No. of Recommendations: 6
this is why I like President Bush's call for an investigation. Now lets see if the accusers of the President have the guts to see it thru...

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=8968

No one anticipated that the aftermath of Katrina would include a false and ignorant tidal wave of calumny against President Bush. Conservatives beware, because the goal here is to politically disable the President, and the conservative agenda along with him.

A few basic facts will help to detox the political environment. First, FEMA is not an agency of first responders. It is not the agency responsible for bringing people bottles of water and trays of fresh food, or transporting them out of harm's way. It also has zero law enforcement authority, or personnel.

These first responder jobs are the responsibility of local and state government -- city police and firemen, city transportation and emergency services personnel, state police, and ultimately the state National Guard.

FEMA has always been primarily a Federal financing agency, providing funding to the locals after the crisis hits to help them respond and rebuild. That is why FEMA's website baldly states don't expect them to show up with their aid until 3 or 4 days after the disaster strikes.

Moreover, the National Guard is under the command of the Governor of each state, not the President. The President can Federalize control over a state's guard on his own order, but doing so without a Governor's consent to deal with an in state natural disaster would be a supreme insult to the Governor and the state. In addition, using Federal troops for local police actions is against the law and has been since the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.

With this background, let's examine who did what in response to Katrina. President Bush declared the entire Gulf Coast, including New Orleans and Louisiana, a Federal disaster area days before the hurricane hit, to enable Federal aid to get there sooner.



more:

Finally, we have not seen public officials in Mississippi, which was hit even harder by the hurricane itself, or Alabama, crying on television or complaining about the lack of Federal aid. They properly mobilized their local police, fire, transportation, ambulance and emergency services, and the state National Guard, to serve their roles as first responders. Unlike Blanco in Louisiana, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, Republican, announced looters would be shot on sight. That maintained law and order, without Federal troops.

Let's shortcircuit the sickening and dopey political posturing now just beginning in Washington. President Bush organized the largest and quickest Federal mobilization in response to a natural disaster in U.S. history. Blanco, Nagin, and Broussard just need to resign in disgrace, as thousands of their own constituents died because of their misconduct.


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Let's shortcircuit the sickening and dopey political posturing now just beginning in Washington. President Bush organized the largest and quickest Federal mobilization in response to a natural disaster in U.S. history.

Well that certainly explains why Bush is taking responsibility for federal blunders.

--ET
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Well that certainly explains why Bush is taking responsibility for federal blunders.

--ET


like a lot of other instances, many here are reading that claim of responsibility for what YOU believe in your own minds to have gone wrong.

Bet many here are gloating to themselves that see, we told you FEMA and the President screwed up, and here is the President admitting it. You idjits don't have the clarity to realize that sure Fema and the FEDs response wasn't perfect, but because of your short sightedness and desire to believe YOU ARE RIGHT, you are probably taking his comment as validation of all YOU and the media hacks are CLAIMING YOU BELIEVE went wrong.. When in fact, thats not what he said at all..

you are so predictable, its no wonder Rove has been able to lead you off the cliff to your own destruction. Many of you are so filled with your own air of superiority, you can't even see the cliff coming.

instead, you let your own arrogance blind you to reality except as YOU want it to be, except as you see it so that it fits your OWN visions...


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 148
Conservatives beware, because the goal here is to politically disable the President, and the conservative agenda along with him.

Conservative agenda?

Do you mean like the conservative agenda of spending multi-billions of dollars on a government corporate welfare handout to pharmaceutical companies?

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of increasing our national debt by over 35% in just 5 years?

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of creating foreign entanglements like a war that has cost thousands of lives and billions of dollars?

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of rushing Congress and the President back in the middle of the night so they could pass a law that interfered with an individual's sacred right to privacy?

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of complete fiscal irresponsibility?

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of handing our billions of dollars of incentives to oil companies that already make billions in profits?

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of taking away basic American freedoms under the guise of protecting us from terrorists?

Yes, please tell us all about this "conservative agenda"?

Bush is as much a conservative as I am a Martian.

AW
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
A few basic facts will help to detox the political environment. First, FEMA is not an agency of first responders. It is not the agency responsible for bringing people bottles of water and trays of fresh food, or transporting them out of harm's way. It also has zero law enforcement authority, or personnel.

Katrina will turn out to be just like the 9/11 comission - the libs will be all for throwing tons o' time at the Congressional inquisitions.

The problem is, just as with the 9/11 comission, they aren't going to like the answers they'll get back (Blanco and Nagin's heads on platters). So, just the like the comission, they'll lose interest in a hurry. Or just ignore the results altogether...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Bush is as much a conservative as I am a Martian.

So are you the Marvin the Martian kind or more like the War of Worlds type?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
Well that certainly explains why Bush is taking responsibility for federal blunders.

--ET
---------------------------
like a lot of other instances, many here are reading that claim of responsibility for what YOU believe in your own minds to have gone wrong.


Interesting, except that the only thing that I said was wrong was that Bush appointed people to FEMA who lacked disaster managment experience.

You idjits don't have the clarity to realize that sure Fema and the FEDs response wasn't perfect, but because of your short sightedness and desire to believe YOU ARE RIGHT, you are probably taking his comment as validation of all YOU and the media hacks are CLAIMING YOU BELIEVE went wrong..

Interesting....but I never said what went wrong, expect from the perspective that inexperienced people were appointed. I don't pretend to know what the investigation will ultimately reveal since it hasn't even started.

you are so predictable

If I'm so predictable, what does that say about someone so hopelessly wrong about my comments?

Many of you are so filled with your own air of superiority, you can't even see the cliff coming.

Do you think it a bit odd to write of feelings of superiority and not seeing things, when you don't bother to read the posts of others you are responding to?

--ET
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Bush is as much a conservative as I am a Martian.

I didn't much like conservatives before Bush came along, but I gotta say, he's giving conservatives a very bad name.


Jimbo

.....with friends like this................
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Yes, please tell us all about this "conservative agenda"?

Bush is as much a conservative as I am a Martian.

AW


missed the point altogether and still got 11 Recs??? what is the correct sound for something that just blew over your head? Whoosh???

by the way, thanks for proving my point about the arrogance and feeling of superiority as tools that blind one from reality...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The problem is, just as with the 9/11 comission, they aren't going to like the answers they'll get back (Blanco and Nagin's heads on platters). So, just the like the comission, they'll lose interest in a hurry. Or just ignore the results altogether...

bingo... course, maybe they will do like they did on 9/11 when they stashed the biggest problem they had (Gorelick) as a commissioner so that they could protect her from revealing damaging facts.

maybe they will nominate Blanco and/or Nagin to the investigation panel....
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Interesting, except that the only thing that I said was wrong was that Bush appointed people to FEMA who lacked disaster managment experience.

so do many here doing the monday morning quarterbacking of what THEY saw went wrong. But I haven't seen any of you criticize them for a lack of knowledge.. In fact, even tho I do have some experience in this field, when I challenged some of you to state some facts to back up your claim that they were too slow, all I got was SILENCE from ALL OF YOU...

yet, you aren't silent in criticizing that which you don't understand.

and by the way, it helps to have a manager at the top that has some knowledge of over which he lauds, but its not essential. Say this because I see the top managers function as one of making sure he has the right people below him to get the organizations job done...

Interesting....but I never said what went wrong, expect from the perspective that inexperienced people were appointed. I don't pretend to know what the investigation will ultimately reveal since it hasn't even started.

sorry my error. I made the assumption that since you tended to agree with the anti-President Bush crowd that you agreed with what they were saying, plus, never personally saw a post of yours taking exception with what they were saying...

Do you think it a bit odd to write of feelings of superiority and not seeing things, when you don't bother to read the posts of others you are responding to?

--ET


see the above.. and don't take it personally. I didn't specifically highlight you like I have SKYBLUE or click. I use YOU as a collective... and again, from what I have gleaned from your posts that I have read, again, I lumped you in with the rest of the anti-Bush crowd... If I am in error, then can you point to a post or two that where YOU (ET) have taken issue with any of the allegations made against Pres Bush..


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
In fact, even tho I do have some experience in this field, when I challenged some of you to state some facts to back up your claim that they were too slow, all I got was SILENCE from ALL OF YOU...

Sorry, missed that challenge. People in New Orleans need food and water. Food and Water is in Baton Rouge waiting to be delivered. Beauracrats decide that it should not be delivered. Beauracrats with the ability to over-rule the first set of beauracrats do not. People in New Orleans start to die from lack of food and water.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
No one anticipated that the aftermath of Katrina would include a false and ignorant tidal wave of calumny against President Bush. Conservatives beware, because the goal here is to politically disable the President, and the conservative agenda along with him.

Conservative tactic #25, straight from Goebbel's playbook.

Be sure to accuse the opposition of whatever it is you have done or plant to do in the future, whether they actually do it or not. That way, you have political cover to do the same thing.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
and by the way, it helps to have a manager at the top that has some knowledge of over which he lauds, but its not essential. Say this because I see the top managers function as one of making sure he has the right people below him to get the organizations job done...

Well, now isn't that the way Bush first campaigned? That this would be a CEO presidency where he would appoint knowledgeable people to oversee things? But he didn't do that for an agency dedicated to disaster relief, and this happened in a post 9/11 world.

I made the assumption that since you tended to agree with the anti-President Bush crowd that you agreed with what they were saying, plus, never personally saw a post of yours taking exception with what they were saying... can you point to a post or two that where YOU (ET) have taken issue with any of the allegations made against Pres Bush...

I don't read everything on this board, or anything close to it. I pick a few threads and participate. For what it's worth, this was my first post on the subject of Bush and Katrina on Wednesday, August 31st, my simple prediction as to what would happen (when written, I thought the levees broke on Tuesday, when it turns out it actually happened on Monday)...

This is how Bush will repsond to Katrina:

Having been burned by his delay on the tsunami, Bush appropriately ended his vacation 2 days early to head back to D.C. He doesn't want to be blamed for being inattentive to natural disaster and human suffering again.

He already did a fly-by of the region, which was also appropriate.

He will not visit on the ground until search-and-rescue is over, for to do so will entail resources (helicopters) that are badly needed elsewhere. He could conceivably deliver supplies to outlying areas and meet refugees at the Astrodome.

He willl supply a lot of aid to the area.

When search-and-rescue turns to search-and-recover, he will visit. On multiple occassions. He will get his hands dirty, so to speak, by helping with recovery by being photographed helping deliver supplies. All of this is also appropriate, as it helps to keep the spotlight on the issue and fuel private aid.

He will "use" this hurricane many times in the future, bringing it up often in speeches, much the way he brings up September 11 often, even when it isn't relevant to the issue.

He will not have any plan on how to pay for the aid, other than to simply dump it onto our kids by adding to the deficit. Since aid is "free" to him (i.e., our kids will pay for it) the amount he supplies will be large.

My two rupees on the subject (as if anyone cared).

--ETurkey


http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=22967038
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Conservative tactic #25, straight from Goebbel's playbook.

Since we're driving this discussion right into the gutter, and since by Godwin's law you've already lost, let me ask this:

How come you know so much about Goebbels' playbook? It ain't from watching us.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
How come you know so much about Goebbels' playbook?

I guess you never heard of reading.

It ain't from watching us.

Yes, that, too.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"How come you know so much about Goebbels' playbook?"

I guess you never heard of reading

Actually, I'm quite the student of history. I'm not one for some parts of it, though. Maybe you're into that, though.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Hey Dopeman.... why question the obvious, the leftists have Goebbels styled agitprop and condemnation down pat.
Let them 'own it'... use it, as they've clearly chosen.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The conservative agenda of putting US taxpayers on the hook for maybe 100 billion dollars in insurance company losses?

With a 1 billion dollar or less triggering loss? That's a sneeze, a hiccup in Washington spending these days. A rounding error.

Anyone who claims anyone in Washington or just about anyone in corporate America or Berkshire Hathaway or etc. is a "conservative" should be kicked in the groin. In fact, I may fly there and do that myself.

So shut up about "conservative". It is ridiculous and folks just embarass themselves when they use that term in America. Two types of socialists:

The radical really big spending libertarian/Republican socialists.

The slightly less big spending Democrats.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Conservatives beware, because the goal here is to politically disable the President, and the conservative agenda along with him.

Hmmm...I always thought Newt Gingrich was a conservative. But apparently not!

Gingrich said the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina "puts into question all of the Homeland Security and Northern Command planning for the last four years, because if we can't respond faster than this to an event we saw coming across the Gulf for days, then why do we think we're prepared to respond to a nuclear or biological attack?"
www.politicalwire.com
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Reading this, one has to wonder what Bush's agenda really is.

What does this record portend? A plan to destroy the country, or at least the New Deal and the income tax? A plan to loot the treasury in a way to make the S&L debacle look like mousenuts? A plan to drive the country back, if not to the Middle Ages dreamed of by Islamic fundamentalists, then perhaps to a pre-renaissance, pre-reformation world of ubermen and dogma?

Even if embraced by conservatives, it is hardly a conservative list -- it is breathtaking in the risks and stress it is willing to subject this nation's very fibre to.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Reading this, one has to wonder what Bush's agenda really is.

What does this record portend? A plan to destroy the country, or at least the New Deal and the income tax? A plan to loot the treasury in a way to make the S&L debacle look like mousenuts? A plan to drive the country back, if not to the Middle Ages dreamed of by Islamic fundamentalists, then perhaps to a pre-renaissance, pre-reformation world of ubermen and dogma?

Even if embraced by conservatives, it is hardly a conservative list -- it is breathtaking in the risks and stress it is willing to subject this nation's very fibre to.



out of curiosity, what school did you go to?? did you go to college??

and did you really think this up all by yourself??
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
AlphaWolf,
"Do you mean like the conservative agenda of spending multi-billions of dollars on a government corporate welfare handout to pharmaceutical companies?"

No, we mean like enhancing capitalism that provides jobs to Americans.

"Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of increasing our national debt by over 35% in just 5 years?"

Yeah, nothing like saving 50 million people from brutal tyrannies and creating a drug prescription plan the Democrats had 8 years to create but didn't.

"Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of creating foreign entanglements like a war that has cost thousands of lives and billions of dollars?"

Yeah, I hate it when we spread freedom and democracy all over the world. Do you hate saving people from dictators or do you just hate arabs?

"Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of rushing Congress and the President back in the middle of the night so they could pass a law that interfered with an individual's sacred right to privacy?"

Never heard of it. Do you mean like how Clinton passed more executive orders than any 10 Presidents in the entire history of our nation? Funny, I don't remember hearing you crow about it then.

"Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of complete fiscal irresponsibility?"

Two words; Senator Byrd.

"Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of handing our billions of dollars of incentives to oil companies that already make billions in profits?"

Yeah, that whole energy resources thing has me baffled too.

"Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of taking away basic American freedoms under the guise of protecting us from terrorists?"

Funny, congress has oversight over the entire act and I haven't heard of any gross violations. Where are the Dems coplaining about this. Why do you hate securing Americans?

"Yes, please tell us all about this "conservative agenda"?"

Um, so far they are the only ones with an agenda. I showed you mine. You show me yours.

"Bush is as much a conservative as I am a Martian."

Welcome to our planet.

Cheers,

Vile
NEVER SAY DIE!!!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4

out of curiosity, what school did you go to?? did you go to college??

and did you really think this up all by yourself??


Read the list.
Discount the political hyperbole.
Look at what he's actually done -- my favorite is the giveaway of our children's future tax payments.

Tell us what he's trying to achieve, if you're such a smart, focused, and level-headed person.

Or, you can call me more names.

Your choice.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
What does this record portend? A plan to destroy the country, or at least the New Deal and the income tax? A plan to loot the treasury in a way to make the S&L debacle look like mousenuts? A plan to drive the country back, if not to the Middle Ages dreamed of by Islamic fundamentalists, then perhaps to a pre-renaissance, pre-reformation world of ubermen and dogma?

Even if embraced by conservatives, it is hardly a conservative list -- it is breathtaking in the risks and stress it is willing to subject this nation's very fibre to.


first of all, I didn't call you a name. I may have questioned your mental state, but I didn't call you a name..

and my question was in reference to what YOU implied you see the President trying to do to this country... I mean, you didn't come across as "goofing around", you are coming across as "these are serious perspectives"...

its like a phone call Rush got today, it was obviously choregraphed on the callers part and you could tell Rush knew it from his reaction.. And like his response, I am not going to bite on your request until you at least provide some justification for your train of thought..

because if you truly think this is where he trying to take the country, I don't see myself having enough time to try and change your perspectives... sorry...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Yes, please tell us all about this "conservative agenda"?

Bush is as much a conservative as I am a Martian.

AW


Hey, give Bush his props! At least he is staunchly pro torture.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Reading this, one has to wonder what Bush's agenda really is.

In looking back over the last 5 years, I have reached the conclusion that his agenda is to be President. Beyond that, he doesn't much care. He takes up positions that his advisors push, then drops them if they get to be too unpopular. Iraq seems to be about the only thing that he hasn't wavered on. I sometimes wonder if this is all about his father. He wouldn't be the first person to spend his life competing with a successful father. If he can take out Saddam, then he can do something his father didn't do. If he can serve two terms, then he beats his father.

And yet, even that probably won't be enough. The senior Bush has slipped quite nicely into the role of elder statesman. Does anyone really see this President doing that when he leaves office?

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Beyond that, he doesn't much care. He takes up positions that his advisors push, then drops them if they get to be too unpopular.

wrong.... tax cuts made it thru....

some form of SS reform although unpopular would have made it thru if the Dems were interested in accomplishing something, hell, if they would have even offered up some ideas of their own instead of being a roadblock to progress, it would have been nice...

opening up our own energy resources, oops, thats right, the DEMS blocked that effort as well..

maybe you should discuss his chances of getting anything done when he faces an organized DEM team that wants him to get NADA done... and they have the press behind them to keep the debate focused on the DEMS talking points rather than a fair debate on the issues...

doesn't care, drops positions?? sure... to be FAIR, you need to discuss the DEMS contributions to running this country over the last 5 years. The only good thing I can recall is that there are NOW LESS of them in DC to act as hindrances to fixing things, getting things done..
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
wrong.... tax cuts made it thru....

And those were popular.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
first of all, I didn't call you a name. I may have questioned your mental state, but I didn't call you a name.

Oh, glad that's cleared up. Try that explanation for most of what passes for racist or anti-Semitic speech: "I didn't call you a name; I may have questioned your mental state." Picky picky.

and my question was in reference to what YOU implied you see the President trying to do to this country.

Well, I was being over the top, but, frankly, you look at the list, as I said, you discount the hyperbole, and its a dreadful record. Maybe its bad luck; maybe its intended. It certainly isn't apologized for. It certainly isn't even acknowledged, in most cases. But a lot of it is face, and so if it wasn't apologized for, and wasn't due to bad luck, then what is it due to? Incompetence? Malice? Some unspoken design?

I don't know where he thinks he's taking the country, but I don't like the signposts and billboards that we're seeing along the road.

And I agree, if you have to be listening to Rush, then you clearly do NOT have the time.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Thank you, Ray. Good answer, if depressing in its import for all of us.

Personally, I think he'slip into the role fashioned by Gerald Ford and Spiro Agnew.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The senior Bush has slipped quite nicely into the role of elder statesman. Does anyone really see this President doing that when he leaves office?

Ex-Presidents have a funny way of surprising people.

I don't think anyone expected Carter to as vibrant and productive (if controversial) career as he's had after he left office. So too with Clinton - I didn't think he'd play a very public role until more time had passed for him to be "rehabilitated," yet he's been tapped by the current administration twice for disaster relief.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Do you mean like the conservative agenda of spending multi-billions of dollars on a government corporate welfare handout to pharmaceutical companies?

Big pharma. The Big Enemy to the people. The right thing to do is not assist these companies and let them slow down their research. Let the market control the type of drugs the research produces.
Some things are not conservative or liberal. Some things are just plain simple.


Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of increasing our national debt by over 35% in just 5 years?

I know you folks get upset when I write that 9/11/01 changed everything, so I will hop on your 9/11/01 meant nothing bandwagon and agree with you. No more spending, decrease the deficit.

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of creating foreign entanglements like a war that has cost thousands of lives and billions of dollars?

Sounds somewhat in line with the conservative party. What's your point?

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of rushing Congress and the President back in the middle of the night so they could pass a law that interfered with an individual's sacred right to privacy?

While I disagreed with this and still do, but how is that not a conservative move?

Or do you mean like the conservative agenda of handing our billions of dollars of incentives to oil companies that already make billions in profits?

So oil companies are evil. They are making record profits. Money means everything. Far be it from the government to incent them to use more ethyl to help farmers and all of us.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"The problem is, just as with the 9/11 comission, they aren't going to like the answers they'll get back (Blanco and Nagin's heads on platters). So, just the like the comission, they'll lose interest in a hurry. Or just ignore the results altogether..."
---------------------------------------------------------

Yeh but this time, because they lefties are all SOOOO CONCERNED with budgetary spending and overspending by Bush, and all SOOO INTERESTED in fiscal responsibility and conservative spending....

THEY'LL ALL WORK FOR FREE...NO MATTER HOW LONG IT TAKES TO FIND A WAY TO BLAME BUSH....THEY WON'T ASK FOR A PENNY FOR THE INVESTIGATION. THEY'LL ALL DEFER THEIR PAYCHECKS. THEY JUST WANT TO GET TO THE TRUTH.


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA



oh look.....another pig just flew by

B
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
FEMA has always been primarily a Federal financing agency, providing funding to the locals after the crisis hits to help them respond and rebuild. That is why FEMA's website baldly states don't expect them to show up with their aid until 3 or 4 days after the disaster strikes.

A misleading characterization, at best. This from FEMA's mission statement (bolding mine):


On March 1, 2003, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) became part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). FEMA's continuing mission within the new department is to lead the effort to prepare the nation for all hazards and effectively manage federal response and recovery efforts following any national incident. FEMA also initiates proactive mitigation activities, trains first responders, and manages the National Flood Insurance Program and the U.S. Fire Administration.

http://www.fema.gov/about/

IOW, their primary mission, as outlined in their mission statement, is to lead the disaster-preparedness effort, and manage the federal response and recovery. Not only was preparation woefully underfunded and, in some cases, ignored, but the head of FEMA was so ineffective in "managing" the response that I knew more about the facts on the ground at the height of the crisis than he did.

Some other tidbit from their site:

Goal 2. Minimize suffering and disruption caused by disasters.
Objective 2.1
Respond quickly and effectively when States,Territories, Tribal Nations, and local governments are overwhelmed.

Objective 2.2
Use the full range of State, Territorial, Tribal, and Federal capabilities in determining the most effective delivery mechanisms for disaster recovery and mitigation programs.

Performance Measures
2.1 By Fiscal Year 2008, FEMA has coordinated and established the capability to respond concurrently to four catastrophic and twelve non-catastrophic disasters.

More here:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/in_brief-fema_strat_plan_fy03-08.pdf

FEMA failed miserably by almost any measure - including their own.

Best,

Speck
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
EricTaller wrote:

"Big pharma. The Big Enemy to the people. The right thing to do is not assist these companies and let them slow down their research. Let the market control the type of drugs the research produces. Some things are not conservative or liberal. Some things are just plain simple."



The market doesn't control the types of drugs produced. The whole enterprise depends on patents, which are government grants of monopoly. In a true free market, there would be no such things as patents. Think that's absurd? Some Libertarians believe it.

Incidentally, why not write, "The right thing to do is for the United States to be a bunch of suckers and subsidize development costs for the rest of the world"?




"So oil companies are evil. They are making record profits. Money means everything. Far be it from the government to incent them to use more ethyl to help farmers and all of us."



Ethanol is much more efficiently produced from sugar. We produced it from corn, just because our farmers happen to grow corn. That's political pork. We actually have import restrictions on sugar from Brazil, and we could produce our fuel ethanol a lot more cheaply without those restrictions.

I still haven't seen anyone explain how you get energy making ethanol from corn. It takes more energy to create the ethanol than you get by burning the ethanol.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Amen, orv. Let 'em have it.

/s/ S.T. [speaking to you from here on the outskirts of Hou Orleans]
Print the post Back To Top