Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » Did New Orleans Catastrophe Have to Happen? » Post A Reply

Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon: Icon 1     Icon 2     Icon 3     Icon 4     Icon 5     Icon 6     Icon 7    
Icon 8     Icon 9     Icon 10     Icon 11     Icon 12     Icon 13     Icon 14    
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

 

Instant Graemlins Instant UBB Code™
Smile   Frown   Embarrassed   Big Grin   Wink   Razz  
Cool   Roll Eyes   Mad   Eek!   Confused   BadOne  
Good Luck   More Crap   Wall Bang   Were Up   Were Down    
Insert URL Hyperlink - UBB Code™   Insert Email Address - UBB Code™
Bold - UBB Code™   Italics - UBB Code™
Quote - UBB Code™   Code Tag - UBB Code™
List Start - UBB Code™   List Item - UBB Code™
List End - UBB Code™   Image - UBB Code™

What is UBB Code™?
Options


Disable Graemlins in this post.


 


T O P I C     R E V I E W
4Art  - posted
In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness.

On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."


Yahoo News - Wed Aug 31, 2005
 
4Art  - posted
Are these the priorities we need for America? I don't think so. [Mad]
 
4Art  - posted
Let's try again, shall we?

In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness.

On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."


Yahoo News - Wed Aug 31, 2005
 
4Art  - posted
Are these the priorities we need for America? I don't think so. [Mad]
 
Art  - posted
quote:
Originally posted by 4Art:
In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness.

On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."


Yahoo News - Wed Aug 31, 2005

The local government is responsible - not the feds or bush. The local government has failed the people of N.O., not Bush.
 
bdgee  - posted
Flood control within the watershed of navigatable waterways and intrastate waterways lies withing the jurisdiction of the Corp Of Engineers, not the local governments. To allow it to be otherwise undermines the ability of any state fo effectively handle the problem. This is even more so with the Mississippi and those bodies of water flowing into it, as it is one of the principal methods of interstate commerce the country has. Neither the State of Louisianna nor the City of New Orleans have responsibility to control flooding or the authority to meddle with it.

Bush pulled out the funding to do the studies and the work, which was already scheduled when he took office. The local governments had no say in it.
 
4Art  - posted
Not true. Bush is the Commander in Chief and had nothing ready. Ineptness in action.

quote:
Originally posted by Art:
The local government is responsible - not the feds or bush. The local government has failed the people of N.O., not Bush.


 
Chadsly  - posted
That's foolish. That's like saying it's the President's fault that my cereal was too soggy and made me choke on it. The President should head up the federal agencies like the FDA. He should have known that milk (approved by the FDA) and the cereal (approved by the FDA) would make a fatal combination when mixed together.

BTW It is the local government's job to take care of the levies and dams. Read again. Look in the Lousiana DNR. You can't blame the President for not providing you enough money to take care of your own state.

This is the exact reason the federal government should be getting smaller and the local government being given these responsibilities (which they are).
 
4Art  - posted
Go ahead, Chadsly. give the "President" another pass. You're beginning to bore me.
 
Chadsly  - posted
Let me take a moment to retract what I just said. Let me take a look at the US Army Corp of Eng.
 
4Art  - posted
"It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."

Yahoo News - Wed Aug 31, 2005
 
Patrick  - posted
Yes 4art, it had to happen. If you think this bad...what about a nuclear strike with 100,000's of people dead and radiation killing about 100,000 more in the aftermath. If this is how we behave for a hurricaine then imagine a nuclear bomb on an American city...the terrorists are working on it.

We had better get wise and seal our borders quick or we see an American city go up in smoke. Liberals say this would be cruel and that we should receive every illegal alien with billions in social programs paid for by you and I.
 
4Art  - posted
Do some research and see just how hard Bush is working on sealing those borders for you, Patrick. [Big Grin] LOL


quote:
Originally posted by Patrick:
Yes 4art, it had to happen. If you think this bad...what about a nuclear strike with 100,000's of people dead and radiation killing about 100,000 more in the aftermath. If this is how we behave for a hurricaine then imagine a nuclear bomb on an American city...the terrorists are working on it.

We had better get wise and seal our borders quick or we see an American city go up in smoke. Liberals say this would be cruel and that we should receive every illegal alien with billions in social programs paid for by you and I.


 
Chadsly  - posted
I apologize. I'm not positive who's job it is to secure the levees. I've read local government say it is their job and how they plan to accomplish it, etc. But as someone pointed out, the US Army Corps of Engineers do specifically say that they are to help out with Flood Control. I don't whether this counts as flood prevention or not.
 
Patrick  - posted
Bush is doing NOTHING to seal our borders. He is even against the minuteman project.
 
4Art  - posted
Exactly. What good is he to you?

quote:
Originally posted by Patrick:
Bush is doing NOTHING to seal our borders. He is even against the minuteman project.


 
Patrick  - posted
He was the best alternative...certainly better than Kennedy's student, John Kerry.
 
4Art  - posted
Really? Why?

I actually preferred Kerry, even though he was a pretty weak candidate.

Besides turning the country into a police state and decimating our economy, what has Bush done for you? Are you one of the top 2% who got a tax cut?


quote:
Originally posted by Patrick:
He was the best alternative...certainly better than Kennedy's student, John Kerry.


 
Dustoff101  - posted
Doctors at this moment are making decisions who gets water and who does not.
 
Chadsly  - posted
I know it sounds gross, but can't they drink their own urine like the guy last year who had to cut off his own arm that was stuck under a rock?
 
4Art  - posted
Thanks Dustoff101. Sorry I got off topic. It's all so incredibly sad I can barely stand it.

quote:
Originally posted by Dustoff101:
Doctors at this moment are making decisions who gets water and who does not.


 



Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share