getting more rich off of a poor person's idea and sweat, while the poor person gets little or nothing.

     Capitalism ends up with a few people controlling nearly all of the capital and doing what they can to ensure that they keep and extend their horde of capital. No rule of capitalism says that the capital must be intelligently utilized or utilized for the long-term benefit of society.

     In whatever system, power and the accumulation of wealth thwart the health of society. We should have a new populism that empowers individuals, small groups and those without large financial resources. Large accumulation of wealth simply forces some people (in large numbers) into unpleasant and painful circumstances.

     The Republicans are now attempting to make wealth accumulation even more easy by eliminating the estate tax. We should do the reverse -- raise it. We should also tax not only income but wealth. By so doing we'll be doing the rich a favor because the Bible says that a rich man has less chance of getting into heaven that a camel has of going through the eye of a needle.

     Tangentially, I don't like hearing any rich person of any political persuasion telling me anything about God or being holy. That includes Pat Robertson. Except for a few like John Edwards, rich people are clueless about what it's like to be poor. How many meals have they missed?

     Posted by adr at 09/10/2005 @ 1:25pm

312. Bush's voiding of certain aspects of U.S. law provides "clear and convincing" evidence that Bush will void the law when it is in the interest of his wealthy friends.

     Bush's action on prevailing wage law belies his excuse of not wanting to violate federal law when it came to deploying federal troops to help the poor and downtrodden people of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.

     Think Patriot Act too.

     Posted by oraibi1952 at 09/10/2005 @ 1:27pm

313. CPT:

     Again with the treating of historic events as discrete, having no relevance to the continuity of history.

     By the time the Trail Of Tears occurred, Native Americans of ALL stripes had been brutalized by over 300 years of warfare and strife, disease and famine. You want to know why many, nay, MOST Native Americans were willing to fight against the US government? Because every white man with which they had ever had any contact had tried to kill them and take their land. Don't sit there and blame the victim. You of ALL people should understand what vengeance is.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 1:29pm

314. If you want to gain an understanding of exactly what the Native Americans endured, consider this. When Columbus landed on Hispaniola, the estimated number of aboriginals was around 90-115 million, including both North, Central, and South America. Tody that number is somewhere around half a million. If my numbers are correct, that is between 99.5% and 99.6% genocide. Hitler wished he could have been as successful.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 1:33pm

315. Oh, and CPT. The practice of taking skin or scalps was originated by Europeans (or people of European descent) as a way of accounting for verifiable deaths of Native Americans. People were paid on the basis of how many scalps or hides they brought in. Read your history.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 1:35pm

316. JORCHEIM,

     Ghandi and MLK have shown the way to protests policy with which you disagree.

     Sorry I do not justify sneak attacks on innocents, which seems to be the preferred methoed of jihadists.

     Why dont you preach to them? Why not educate the ones who carry out murderous attacks that TARGET civilians.

     I dont think progressives are irrelavant, merely foolishly idealistic for not seeing what the world as it is.

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 1:37pm

317. JORCHEIM

     OH I SEE, The old saying "I taught a man to shoot a rifle, years later he went and killed 50 people." Who is to blame?

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 1:41pm

318. The right wing continues to play the race card. They continue to insist that the The thin veneer of civility has been pierced by the behaviour of poor blacks that threaten to destroy our whole culture if we let them!...

     This week, in Newsweek George Will said as much as he reinforsed the notion that there has been extensive murder and rape occuring in NO since the flood........

     I acknowledge that there has been extensive looting but murder and rape - I don't think so! Does anybody have any empiracle evidence to support these assertions? I don't want hearsay, I want real evidence!.....

     I keep hereing these reports of perveasive incivility by the right wingers. Is it possible that this is just another cheap , hateful facet of the "blame it on the poor folks" agenda?......

     Anyone who still thinks race is not an issue, This from the New York Times today; Reporters heard Baton Rouge Represenative comment that, " WE have been trying to clean out those housing projects for years. We couldn't do it - but God did.".....

     Can't you just feel the love!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 1:41pm

319. cpt, I prefer foolishly idealistic to thinly veiled apologists for genocide. your knowledge of history is minute as is your sense of morality, evidently

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 1:43pm

320. CPT:

     You are again ignoring history. The US has repeatedly thoughout its history fired upon innocents. From the attack by the US Army upon Matamoros in Mexico to begin the Mexican American War to the firebombing of Dresden, to the dropping of nuclear ordinance on Japan, to the napalming of Vietnam into oblivion, to invading other countries (Iraq instantly springs to mind) which have NEVER attacked us, your assertion that we are somehow above attacking innocents does not bear out when considered against history. I am tired of neo-cons and their lackeys holding the world to a much higher standard than they are willing to hold themselves. You are a hypocrite, as are your conservative bedfellows.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 1:44pm

321. also we cannot preach to the jihadists, as they are "over there", we can however preach to the jihadists over here, to which number you seem to belong. please enlighten me if I'm in error

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 1:44pm

322. CPT:

     You said: OH I SEE, The old saying "I taught a man to shoot a rifle, years later he went and killed 50 people." Who is to blame?

     My retort: That has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the point I made. Brutalization creates victims, and it creates those who would ish to claim revenge on those who have hurt them. Think about the cries for vengeance after 9/11. Now, multiply those feelings millions of times, for that is approximately how many corpses we as a nation have to answer for.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 1:47pm

323. JORCHEIM,

     You references back to Columbus in the 1490s, relate to the American northern tribes in what way? did the aboriginals in the north know what their brothers in the south endured? Unlikely

     So if a black man killed my great grandfather, I should immediatley sterotype him and assume the worst of all other black men who come my way?

     And as a point of fact, it was much more complicated than you are implying.

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 1:48pm

324. you state our enemies attack civilisans, shameful to be sure, but does anyone believe that the heavy bombardment of entire neighborhoods and town does not kill civilian?

     american exceptionalism at work

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 1:50pm

325. CPT;

     "IDIOTOLOGY"? That's a pot calling the kettle black! You know what the difference between a "tool" and a fool is? A "tool" is a guy like Cliff Clavin - he thinks he knows something! Thats you pal!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 1:51pm

326. JORCHEIM It has everything to do with the fact as you claimed that the Europeans taught them to scalp people, more precisely the French, you infer that Europeans were resposible for teaching them brutalization, when they were in fact brutal enough on their own

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 1:51pm

327. CPT:

     WRONG AGAIN!!!

     There are MANY examples of intertribal trade from the very tip of South America to the Innuit. Again, if you read more than just your conservative talking points distributed by Fox News, perhaps you would be aare of the work being done in Cultural anthropology, specifically with regards to Native American culture.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 1:52pm

328. NO NONSENSE

     Thank you for proving my point,

     PS hey brother dont take things so personally, relax, take a knee and drink water.

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 1:53pm

329. CPT:

     You are no longer worth my time. You illustrate time and time again your ignorance to the world, both historical, cultural, economic, and recent. You need to go read some history books, and perhaps, try to understand human nature a little better. Once you do that, then, and only then, should you return to this board.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 1:54pm

330. Behrens, we know it was the prevailing wage, the effect is the same, it's ok to screw the workers, as long it's during an emergency. shameful, as is your apology for it. I don't think the Fema workers are asked to work for less than their accustomed salary because it's an emergency. think your posts through, if you can, before you write.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 1:55pm

331. the demonization of the indians was the prevailing ideology, and used as an excuse for genocide. an ideology obviously shared by Cpt.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 1:57pm

332. JOECHEIM,

     So they were fully aware of the history of columbus and other explorers crimes? Ok That justifies them sterotyping poor whites in the 1800s, who were the ones who first settled the frontier.

     Try to stay on point, And if i missed a recent discovery, i had not heard about it.

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 1:58pm

333. JORCHEIM

     Trying to understand the enlightened mind, but since I dont share your views lockstep you judge my view points as having no merit. odd for a liberal

     JOHANN You would be wrong, but if you wish to only hear what you want, please feel free to push the ignore button

     Posted by CPT at 09/10/2005 @ 2:02pm

334. Boy, I stay away for less than a day and now can't seem to find what thread you guys are pursuing. Native Americans? Now how did they enter the discussion? I beg The Nation to get another article up - that seems to re-set the posts back to some semblance of a general theme.

     Another thing - has CPT added anything to the discussion of late? or LibsAreSourceofWisdom? Where are the articulate conservatives with something actually interesting to say when we need them most?

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/10/2005 @ 2:03pm

335. If life has spiritual laws as well as material laws, then the operating principle is likely the golden rule. Does it make sense, in such a case, that actions toward the golden rule advance civilization, while action away from it regress civilization? If so, then then the movement of every atom makes progressive action manifest; while regressive actions create burdens and hardships. Perhaps we avoid spiritual laws at our peril.

     Posted by dmbones at 09/10/2005 @ 2:07pm

336. JOHANNESROLF,

     I wrote:

     "I checked a little. It is not the minimum wage that was suspended. It is the "prevailing wage," whereby federal contractors are required to pay (obviously) the prevailing wage for a particular job/task. So if a carpenter's prevailing wage in a particular parish might be $12/hour, the contractor or sub-contractor need not follow that as would usually be the case and can choose to pay, say, $9/hr. A pretty dirty little augmentation to standard contracts considering that we are dealing with a disaster instead of simple road construction project. The term class warfare comes quickly to mind."

     What on earth causes you to call me an apologist for what I clearly imply is exploitation? I'm on your side, dude. Curb the insults, please.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 2:19pm

337. fishbite you are correct, we have gotten off topic. the antidote to that is to post something on topic. near the end of the thread this often happens, threads, like nature, abhor a vacuum.

     Cpt, I have asked for your opinion by responding to your posts in a sincere way. your answers don't show such sincerety, if I wanted to push the ignore button for you I would have done so long ago

     your defense of genocide aginst the indians is grotesque

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 2:19pm

338. behrens, I rechecked your post, and I did misinterpret it, my apolgies

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/10/2005 @ 2:22pm

339. Anyone who still thinks race is not an issue, This from the New York Times today; Reporters heard Baton Rouge Represenative comment that, " WE have been trying to clean out those housing projects for years. We couldn't do it - but God did.".....

     Can't you just feel the love!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE 09/10/2005 @ 1:41pm

     More race baiting NN? There is no such article in the New York Times nor even from doing a Google search. Previously it was cited as coming from the Wall Street Journal. If there had been a quote like that, a specific name would have been indicated and it would be all over the media as Jesse Jackson and Sharpton would have been all over the networks to get attention on it.

     Pretty desparate attempt to continue a pathetic attempt to paint conservative Republicans as racist.

     Posted by love liberty at 09/10/2005 @ 2:47pm

340. LL,

     This was mentioned in Maureen Dowd's column in the NYT:

     "The Wall Street Journal reported that Representative Richard Baker of Baton Rouge was overheard telling lobbyists: 'We finally cleaned up public housing in New Orleans. We couldn't do it, but God did.'" Is this the name you requested?

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 2:55pm

341. Freiheit, I never said Cuba was an eden. NOt once. I simply made the observation that, as poor as they are at many things there are some concrete tasks that they're better at than this government is, with all its know-how and technology. I also said that it's democratic process was as at a high a level as that of the United States. I never said anything about edens or paradise. Not once.

     Funny. You live in a one party state that's split into two factions of the ruling class, the wealthy, called the republicans and the democrats. NO one else in this country has any real representation. It is a tragic error that Cuba has an openly functioning one party system, but that's a problem the Cuban people are going to have to correct. No one will "give" them that freedom, as the doodybrain in the White house and his acolytes are always saying. There are factions within the Cuban party, and those forces will continue to play themselves out after Castro's death, if the fucking United States can be forced out of the way.

     It amazes me you live in a country that has the audacity to insist on a military base in a sovereign nation like Cuba, has the bloody fucking nerve to build a prison camp there, and than lecture the world on democracy. And you apparently don't see the disconnect. Well, it's a waste of time to argue the point with you then.

     Posted by Jayarjunyah at 09/10/2005 @ 3:13pm

342. Bush's voiding of certain aspects of U.S. law provides "clear and convincing" evidence that Bush will void the law when it is in the interest of his wealthy friends.

     Bush's action on prevailing wage law belies his excuse of not wanting to violate federal law when it came to deploying federal troops to help the poor and downtrodden people of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.

     Think Patriot Act too.

     Posted by ORAIBI1952 09/10/2005 @ 1:27pm

     Bush did not void the law. No president can just void a law. Bush temporarily suspended Davis-Bacon to allow several things.

     1. Hold down the cost of rebuilding in the Gulf States (or perhaps you want no cost controls and just further expand the deficit?)

     2. This will allow smaller companies to compete for contracts.

     3. More people will have the opportunity for jobs

     It should be noted that this has been done before by other presidents.

     Roosevelt in 1942

     Nixon in 1971

     Bush Sr. 1992 Hurricane Andrew

     Posted by love liberty at 09/10/2005 @ 3:21pm

343. Dbones:

     Give it a break ! If God made us in his own image.....Well I won't go there , it will only add fuel to the fire.....

     Look, man is intrinsically selfish. Any compassion or empathy is learned behaviour and not learned for altruistic reasons necessarrilly. WE encourage civility for selfish reasons - so we can survive. In fact if you look at the Japenese one could argue that the closer you cram us together the more civil we get! Why? Because we have to learn to be tolerant or we'll kill each other. So we're civil, but only when we're forced to be. Eventually, I guess we'll get tired of killing each other and realize it's imperitve for the perpetuation of our species. THe Israelis and Palestinians aren't helping my argument!

     So maybe we just need to interbreed to the point where everybody is indestinquishable and we're crammed together like sardines! Maybe then intolerance and hate will dissapear but only for pragmatic reasons!....

     The problem is: fatalistic, Christians think Jesus is going to come and save us from ourselves. So we'll never get the chance to evolve! Interesting paradox!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 3:21pm

344. TJBEHRENS1 ;

     Thanks, for again revealing Liberty to be a partisan hack! I read the article this morning but I couldn't remember the guys name!....

     Liberty; I don't engage in hollow bullshit like you!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 3:27pm

345. TJB,

     Thank you for providind the source. Here is Baker's response:

     Baker issued a lengthy statement saying he was "taken aback" by the Journal's brief item. "What I remember expressing, in a private conversation with a housing advocate and member of my staff, was that 'We have been trying for decades to clean up New Orleans public housing to provide decent housing for residents, and now it looks like God is finally making us do it,' " Baker wrote. "Obviously I have never expressed anything but the deepest concern about the suffering that this terrible catastrophe has caused for so many in our state."

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/09/AR200509 0901930.html

     I don't know what the real truth is, but for anyone to suggest that all members of any political party share the views of a singular comment by one lowly congressman is lacking in any real objectivity or just looking for more partisanship.

     Posted by love liberty at 09/10/2005 @ 3:41pm

346. LL,

     Your rationalizations for low wages on the federal contracts don't wash. Curbing costs? The federal government is the client and is handing out the contracts to private corporations. Just as any client will on any construction job, it can dictate any number of things related to the work process (insisting on a certain standard of materials used, a specific time frame, limits on sub-contractors, etc.). Since "it" is also "us" it is reasonable for "it" to insist that the private contractors not screw those of "us" out of a justifiable wage. If the contractors think the contract is unfair, they don't need to bid.

     Yeah, I envision lots of local, small companies lining up to do these jobs and actually competing thanks to the low wages they can offer. And maybe if the feds actually insisted on low wages, then virtually all current evacuees could be employed and the work could be done exclusively by local contractors. I believe that the storm-damaged region has an ancient history when it comes to doing efficient work with very low cost labor. Not necessarily a history some of us would like to relive.

     As for the other presidents, why repeat past blunders when we have the opportunity to be fair?

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 3:43pm

347. LIberty:

     "I don't know what the real truth is...." That's right! you would'nt know the real truth if somebody shoved it up your........

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 3:51pm

348. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     RE: Your post on our milk supply

     That's one of many reasons I only drink soy juice. As an aside, I am loathe to call anything squeezed from a bean milk... I have as yet never seen a soybean with teats or nipples.

     Posted by JORCHEIM 09/10/2005 @ 07:58am

     Have you been looking for a bean like that? :-)

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 4:05pm

349. As for the other presidents, why repeat past blunders when we have the opportunity to be fair?

     TJB,

     Because I don't consider it a blunder. Like many conservatives, I believe that Davis-Bacon should be repealed. It is a poor way for the US Govt to do business and was instituted and maintained to this day to please Big Labor.

     Posted by love liberty at 09/10/2005 @ 4:06pm

350. "I don't know what the real truth is...." That's right! you would'nt know the real truth if somebody shoved it up your........

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE 09/10/2005 @ 3:51pm

     First, I think you and Bloppy have an inordinate interest in anal sex. Don't want to suggest anything but?

     Secondly, I think there is a reasonable assumption to made that when you created your blogger name, your keyboard stuck and it came out No-Nonsense instead of No-Sense as you intended based upon truth in advertising requirements.

     Posted by love liberty at 09/10/2005 @ 4:10pm

351. That being that we do not allow nation-state policy to reflect personal religous ethics.

     CPT, you speak only for yourself! I wish your claim were true of all evangelicals, but it is demonstrably false. Exhibit A: OKSG Exhibit B: LOVE LIBERTY

     As for LL, that first post of yours today was way too long. I am just not going to wade through something that long. I will skim it to get the gist, but then scroll on for the sake of finishing before sundown....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 4:15pm

352. Wow, Zero! Back with a vengeance! Sad that your anger had to be triggered by our leaders, but you're never more eloquent than when firing with both barrels.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 4:31pm

353. LIberty:

     YOU SLAY ME! I take great comfort in the fact that you (more than anybody else here)are a represenative of your ilk and justify the stereotype.

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 4:38pm

354. LL, I wonder if you've ever lived in the South, by which I mean one of the states that was part of the Confederacy during the civil war. I have, and I also lived much of my life in Kentucky, a border state in said war. I've lived in TX, FL, and VA. These are all red states, all voting for Dubya twice. I can assure you that there are many racists in these states. They like the GOP in part because the Dems are responsible for ending Jim Crow laws with civil rights legislation in the '60's. If you think racism of southern whites is not a huge reason for the success of the GOP in those states, you are delusional. I know it because I HAVE SEEN IT WITH MY OWN EYES too many times.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 4:40pm

355. LL, In case it wasn't clear, I was responding to your statement

     Pretty desparate attempt to continue a pathetic attempt to paint conservative Republicans as racist.

     No, many conservative Republicans paint themselves as racist all on their own - they don't need help....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 4:44pm

356. No-No..., "Eventually, I guess we'll get tired of killing each other and realize it's imperitve for the perpetuation of our species."

     Realizing such, better to consult cooperatively as we're able, than suffer until we're forced to...., no?

     Posted by dmbones at 09/10/2005 @ 5:23pm

357. Dembones;

     That would assume we are inclined to introspection and forsight. So maybe some Buddists will get with the program but like I said most of "us" are just waitng for Jesus to come and fix everything. Hell, we can't even get these morons to consider Global warming! Why worry about destroying the planet - when the Bible say's it is ours to rape and piliage until the "Big Guy" comes back. He's just going to lay it to waste then anyway!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 6:11pm

358. "The Bush administration must be put on a leash to keep it from indulging its worse tendencies as it fades from view under the immense and still accreting weight of the collective electoral liabilities it has created for itself. This administration has been like a re-run of the Hoover administration, only on steroids."

     ZERO ...you are so full of shit you stink. So do the rest of you silly liberals. All your whining and bitching wont change the outcome of the fact your losers and will not gain power again for years to come(hopefully never). Go ahead and shout & scream like you all are so good at:

     2000 election

     9/11

     2002 election

     Iraq war

     Michael Moore(and all the silly fools that sound like him)

     2004 election

     Valerie Plame

     Cindy Sheehan

     Hurricane Katrina

     All the above attempts....just makes you look more foolish and gives us more seats in congress, the white house and soon the courts. You fools cant even see you've already gone over the cliff..bye bye!

     Posted by antizero at 09/10/2005 @ 6:18pm

359. Dead bodies are still floating all over New Orleans. Hundreds, if not thousands, of children are still searching for their parents. Wiped-out communities are still awaiting water and power.

     So, what is armchair first responder Sen. Hillary Rotten Clinton's first response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster?

     A commission.

     "It has become increasingly evident that our nation was not prepared," Sen. Clinton, lectured in a Labor Day letter to President Bush. Yes, thank you, Sen. Sherlock. Those gleaming degrees from Wellesley and Yale Law are really paying off.

     Sen. Clinton's "Katrina Commission" would be modeled after the "independent" 9/11 Commission. I can see it now: Democrat Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco, whose main imperative is covering up her own culpability, will be the next Jamie Gorelick; Jefferson Parish President Aaron Broussard, the local corrupt-o-crat who got his 15 minutes of fame on "Meet the Press" last week, will be the next Richard Ben-Veniste.

     And this time for "diversity," maybe they'll call on Randall "Black people are eating corpses . . . oh, never mind" Robinson and rapper Kanye "It's all about me" West to share their deep expertise.

     Despite the abject failures of local and state officials to prepare for the worst, abide by their own evacuation plans, maintain an effective police force, and crack down on looters, Sen. Clinton's commission would only examine the "adequacy of federal response efforts."

     Translation: Bash Bush.

     Do we really need another group of staunch Democrats and milquetoast Republicans appointed to furrow their brows and pull their chins and stab their fingers in the air on cue for weeks on end while they find 50 different ways to tell us "We are not prepared"?

     Have you forgotten the spectacle of 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey hectoring witnesses, whining about his time being "eaten up," and yukking it up on Jon Stewart's "Daily Show" as he served on the federal panel investigating the deadliest enemy attack on American soil?

     Or the stunning arrogance of 9/11 Commission chair Tom Kean, who carped that "people ought to stay out of our business" when challenged on Gorelick's clear conflicts of interest in investigating the barriers to communication between law enforcement and intelligence agencies?

     As military leaders now spearhead bureaucratically delayed recovery efforts and private citizens and corporations lead the way on massive charitable relief campaigns, the last thing this country needs is another grand-standing panel of blowhards to soak up public resources to restate the obvious. There isn't a single Katrina victim who will benefit from hindsight hound dogs publishing thousand-page tomes with cherry-picked evidence that distorts the true narrative of what happened and why.

     That is the wasteful, shameful legacy of the 9/11 Commission, which is undoubtedly relieved that Katrina has diverted attention away from the Able Danger fiasco on the eve of the fourth 9/11 anniversary. The panel failed to include any information in its report about the army intelligence unit that had identified al Qaeda cells -- including several 9/11 hijackers -- one year before the attacks. Five eyewitnesses deemed credible by the Pentagon have now vouched for the information, which the FBI never saw because of bureaucratic roadblocks enforced under the Clinton administration.

     If it don't fit, you must omit. That seems to have been the unwritten mandate of the 9/11 Commission, and it's the mandate that the Democrats' top presidential contender in 2008 wants her Katrina Commission to follow.

     President Bush gave in once to commission-ary zeal. He shouldn't make the same mistake twice. Let agency inspector generals, private, non-partisan researchers, the press and citizen journalists do the post-mortems.

     Leave the leather chair-warmers and their PR agents out of it.

     Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/10/2005 @ 7:02pm

360. Zero - whatever you've been doing, keep it up! You've got someone so incensed that he's morphed into ... AntiZero!! Carrying the mantle of Al*dra, Antizero comes into the battle armed with, well armed with nothing really. I like the bit about being so full of shit you stink - I guess if you're partially full of shit, you don't stink.

     Guess what, AuntieZero - I can smell your stink all the way through the internet. The stink of ignorance, prejudice, hatred and yes, that growing kernel of fear.

     Posted by Fishbite at 09/10/2005 @ 7:11pm

361. LIBSARENUTS,

     What the hell is a "staunch Democrat." Someone who insists on...uh, what? If you think the Senate is going to allow Hillary to create a commission without Republican control, well then, uh, geez I just don't know how to even contemplate such a fantasy.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 7:28pm

362. Several hours ago I asked if anyone could varify any of the salacious rumours of violence that were being reported. I suspected they were mostly part of an effort to excuse the lame response of Local authorities, Fema and Homeland Security - now I'm certain......

     Did the rumor mill help kill Katrina victims?   Matt Welch     All along Hurricane Katrina's Evacuation Belt, in cities from Houston to Baton Rouge to Leesville, Louisiana, the exact same rumors are spreading faster than red ants at a picnic. The refugees from the United States' worst-ever natural disaster, it is repeatedly said, are bringing with them the worst of New Orleans' now-notorious lawlessness: looting, armed carjacking, and even the rape of children.     "By Thursday," the Chicago Tribune's Howard Witt reported, "local TV and radio stations in Baton Rouge...were breezily passing along reports of cars being hijacked at gunpoint by New Orleans refugees, riots breaking out in the shelters set up in Baton Rouge to house the displaced, and guns and knives being seized."     The only problem-none of the reports were true. "The police, for example, confiscated a single knife from a refugee in one Baton Rouge shelter," Witt reported. "There were no riots in Baton Rouge. There were no armed hordes." Yet the panic was enough for Baton Rouge Mayor-President Kip Holden to impose a curfew on the city's largest shelter, and to warn darkly about "New Orleans thugs."     Even before evacuees could get comfy in Houston's Astrodome, rumors were flying that the refugees had already raped their first victim, just like that seven-year-old in the Superdome, or the babies in the Convention Center who got their throats slit. Not only was the Astrodome rape invented out of whole cloth, so, perhaps was the case reported 'round the globe of at least one pre-pubescent being raped and murdered in New Orleans' iconic sports arena.     "We don't have any substantiated rapes," New Orleans Police superintendent Edwin Compass said yesterday, according to the Guardian. "We will investigate if the individuals come forward." The British paper further pointed out that, "While many claim they happened, no witnesses, survivors or survivors' relatives have come forward. Nor has the source for the story of the murdered babies, or indeed their bodies, been found. And while the floor of the convention centre toilets were indeed covered in excrement, the Guardian found no corpses."     As Katrina wiped out New Orleans' communications infrastructure, and while key federal officials repeatedly expressed less knowledge than cable television reporters, panicky rumors quickly rushed in to fill the void. Many of them have shared the exact same theme-unspeakable urban ultra-violence, perpetuated by the overwhelmingly black population.     St. Tammany Parish President Kevin Davis issued a statement yesterday that "Rumors are flying and being repeated occasionally in the media that describe supposed criminal actions in St. Tammany Parish. These rumors are NOT true." Police superintendent Compass yesterday had to fend off accusations yesterday that his beleagured force "stood by while women were raped and people were beaten." ......

     Not surprised I didn't get any responce!   

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/10/2005 @ 9:08pm

363. One of the frequent questions posed on this site is "Have you read Das Kapital? Good leftie and German descendant thought I am, I have not. Could someone tell me what Socialism has to offer to the morbidly impoverished of this country other than a small check each month?

     Posted by TJBEHRENS1 09/10/2005 @ 12:20am

     Hmmm, the non-sequiturs are flying! Asking if someone has read Das Kapital is not tantamount to demanding a switch from capitalism to socialism. (Yes, I know, we don't have pure capitalism in this country any more than socialist countries have pure socialism, but go with me for sake of argument)

     FREIHEIT was waxing on about the glories of capitalism, and I was just wondering if he knew about the downsides, especially those manifest in the early years of capitalism. Simply expecting people to be well-read and knowledgeable about a topic is not the same as demanding a revolution towards a new economic paradigm. In fact, those two things are vastly different. So please lighten up and stop jumping to wild conclusions.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 9:12pm

364. ANTIZERO: Thanks for the very humorous post - most entertaining, I must say. Unfortunately, it is entertaining for all the wrong reasons.

     You see, it is you who has gone off the cliff, and millions more like you who voted for George W Bush. Sadly, you don't even know it yet. After a few more elections, it may be too late to stop you from taking the whole country with you.

     Empires do not last. The very ambition towards empire carries with it the seeds of destruction. If you live another 50 years or so, you will see the debacle unfold, unless along the way the majority come to their senses....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 9:24pm

365. Jesus rocks!

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 9:45pm

366. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     Actually, I have been looking for a woman with lactose-free breastmilk... *ducking*

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 9:47pm

367. zero:

     limit the wages of those at the top? that's blasphemy.

     limit the wages of those at the bottom so those at the top have the "incentive to work". that's capitalism

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/10/2005 @ 9:49pm

368. ZERO:

     You know, a man could get disappeared for uttering such heresy.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 9:56pm

369. JORCHEIM, Thanks for the funniest intentionally funny post I've seen in weeks! I am LOL.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:00pm

370. FREIHEIT, I knew you would. So I called my buddy who is a computer expert and he hacked the phone grid. You think you're coordinating a CIA hit on ZERO but you're really ordering up extra cable channels.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:02pm

371. ILP,

     I have been terribly tired and you are now the second good person I seem to have rubbed the wrong way. I'm not sure what in my post about Das Kapital wasn't sufficiently light. It seems like so long ago now, but I was rambling about different issues dealing with technology and capitalism. My question about Socialism was improperly phrased. I should have simply asked if Marx's ideas were instituted in next year's federal budget, what changes would we see for the poor.

     Honest, I didn't mean to be difficult, obtuse, or stupid. Maybe I should just drink myself to sleep and dream of a better tomorrow.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 10:03pm

372. I told him to give you the Playboy channel and Telemundo! Sorry about the Air America - I'll see about getting the volume turned up...er, I mean, turned off.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:06pm

373. TJB, Thanks for the clarification. I came across as a little bit defensive, but that's just because I don't want to give any ammo to the righties out there....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:08pm

374. ...as the Financial Times observed, "For the past quarter-century in Washington...US politics has been dominated by the conviction that what was wrong with America would be solved by getting government off the people's backs"--an attitude that contributed to the criminal inaction on the part of the federal government.

     Nearly half the past quarter-century, the White House was in Democratic hands. Only within the last eleven of those twenty-five years has the Republican Party controlled both houses of Congress, during which Clinton was in office six of those eleven years. Shame on Carter, Clinton and the Democratic-controlled Congress!

     While the Louisiana Army Corps of Engineers proposed $18 billion in projects that would have shored up the protective levees, improved flood control and perhaps prevented last week's breaches in the levees' walls, none of these projects were funded. Instead, the White House cut the Corps' budget and actually proposed a further 20 percent cut in 2006.

     Firstly, it's not the Louisiana Army Corps of Engineers, it's the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. Secondly, Bush has designated more money for Corps of Engineers work in LA during his five years in office than Clinton did during the last five years of his term. Thirdly, Louisiana received $1.9 billion dollars for Corps of Engineers work this year, whereas California, with six times the population of LA, received only $1.4 billion. Fourthly, the state of LA has refused to come up with matching funds for their part of paying for the levee work; consequently, they've left several million dollars in Federal funds lying on the table. Fifthly, LA threw away nearly $2.5 million restoring a freaking Mardi Gras fountain and the park around it on the edge of Lake Pontchartrain. Finally, the talk about Bush diverting $17.1 million to the Iraq war is a red herring in light of the fact the Corps of Engineers was in the middle of spending over $15 million on a lock on the Industrial Canal, one whose levee breached, to handle "increasing barge traffic" when barge traffic on that canal has actually been decreasing the last several years. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/07/AR 2005090702462.html

     When the hurricane happened the poverty rate in New Orleans stood at 28 percent--more than double the national average. Fully half the children of Louisiana now live in poverty, the second-highest child poverty rate in the country (its neighbor, Mississippi, is number one).

     That thought is enough to make a sane person wonder why that's the case after the Federal government has thrown billions of dollars at poverty since 1965. Mississippi is understandable as most of those in poverty live in the Mississippi Delta between Memphis and Vicksburg where job opportunities, other than in agriculture, are few and far between. On the other hand, there have been plenty of job opportunities unrelated to the service industry in New Orleans. The poverty rates of Memphis, Birmingham, Atlanta or Houston come nowhere near that of New Orleans. Why is that? How much does the widespread, and widely acknowledged, corruption in local and state politics contribute to that figure? The poor and indigent have been ill-served by their Congressional representatives keeping them down on the welfare plantation by doling out billions in "entitlement" programs without requiring anything constructive in return; this is being done solely as a means of ensuring their continued re-election to office. Is it any wonder why so many able-bodied poor were milling around the Superdome and the Convention Center wanting to know when the government was going to, once again, come to their rescue, while a very few without cars took the initiative of personally finding means to get out?

     Instead of pork barrel spending on absurd bridges like "Don Young's Way" in Alaska, let's have the federal government spend our money wisely to modernize our hospitals, highways, universities and other institutions.

     Let's not forget such memorable pork barrel projects as the aforementioned Industrial Canal lock project. Citing the website for Citizens Against Government Waste, "Members of Congress often say that pork is in the eye of the beholder and that pork provides valuable jobs. Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W. Va.) uses this argument all the time. Since 1991, Sen. Byrd has helped secure nearly $3 billion in pork for West Virginia, yet the state has the third lowest per capita income in the country. By Sen. Byrd's estimations and pork-barrel prowess, West Virginia should be the richest state in the country."

     "Finally, we must seek to upend twenty-five years of right-wing political dogma that is responsible for what went wrong in responding to this disaster."

     Again, Democrats have controlled Congress for over eleven of the last twenty-five years and they've held the White House twelve of those years. Shame on the "right-wing political dogma" coming from those bad, bad "protectors and providers for the oppressed" Democrats!

     Frankly, I'm just as fed up with the Far Right idealogues as I am with ultra-Left idealogues like you.

     Posted by AlBruAn at 09/10/2005 @ 10:11pm

375. As for Air America, it isn't that bad, is it? You guys don't think Franken is funny? Maybe I am just too much of a science geek and I guy like Franken seems hip and cool by comparison to my crowd.

     Jerry Springer is much more respectable on the radio than on his TV show.

     Unfortunately, Garafolo and Rhodes are strident wackos. But Garofolo is hot IMO, so I overlook her wackiness. God, what a babe....

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:12pm

376. ALBRUAN, After reading Nearly half the past quarter-century, the White House was in Democratic hands to kick off the 2nd paragraph of your post, I stopped taking you seriously.

     The facts are this: From Sep. 1980 (25 years ago) to January 1981 Carter was in the White House for 4 months. We then had 8 years of Reagan and 4 years of Bush I, followed by 8 years of Clinton and 4 years 8 months of Bush II.

     So that is 8.33 years of Dems out of 25 total years. Not even close to half.... Dream on.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:16pm

377. "Oblivious. In denial. Dangerous." Who of us will ever forget those memorable words spoken by Nancy Pelosi in reference to Pres. Bush? From what CNN had to report, the same thing could be said of her as she, too, was oblivious, in denial and dangerous.

     One of this week's most high profile fights has been between the White House and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who charged that Bush was dismissive of her request to fire FEMA Director Michael Brown during his session with House leaders Tuesday.

     "Why would I do that?" Bush said, according to Pelosi, who responded, "Because of all that went wrong, with all that didn't go right last week."

     "What didn't go right?" Bush said, according to Pelosi.

     "Oblivious. In denial. Dangerous," she said.

     CNN's Dana Bash reports that a senior administration official, who was in the meeting, denied Pelosi's account. The official said the president challenged her by asking rhetorically, "Oh you know? You've conducted an investigation?"

     Pelosi then demurred, according to the official. "Thank you for your advice," Bush said.

     See: Blame Game, Cont. [cnn.com]

     Posted by AlBruAn at 09/10/2005 @ 10:22pm

378. ILP,

     I think he cut and pasted an article from 1955.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/10/2005 @ 10:23pm

379. ILP, I stand corrected...I'm obviously living in the past...2000 to be specific. That's when the world came to a crashing halt wasn't it? Right after GWB's election to the presidency?

     Posted by AlBruAn at 09/10/2005 @ 10:27pm

380. ALBRUAN, Are you prepared to defend the emergency response of last week to the hurricane as flawless? As having no errors, mistakes, or delays? Wow, Chicken Little has found his complete opposite.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:30pm

381. ILP, I stand corrected...I'm obviously living in the past...2000 to be specific. That's when the world came to a crashing halt wasn't it? Right after GWB's election to the presidency?

     Posted by ALBRUAN

     I would say that it depends on your perspective! Certainly there are lots of Bush supporters who'd say things have been going great since then. My father said that George W. is one of the greatest presidents we've ever had. That was in June of 2001. How he could make such an evaluation 5 months into Dubya's administration is beyond me, but there ya go.

     I'd be interested in hearing your answer to your questions.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:33pm

382. FREIHEIT, I did not have the pleasure of seeing Rep. Pelosi's appearance on CSPAN. Rest assured I will not be taking your word for it, though :-)

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:35pm

383. TJBEHRENS1:

     I hope you don't mind if I weigh in on your question regarding socialism. First off, understand that I am not a socialist. However, I do find socialism much more attractive in theory and in practice than naked capitalism.

     I think to begin with, starting next year, were socialism were to be instituted there are a number of issues that need to be addressed.

     1: Taxes

     A flat tax should be placed on ALL forms of income, paper, earned income, capital gains, etc. Therefore, no income class would be unfairly targeted by the tax rate. All loopholes would be closed.

     An estate tax on all estates valued at $3million and above would be put into place, and the tax exemption would from that point onward be pegged to the CPI.

     All American corporations that choose to move their corporate headquarters away from the US in order to reduce or eliminate their tax burden will be barred from doing business in the US or with any other US corporation. Likewise, expatriated corporations will have 1 calendar year to return to the US or face the same exclusions.

     2: Health Care

     A single-payer system will be instituted universally.

     Pharmaceutical corporations will be suject to new, tougher oversight by board of independent doctors, nurses, scientists, and citizens. Similar penalties for detrimental business practices will be instituted (see Taxes above).

     3: Elections and Lobbying

     All lobbyist positions will be eliminated.

     No private monies will be allowed in campaigns. All certified candidates will use a publicly alloted amount of money for their candidacy.

     Immediate Runoff Voting (IRV) will be the new law of the land.

     A government/corporate veil will be instituted, meaning that if someone serves in government or works in the private sector, that person will, for a period of 10 years after termination of said position, be barred from a position in the other.

     4: Public Works

     A MAGLEV system will be instituted nationwide, to be completed in 15 years.

     We institute a plan to be weened off of foreign oil supplies in 15 years, through the use of alternative fuel sources, and the development of new technology.

     5: Employment

     A retraining program to be funded by corporations downsizing employees will be instituted.

     A living wage law will be instituted, and will be increased yearly according to the CPI.

     This is just a start.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 10:35pm

384. ILP, I guess it's beyond your mental capacity to understand it, but it's obvious from CNN's story that Nancy Pelosi didn't exactly know what hadn't gone right. Her calling Bush oblivious about it is yet another example of the pot calling the kettle black. Nowhere in my posting do I "defend the emergency response of last week to the hurricane as flawless? As having no errors, mistakes, or delays?" Just wondering, but who spiked your Kool-Aid and with what?

     Posted by AlBruAn at 09/10/2005 @ 10:38pm

385. OK, ALBRUAN, let's just examine the transcript, shall we? To begin, an excerpt from one of your earlier posts:

     "Why would I do that?" Bush said, according to Pelosi, who responded, "Because of all that went wrong, with all that didn't go right last week."

     "What didn't go right?" Bush said, according to Pelosi.

     "Oblivious. In denial. Dangerous," she said.

     Clearly Pelosi is implying a disconnect between George Bush's implied evaluation of the federal relief efforts and ACTUAL relief efforts.

     There followed my reply:

     ALBRUAN, Are you prepared to defend the emergency response of last week to the hurricane as flawless? As having no errors, mistakes, or delays? Wow, Chicken Little has found his complete opposite.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS 09/10/2005 @ 10:30pm

     Simply asking a question! Maybe the Chicken Little remark was uncalled for, but the question remains. Your post was an excerpt, clearly designed to portray Rep. Pelosi as having no substance to back up her criticism. So I posed a valid question in response to that, and you insult my intelligence.

     Perhaps you lost the thread of the conversation and felt it necessary to attack my intelligence in a sort of pre-emptive strike. But I laugh at such attacks. When you get your Ph.D. in physics, or when your IQ test places you above the 99.7 percentile, then maybe I will feel the sting. Until then, perhaps we can just stick with discussing the issues and cracking jokes?

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 10:54pm

386. ILP, to answer your question, no I don't think the world came to a crashing halt when GWB was elected president even though I was glad he won. I merely saw him as the lesser of two evils. Al Gore, Jr. used to be "my" senator so I knew all I needed to know about him to keep me from ever voting for him. That said, I'm not exactly a huge fan of GWB.

     For one thing, I totally disagree with his elimination of taxes on stock dividends. I have a huge number of shares in The Coca-Cola Company, but they won't do me any good until I retire. All the interest earned on them is being reinvested in purchasing more shares as part of my 401k plan so I won't have to worry about taxes on that interest until I retire. GW claimed those taxes should be eliminated because they amounted to double taxation and because that was what was needed to kickstart the economy. That being the case, he should've dropped the tax on interest earned from passbook savings accounts in banks and credit unions instead. More jobs are created by small employers, those having under 500 employees, than huge multinationals...employers who get the funds to expand their operations by bank loans rather than through the sale of shares. Needless to say, it's blatantly obvious that his elimination of taxes on dividend interest is heavily geared to profit huge corporations and the wealthy.

     For another thing, he totally blew it in Iraq by refusing to have enough troops there to protect ammo sites, hospitals, banks and archeological treasures to name a few. However, given what he knew at the time, I feel he made the right decision to invade Iraq. I've heard the lie about how he lied about WMDs enough times to make my head spin; that lie was shot down by the 9/11 commission when they found virtually all of our intelligence agencies reported that Saddam did indeed have WMDs at the time. The commission also reported that he hadn't pressured any of those agencies to come up with that conclusion. Another common lie in the period leading up to the invasion was that the economic sanctions were working; that lie was put to rest in the recent report by Paul Volker about the corruption in the U.N.'s Oil-for-Food program...the program that put an estimated $10 billion in Saddam's pockets while he let his people starve.

     Posted by AlBruAn at 09/10/2005 @ 11:02pm

387. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     I'm just curious. What are the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd standard deviations from the mean for IQ in America?

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 11:03pm

388. JORCHEIM, Thanks for your post of 10:35 PM EST. Permit me to make the following observation regarding this excerpt:

     A flat tax should be placed on ALL forms of income, paper, earned income, capital gains, etc. Therefore, no income class would be unfairly targeted by the tax rate. All loopholes would be closed.

     As long as we have sales tax, excise tax, gas tax, phone tax, etc. a flat tax is a de facto regressive tax. This concerns me. IMO those who benefit the most (economically) should pay a higher percentage of income tax in any society.

     Secondly, how did you arrive at the $3M figure for the estate tax cutoff?

     Thanks for submitting some interesting ideas. I know ZERO, myself and others (FREIHEIT, even) come to this site in part for the exchange of ideas and it is nice to see new ones.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 11:03pm

389. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     I'm just curious. What are the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd standard deviations from the mean for IQ in America?

     Posted by JORCHEIM 09/10/2005 @ 11:03pm

     Good question! I don't know the answer to it - I've never looked into it. I don't think of IQ tests as the definitive word on intelligence. Some people test well - I happen to be one of them. That said, such tests are still usefull as part of an overall profile of a person's mental capacity.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 11:08pm

390. JORCHEIM, One more thing: There are at least 2 widely used tests that I know of, although I don't recall the names of the tests. Are you referring to a particular one?

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 11:10pm

391. ALBRUAN, This is getting too interesting! So you lived in TN some time prior to 1992, obviously. I am interested to hear your thoughts on why Al Gore was the greater of 2 evils.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 11:12pm

392. ALBRUAN, I am hopelessly off-topic here, but you brought up taxation and I want to follow up on that. You wrote

     he (GWB) should've dropped the tax on interest earned from passbook savings accounts in banks and credit unions instead. More jobs are created by small employers, those having under 500 employees, than huge multinationals...employers who get the funds to expand their operations by bank loans rather than through the sale of shares. Needless to say, it's blatantly obvious that his elimination of taxes on dividend interest is heavily geared to profit huge corporations and the wealthy.

     Do you conservatives ever thing about what would really stimulate the economy? Who spends most of their income? Rich people or poor people?

     When Bush proposed the dividend tax cut, Warren Buffet said it was a bad idea. He said it wouldn't provide as much stimulus as, say, a payroll tax holiday, because people like Buffet would just use their tax cuts to buy more stock.

     If you really want a stimulus, why not increase the income tax exemption???? Then everyone gets the same cut, dollar-wise, and it would instantly put money into the hands of people who'd spend the whole damn cut, namely, poor people.

     I say bump the exemption up next time you want to cut taxes. Maybe to 6 or 8 k for startes.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/10/2005 @ 11:18pm

393. ILOVEPHYSICS:

     Honestly, I didn't know there were 2 different tests. My last IQ test I took sometime in high school.

     Posted by jorcheim at 09/10/2005 @ 11:22pm

394. ILP,

     You're right, I grew up in TN...was born and raised in Chattanooga, lived and worked in Memphis and Knoxville (had one set of great-great-great-grandparents who married in Knoxville in November 1796). Even though both of my father's grandfathers were from Knoxville, they both fought in the Union Army; my mom's maternal grandfather fought in the 83rd Illinois Volunteer Infantry while her paternal grandfather sat out the war because he had an infant son...my grandfather). I've also lived and worked in Minneapolis, Atlanta, Vienna, Austria and currently live in Jacksonville, FL :(. Anyway, about Al Gore, Jr....

     I'd heard all of his lies about how his daddy was such a great defender of civil rights for the blacks and how his daddy was ousted from office by the voters of TN because of that; fact is Al Gore, Sr. opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Then there was the lie about how he hated tobacco because his sister died of lung cancer; said lie being put forth while he was reaping profits from the family tobacco farm. Then there's Al Gore, Jr., the environmentalist, who was attacking some companies in the Amazon Basin who were clear-cutting forests and pushing the indigenous peoples off the land, while strangely being silent about his investments in companies that were guilty of the same thing. It's one thing to promise voters things one never intends to do once in office, it's another thing to be stupid enough to tell lies that can be proved.

     Posted by AlBruAn at 09/10/2005 @ 11:31pm

395. Thanks for your response, JORCHEIM. Last check on the site before nighty-night. I agree with ILP about the problem with the flat tax--good lord, is it possible for Steve Forbes to actually have promoted a good idea? Is your suggestion of the flat tax simply your interpretation of what a progressive budget would look like or is it based on your knowledge of Socialist economic theory?

     Quite honestly I just need to walk to the library and risk Chertoff finding out I'm interested in Marx's book. I'll read up and catch up with the rest of you.

     This is a wonderful site when the religious zealots are off doing their own things!

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/11/2005 @ 12:01am

396. ILP, I may be wrong, but you apparently didn't get my point. I was differentiating between eliminating savings interest tax as opposed to Bush's plan to eliminate taxes on dividend income as a point of disagreement I have with Bush. You are exactly correct about what Warren Buffet had to say about that tax elimination and I agreed, and still agree, with him completely when I read the articles about his statements in our employee newsletter at The Coca-Cola Company (he's on the board of directors there). It should've been clear that I was against such breaks for the wealthy and multinational companies. I'm nowhere near wealthy, but eliminating taxes on the interest I'm earning on my savings account would benefit me and vastly more others than the elimination of dividend interest taxes. Not only that, but it would benefit a lot more people since the tax I'm having to pay on my savings account diminishes the amount of money on hand at banks to loan out to small companies. Without that capitalization, small companies cannot expand and hire more employees.

     I see nothing at all wrong with increasing the income tax exemption. Without jobs, and the income that comes with them, how would you propose initially putting money (that could be kept through increasing the income tax exemption) into the hands of the poor? Small companies do a much better job of creating jobs than the multinationals do and the work they perform is of a much higher quality than what government can do; if they don't do a better job, they'll go out of business. The same can't be said about governmental bureaucracies...witness FEMA and the governments of NOLA and LA last week.

     While I'm at it, I think taxes on businesses should be eliminated. They sound great on paper, but not in practice. All they've done is turn businesses into tax collectors for the government. If the tax is increased, businesses merely increase the price of their product and pass it on to the consumer the same way they would with increases in the cost of production. Just another way of soaking everyone, including those on food stamps.

     Posted by AlBruAn at 09/11/2005 @ 12:09am

397. George Washington's brother was the Uncle of our country.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/11/2005 @ 12:18am

398. What year did Jesus think it was?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/11/2005 @ 12:21am

399. We are conditioned to notice and emphasize the differences among ourselves, instead of the similarities. The coporate-style partioning begins early in life: fetus, newborn, infant, toddler, preschool, elementary school, middle school, junior high, senior high, pre-teen, teen. Get in your box and stay there!

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/11/2005 @ 12:28am

400. The keys to America: the cross, the brew, the dollar, and the gun.

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/11/2005 @ 12:31am

401. .

     ILOVEPHYSICS

     When you get your Ph.D. in physics, or when your IQ test places you above the 99.7 percentile, then maybe I will feel the sting.

     Cut it out. If you don't want to be insulted, don't insult our intelligence. A capacity for consistent and rational thinking can't be faked. Wild claims to credentials don't hack it. We have had the greatest natural disaster to hit the Unites States ever. Under such circumstances no mind trained to think rigorously would demand:

     ALBRUAN, Are you prepared to defend the emergency response of last week to the hurricane as flawless? As having no errors, mistakes, or delays?

     The most critical things went right. The fed's NOAA predicted the course of the hurricane in plenty of time. President Bush then picked up the phone and called Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco and New Orleans' Mayor C. Ray Nagin. It was the president who urged them to evacuate the city before Katrina hit. Gov Blanco evacuation announcement referred to President Bush's exhortation. Eighty percent of the city was evacuated in time. And once FEMA got going, albeit two days late, it performed with great effect.

     As to the levees, I previously linked to authoritative references to the hundreds of millions of dollars that had only recently been spent on strengthening the New Orleans system. It had not been neglected or short changed. The 17th Street Canal section that broke had only lately received an especially thick concrete wall several feet thick.

     What failed most tragically in the first instance, clearly were the local officials. They had not worked up a practical evacuation plan that took care of the people who lacked transportation. They had not provisioned the local emergency shelters with food water and medicines. They had not created and trained emergency personnel prepared to deal with such a crisis. They did not even have a competent and motivated police force. They had a corrupt, lazy and incompetent City Hall.

     Secondly, after the hurricane had passed, yet the water kept rising, it took many hours to pinpoint the busted levee. And then the repair effort was slow to gather resources and hurl them into the breach. That too was a failure of none one other than the locals.

     Thirdly, with the lake rushing into the city, C. Ray Nagin had the job of fighting for his citizens. He was the mayor, the immediate response had to come from him, not from Washington. Then on the spot crisis management, improvisation, bold moves were called for. A call should have gone out for all existing boats private and municipal to go into the affected areas and haul people off roofs. Private and public vehicles should have been commanded and induced with payment vouchers to gather at designated staging areas. Arrangements needed to be made with neighboring towns to take refugees. Every one of the mayor's staff should have been overseeing a different part of the city, each in a boat or car, with a megaphone, instructing people where to assemble. Instead Nagin spent his time cursing and weeping and asking why the federal govt was not on spot.

     In a catastrophe that tears up the entire gulf coast, that collapses bridges, floods highways, and kills even in Ohio, when hundreds of cities and communities shriek for help, some like Harrison in Mississippi disappearing completely, it takes time to get a clear view, to assign resources appropriately, to understand where the crisis is deepest and to find routes for the massive convoys. While that is being organized the local authorities must hold the fort.

     Yes, in the fourth instance FEMA failed, it was too slow, it was confused too long. It could not reasonably be on the scene on the first day or the second, but by the third help should have been thunderous. FEMA was late by a day or two. That was its shortcoming.

     Finally, President Bush failed in the imagination department. He should have announced, by the second day, that he was taking over one of the New Orleans skyscrapers and moving himself and his govt in right there. That building then, ablaze with light from emergency generators, would have been a powerful statement. The nation would have seen the govt wading into the midst of the crisis and setting up a beacon. Mostly a gesture, yes, like landing on the carrier, but the rescue effort would have gained added focus. It would have reassured the public, and been first rate politics. It would have squashed the Pelosis and asserted jerks.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/11/2005 @ 01:56am

402. Wow, NACL, You certainly are persnickity. I will continue to ask questions if I think people's posts need clarification. Do you dispute that humans are sometimes vague in their meaning? Go ahead with all the rancor you wish. I was making no demands of ALBRUAN, rather I wanted to know if he was really a shameless hack for the administration or not. Incredibly, such activities have been known to occur in these parts...

     Wild claims to credentials? No, just statement of fact. I don't really care one way or another if you believe it...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/11/2005 @ 02:57am

403. BTW NACL, How do you rate natural disasters? By loss of life? In that case, the hurricane that hit Galvaston around 1900 would probably rank higher than Katrina in the natural disaster department. FYI...

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/11/2005 @ 02:59am

404. ALBRUAN, I think I did get your point. I just skipped past it to what I thought was more appropriate taxation policy ideas. Yeah, we can debate savings interest tax cuts versus dividend tax cuts, and when and how they should be applied, to which dividends, etc. I just think it mostly boils down to which rich people we should help out! Granted, not everyone who gets such income is rich, but by and large they are.

     To me the more important question is how to narrow the gap between rich and poor, which is nearly tantamount to saying "how do we improve the standard of living for the largest number of people?" Starting with raising the exemption (that is, if you are going to cut taxes in the first place) is better than starting with "how can I help rich people reduce their tax burden?"

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/11/2005 @ 03:08am

405. .

     ILOVEPHYSICS

     NACL, How do you rate natural disasters? By loss of life? In that case, the hurricane that hit Galvaston around 1900 would probably rank higher than Katrina in the natural disaster department. FYI...

     In 1900 a 20 foot tide washed over one small island, Galveston. It was filled with vacationers. No timely warning had been received. The people were unable to flee. The in-rushing sea drowned an estimated 8,000.

     That was a catastrophe. But it did not change the coastal geography of three states. It did not, more than momentarily, close down ports, did not interrupt America's fuel supply, did not devastate the nation's commerce. It did not produce millions of refugees and destroy huge cities.

     Had Galvaston had 10 hours warning it would have been evacuated and no one would today remember a 1900 hurricane.

     In Katrina's case, despite most people getting out in time and most of the rest reaching large structures or roofs, despite helicopters and a massive rescue effort, 10,000 still died just in New Orleans, according to Mayor Nagin. Even if that number is exaggerated, it doesn't include the deaths and damage done elsewhere in Louisiana and in Mississippi and Alabama. Katrina was clearly a far mightier storm, a more ferocious natural disaster than the Galveston hurricane.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/11/2005 @ 09:38am

406. .

     ILOVEPHYSICS

     Wild claims to credentials? No, just statement of fact. I don't really care one way or another if you believe it ...

     Of course you care, why else that nick.

     The fact is, anyone smarter than 99.7% of everyone else doesn't need to flourish a high IQ score to prove his argument is sensible.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/11/2005 @ 09:47am

407. .

     ILOVEPHYSICS

     You certainly are persnickity.

     No. I'm sloppy. My 1:56AM post meant to speak of assorted jerks (not asserted jerks).

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/11/2005 @ 10:01am

408. urmygyro, what date did Jesus think it was? let's say that he was twenty when he asked that question. this year,2005, is 5765 in the jewish calendar, so subtract 2005 from that number, which would refer to the year of his birth, or AD, (the actual dates of this Jesus fellow are in historical doubt),then add twenty years, so the answer is 3780. but then that was a facetious question wasn't it?

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/11/2005 @ 10:35am

409. NACL..

     yawn

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/11/2005 @ 10:35am

410. johaneswolf...

     yes, it was facetious.

     when will all the rhetorical questions end?

     Posted by urmygyro at 09/11/2005 @ 10:38am

411. Ilovephysis, how nice for you that you do well on IQ tests, why don't you do your bragging at the next Mensa meeting?

     to the fellow who wants to abolish taxes on corporations, because after all they pass that cost along to us consumers, do you honestly think that were those taxes abolished tomorrow the corp.s would pass the savings from that along to consumers? Ha !

     consumption taxes are inherently unfair to the poor and the middle class, the rich don't have to buy as much as the poor, they already have everything

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/11/2005 @ 10:56am

412. gyro, facetious or not you got your answer

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/11/2005 @ 10:57am

413. NACL writes "...10,000 still died just in New Orleans, according to Mayor Nagin. Even if that number is exaggerated..." It appears that number was not just exaggerated, it was grossly over-exaggerated. It's akin to the 30-40,000 deaths first expected from the attacks on the World Trade Center.

     Posted by AlBruAn at 09/11/2005 @ 11:04am

414. when all the hot air and false information on tax cuts and the like are done, the fact remains, we pay taxes so that we can live in a society. cuts in taxes mean cuts in services. our children are not educated, our infrastructure is near collapse etc

     when the people feel that theri taxes are not going to the needs of that society, they get restless, and are ripe for demagogic manipulation, see Ronald Reagan

     other civilized nations generally have higher taxes, but their people know where their taxes are going, healthcare, education, day care, pensions,secure borders, high speed trains etc,

     and they also know where their taxes are NOT going, obscenely bloated military spending, more than all other nations of the world combined, handouts to corporations who bribe the congress, propping up dictatorial regimes the world over, etc,

     this is a fit subject for discussion, not the minutiae of this tax or that

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/11/2005 @ 11:09am

415. albruan, are you gloating that the number was exagerated or happy that fewer people seem to have died?

     Posted by johannesrolf at 09/11/2005 @ 11:10am

416. The fact is, anyone smarter than 99.7% of everyone else doesn't need to flourish a high IQ score to prove his argument is sensible.

     Posted by NACL 09/11/2005 @ 09:47am

     It appears you've lost the thread, NACL. I was not, in fact, doing that of which you accuse me. I was asking a question! (which ALBRUAN didn't answer, I might add.)

     Clearly you don't need to tell us how low your IQ is to prove you're not following.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/11/2005 @ 11:54am

417. THE BUSH RESPONSE TEAM

     10,000 bodies floating in the muck. Bush tells New Orleans: "Well, tough luck!" Condoleezza Rice buys $3000 shoes while New Orleans is singing the blues. Rice goes to Broadway play---misses Cabinet meeting while New Orleans lies dead and bleeding. 10,000 bodies floating in the muck... Cheney tells Halliburton "Get the fuck down to the bayou, we've struck it rich from Hurricane Katrina---she's one sweet bitch... Now Halliburton gets a fix-it contract just like we did in old Iraq." 10,000 bodies sinking hard but we can't send in the National Guard 'cause Bush sent half of them to Iraq to stab the world in the back, to steal their oil and suck them dry while we spread the "freedom/democracy" lie. 10,000 bodies---most of them black.--- are sinking while FEMA takes a nap. Its head, Michael Brown, breeds Arabian ponies. He's one of Bush's favorite phonies. 10,000 bodies float out to sea. Bush tells Cheney: "I gotta go pee."

     wowugh@yahoo.com

     Posted by wowugh at 09/11/2005 @ 12:03pm

418. when the people feel that theri taxes are not going to the needs of that society, they get restless, and are ripe for demagogic manipulation, see Ronald Reagan

     Posted by JOHANNESROLF 09/11/2005 @ 11:09am

     Yes, I agree, and I was thinking about that last night. It seems like every conservative I know thinks that their taxes are going to black people on welfare. Invariably they say "I don't want those people getting my money."

     So there is a disconnect in the minds of most conservatives that is problematic. Moreover, when I try to educate them on the interdependence of society, invariably they cannot grasp the concept.

     Basically these conservatives, even if they don't realize it, want a social darwinism in which they pay only enough taxes to finance a police force to keep the people who are bad at capitalism from showing conservatives the true meaning of jungle darwinism.

     In other words, the conservatives like to set up a society in which people who are good at using other people to make money have it all their own way, and tough shit to those who aren't good at making money. It actually is an implied judgement: The conservative says "My life is more important than yours, so we must have an economic structure that favors me and disadvanatages you, with no compensation to you for the structural disadvantage, because you (i.e., the person who is not good at capitalism) are not worth it."

     Even if the conservatives don't understand this (and most of them don't really have a clue) it is still the underlying philosophy of their morally bankrupt neoconservatism.

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/11/2005 @ 12:06pm

419. NACL wrote ILOVEPHYSICS

     "Wild claims to credentials? No, just statement of fact. I don't really care one way or another if you believe it ..."

     Of course you care, why else that nick.

     The fact is, anyone smarter than 99.7% of everyone else doesn't need to flourish a high IQ score to prove his argument is sensible.

     Posted by NACL 09/11/2005 @ 09:47am

     To answer your question pointedly, "No, you are wrong. I don't care what you, NACL, think. The post of mine which you qouted was directed to ALBRUAN, not to you. You often don't show up on this blog for days at a time so I had no way of knowing if you, NACL, would read my posts, and nor did I care."

     My reply is accurate. You need to stop thinking that all posts are directed to you personally and that we all sit trying to write posts that are focused on you and your world only. (except maybe for BLOPPY).

     Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 09/11/2005 @ 12:18pm

420. NACL;

     So, the greatest benifit of your scheme would have been to squash his critics? Unfortunately that puts the hypothetical cart in front of the horse pal! He wouldn't have those critics if he had displayed real leadership in the first place!.....

     Perhaps one of the greatest understatments; "Bush lacked imagination"! So I guess your statement is wishful thinking - trying to imagine what it would be like if he had an imagination - and was a real leader with no critics!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/11/2005 @ 12:22pm

421. .

     ALBRUAN

     It appears that number was not just exaggerated, it was grossly over-exaggerated. It's akin to the 30-40,000 deaths first expected from the attacks on the World Trade Center.

     I hope it is grossly exaggerated. What is your point?

     Do you see something sinister in the initial guess that 20,000 were dead in the Twin Towers? (I don't remember the numbers you claim.) Around 50,000 people worked in the WTC and another 70,000 visited in the course of the day. Fearing tens of thousands of deaths was not so outlandish.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/11/2005 @ 12:25pm

422. Counterpunch.com, always a good source of left-wing trashtalk, had the following description of the dullness of Bush's mind: "The evidence is most often presented by his tongue that, embedded in an otherwise empty chamber, by its wagging gives voice to the vacuousness of his thought." Nasty eloquence at its best.

     Relating back to the point made by ILP and Johannesrolf, one of the strangest things that has happened recently in this country is the growing disconnect between the higher numbers (shocking numbers, really) of those living in poverty and the attention paid to these numbers by the politicians and the media. We've gone through Clinton's welfare reform which seemed to be only a little painful since the economy was booming. But now that the economy's speed has slowed, those living at the bottom rungs of the economic ladder are struggling with no one speaking for them. Instead we have armies of slick-kitten white boys fighting for their chunka change on K -Street, none of whom give a rat's ass about those who have nothing to give them. This would seem to be faith-based programming at its best since the only thing left to the poor is the belief that something greater than our dull-witted government and their business allies might actually care about them.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/11/2005 @ 12:32pm

423. By the way, NACL, I'm interesed to learn about the means of transportation and communication available in 1900 Galveston that could have evacuated the entire city in 10 hours.

     Posted by tjbehrens1 at 09/11/2005 @ 12:34pm

424. .

     NO-NONSENSE

     NACL; So, the greatest benifit of your scheme would have been to squash his critics? Unfortunately that puts the hypothetical cart in front of the horse pal! He wouldn't have those critics if he had displayed real leadership in the first place!.....

     Setting up a temporary White House in or near New Orleans would have had several benefits, one of which would have hog tied critics like you. You don't think so?

     As to leading, Bush called the governor and mayor before the storm hit and urged them to evacuate New Orleans. In announcing her evacuation order the governor referred to the president's telephone call.

     That was leadership.

     You fault him for not getting driving a food and water convoy into New Orleans?

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/11/2005 @ 12:44pm

425. Tjbehrensi:

     Do you really think you can illicit any plausable, thoughtful response from a guy that displys such tortured logic? NACL has revealed time and again that his powers of deductive reasoning are circuitous at best. He's lost in a maze of biased assumptions that always lead to the same place - a dead end!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/11/2005 @ 12:49pm

426. .

     TJBEHRENS1

     By the way, NACL, I'm interesed to learn about the means of transportation and communication available in 1900 Galveston that could have evacuated the entire city in 10 hours.

     Galveston had around 37,000 people in 1900. It was two miles from the mainland. There were two causeways across.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/11/2005 @ 12:52pm

427. Nacl;

     Let me spell it out for you; If Bush had appointed competant people in the first place he wouldn't have been put in the position of having to make hollow, political gestures to prove his leadership. His appointees would have taken the bull by the horns and their good work would have spoken to BUSH's judgement and leadership. But he didn't - however they're "actions" did reflect on him, just not in a positive way!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/11/2005 @ 12:58pm

428. Nacl;

     First I blame the morons he appointed for not immediately dropping generators ( with engineers to run them )on the roofs of all the hospitals, the Super Dome and the convention center. Hell. we had them all over Chicago ready to go for Y2K.

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/11/2005 @ 1:04pm

429. .

     NO-NONSENSE

     I blame the morons he appointed

     Right, the administration if full of morons, whereas you are such a shmarty.

     You are brilliant, to the top of your boots.

     .

     Posted by nacl at 09/11/2005 @ 1:42pm

430. Jack Kelly: No shame The federal response to Katrina was not as portrayed

     Sunday, September 11, 2005

     It is settled wisdom among journalists that the federal response to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina was unconscionably slow.

     Jack Kelly is national security writer for the Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo, Ohio (jkelly@post-gazette.com, 412-263-1476).

     "Mr. Bush's performance last week will rank as one of the worst ever during a dire national emergency," wrote New York Times columnist Bob Herbert in a somewhat more strident expression of the conventional wisdom.

     But the conventional wisdom is the opposite of the truth.

     Jason van Steenwyk is a Florida Army National Guardsman who has been mobilized six times for hurricane relief. He notes that:

     "The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."

     For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 2002. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.

     Journalists who are long on opinions and short on knowledge have no idea what is involved in moving hundreds of tons of relief supplies into an area the size of England in which power lines are down, telecommunications are out, no gasoline is available, bridges are damaged, roads and airports are covered with debris, and apparently have little interest in finding out.

     So they libel as a "national disgrace" the most monumental and successful disaster relief operation in world history.

     I write this column a week and a day after the main levee protecting New Orleans breached. In the course of that week:

     More than 32,000 people have been rescued, many plucked from rooftops by Coast Guard helicopters.

     The Army Corps of Engineers has all but repaired the breaches and begun pumping water out of New Orleans.

     Shelter, food and medical care have been provided to more than 180,000 refugees.

     Journalists complain that it took a whole week to do this. A former Air Force logistics officer had some words of advice for us in the Fourth Estate on his blog, Moltenthought:

     "We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.

     "The United States military can wipe out the Taliban and the Iraqi Republican Guard far more swiftly than they can bring 3 million Swanson dinners to an underwater city through an area the size of Great Britain which has no power, no working ports or airports, and a devastated and impassable road network.

     "You cannot speed recovery and relief efforts up by prepositioning assets (in the affected areas) since the assets are endangered by the very storm which destroyed the region.

     "No amount of yelling, crying and mustering of moral indignation will change any of the facts above."

     "You cannot just snap your fingers and make the military appear somewhere," van Steenwyk said.

     Guardsmen need to receive mobilization orders; report to their armories; draw equipment; receive orders and convoy to the disaster area. Guardsmen driving down from Pennsylvania or Navy ships sailing from Norfolk can't be on the scene immediately.

     Relief efforts must be planned. Other than prepositioning supplies near the area likely to be afflicted (which was done quite efficiently), this cannot be done until the hurricane has struck and a damage assessment can be made. There must be a route reconnaissance to determine if roads are open, and bridges along the way can bear the weight of heavily laden trucks.

     And federal troops and Guardsmen from other states cannot be sent to a disaster area until their presence has been requested by the governors of the afflicted states.

     Exhibit A on the bill of indictment of federal sluggishness is that it took four days before most people were evacuated from the Louisiana Superdome.

     The levee broke Tuesday morning. Buses had to be rounded up and driven from Houston to New Orleans across debris-strewn roads. The first ones arrived Wednesday evening. That seems pretty fast to me.

     A better question -- which few journalists ask -- is why weren't the roughly 2,000 municipal and school buses in New Orleans utilized to take people out of the city before Katrina struck?

     Posted by LIBSARENUTS at 09/12/2005 @ 11:48am

431. Nacl;

     I think a bolder type face would give your assertions more gravitas!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/12/2005 @ 12:11pm

432. Nacl;

     Maybe they could provide a special type face called conservative blockhead bold - just for you!

     Posted by NO-NONSENSE at 09/12/2005 @ 12:19pm