Skip to content

New Orleans...wtf?

Archived

163 replies · 3,092 views

This is an archived legacy thread. Replies are closed, but the discussion is preserved.

twist wrote:

I think elections should be declared invalid and re-run if less than 75% of people vote (or maybe people should be compelled to vote).

I believe that in the former USSR voter turn out was very high although only one Party was on the ballot. Compelled by AKM (Autovat Kalashinkov Military, the AK47 not frontline weapon for years nor the AK74).

Choosing not to vote sends a political message. But it would be nice to have someone to vote for instead of someone to vote against like the last US election. This is why Kerry lost--"vote for me because I am not him."

Maybe you've hit on an idea here; a negative vote... maybe we should be allowed to vote for the person we don't want to be elected. I think that would be an important option if voting was compulsory...

0 likes

digitalwaters wrote:

Steve Campbell wrote: Took me a long time to work out what was up with the US left. Could never figure why liberal was a dirty word to right wingers.And was never sure why you kept electing crazy religious whackos... But I've seen a few things lately that scared me, all i can says is....I know why most of y'all can't be arsed voting, I feel the same way here.....I refuse to waste the ink to endorse a single one of the wankers on offer (here than means various species of nazi and the local sewing circle).

TBH, this aint one for point scoring. Headscractching and futureproofing would be a beter pursuit.

It's of course everyone's right to abstain from voting, but when people do this en masse the extremists get in and scary things happen.

I think elections should be declared invalid and re-run if less than 75% of people vote (or maybe people should be compelled to vote).

Theres a whole brace of minority parties which are there for the minority opinion, but if everyone voted some of these smaller parties would have more influence.

I'm a pragmatic leftie... I voted Labour (Democrat) normally, but when they upset me by doing things like invading Iraq, I vote Green...

when was the last time 75% of the nation voted?

and whats the point in voting Green? do you not feel its a wasted vote? What would they do if they got in? nothing they don't have the foresight or the backing to plan for the big picture, has the Green party ever wona seat anywhere?

0 likes

bLuE oRdEr wrote:

twist wrote: Look, it's not a political thing, it's FEMA's deal. They're the ones who messed it up, not Bush, not Kennedy, not anyone else.

But it is a political thing. Bush says it's not political because he's the fuckup who's responsible. As long as he can get people to believe that he's not the fuckup who's responsible, by saying "let's not play politics," then the buck ends up somewhere else: FEMA, mother nature, uppity black folks, anywhere but on his desk.

Heres' why it's political:

(1) Global warming. Bush has spent his entire presidency pretending it doesn't exist. He's fought tooth and nail to prevent the U.S. from taking any steps to slow down and reverse global warming. If it doesn't exist, you don't have to take any steps to stop it.

Here's what we know about global warming that's relevant to New Orleans: The Southeast coast of the U.S. is the most vulnerable part of the U.S. to global warming impacts. We can expect bigger storms, more often. Anybody who's read the scientific reports knows this. Bush asks how he could have known beforehand? He's a lying sack of shite.

Hurricanes have been happening since weather began-- about 6000 years now, according to the Bush crowd. It would be totally unfair to blame Bush for a hurricane. We've been headed for a global warming disaster since before Bush was born, so it would be totally unfair to blame Bush for causing global warming as well. BUT, Bush has worked vigorously to prevent the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases from curbing its emissions. Clearly, he places the welfare of his oil and coal conies above the welfare of every living being on this planet. He's fiddled while the planet burns, so it is fair to blame him for the the devastation resulting from global warming.

(2) Flood control. Bush has cut flood control funding for New Orleans every single year since the Iraq vendetta. He asks how he could have known beforehand? FEMA-- the agency Bush wants to blame-- reported to him at the beginning of his presidency that the top 3 emergencies the U.S. faces are (1) a terrorist attack in New York City; (2) a hurricane in New orleans, and (3) an earthquake in San Francisco.

We've all seen how he sat around with his thumb up his ass while bin Laden sent terrorists to pilot school in Florida, and we've all seen how he sat around with his thumb up his ass while those same terrorists flew planes into the twin towers and the Pentagon.

Now we come to New Orleans, and he's cut flood control funding every year. $250 million in repairs were needed, but he sent that money to fund his family vendetta in Iraq instead. Meanwhile, he let his developer buddies build on the delta wetlands and barrier islands-- nature's flood control system. And Bush asks how he could have known?

San Francisco's next. Funny how the top 3 national emergency problems in the U.S.-- emergencies Bush has ignored-- are blue cities. And he says "Let's not play politics"?

(3) The disaster relief. Whether he likes it or not, Bush is the President, and thus responsible. If FEMA fucked up, it's still up to Bush to get the ball rolling. But he couldn't be bothered. No, he was busy vacationing at his ranch. Sure, he could interrupt his vacation to rush back to DC to intervene in the Terry Schiavo debacle, but interrupt his vacation to get the ball rolling on disaster relief for a few hundred thousand poor black people? The whole world saw what he did with that one. He kept right on vacationing.

When he finally did get off his candy ass and tour the area, he was dazed by what he saw. Why? He's the President-- why doesn't the President know what's going on in the worst disaster area the nation has ever witnessed? The rest of the world knew what was going on-- what's his excuse?

But what responsibility did the Governor of LA and the Mayor of NO have? Seems to me that if your city is ripe for a natural disaster of this magnitude, and people have been saying this for years, some sort of plan should have been ready.

The plan is: (1) Make the flood control repairs; Bush spent the money on his family vendetta instead, and sent the rest as tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans; (2) FEMA coordinates emergency relief; FEMA is under Homeland Security, which reports to the President, so ultimately, Bush is the fuckup in charge.

The Governor can declare a state of emergency, which allows the federal government to begin relief efforts. The Governor did her job. The Governor can send in the National Guard-- except they're on duty in Bush's family vendetta.

The mayor can declare martial law. He did that. The mayor can deply the police. He did that. The mayor can ask for federal assistance. He did that.

While the mayor and Governor were doing their jobs, Bush was on vacation at his ranch.

Sitting on the roof top bitching about the Federal government not bailing your entitled ass out is not a plan. If my house is on fire my children know how to get the fuck out.

Some people are so poor that they don't have a car. Some people are so poor that they don't have money to put gas in a car. Some people don't know anybody who has the money to put gas in a car. Some people are so poor they can't buy a bus ticket or a train ticket to get out of town. Some people are old and sick and in wheelchairs.

Maybe we should blame them.

Now not everyone is able to leave a large city on 3 days notice. BUT the city and State should have had some system of evacuation of the poor, elderly and infirm.

And where does FEMA-- the Federal Emergency Management Agency-- fit into all of this disaster planning?

Barney Army wrote: It's a natural disater. Shit really does happen.

Shit happens, but Bush has known for years, and DID NOTHING. That's not a natural disaster-- it's a policy choice.

So, what was your boy billclinton doing for New Orleans for the eight years he was busy skull shagging Monica and having Ron Brown capped in the dome?

Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? Administrations - federal, state and local - have ignored the problem of New Orleans being vulnerable to a catastrophic hurricane for the last 40 years.

And, there is PLENTY of blame to go around regarding response or the lack thereof between Bush, Blanco, the mayor and the police chief.

0 likes

Jesus: the FSP/USA repost got a response. Its not the best critique, I aggree, but its nice to know that some pople on the left have principles and would not fellate a syphilitic camel in order to get near power.

Im begining to side with McDermott against the Liberals here (doubtless "extremists are all the same" thought processes will flow from the well dressed up simple minds here). When that starts happening, you know its time to stop posting opinions and keep pasting up whatever you feel like.

Hows my spelling? Phone: 1800:dead:

0 likes

Tex wrote: And, there is PLENTY of blame to go around regarding response or the lack thereof between Bush, Blanco, the mayor and the police chief.

mayor nagin has been much angrier at governor blanco than at bush since their meeting in air force one last week. this tragedy has created some strange bedfellows!

it's everybody's fault, it's nobody's fault.... goodness.

0 likes

Bush to Lead Katrina Inquiry

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Good one W! I think in that vein, I'll grade my own paper I'm submitting for graduation. And after graduation it's time for a job, where I'll be leading my annual performance reviews. :deal:

0 likes

AgentWood wrote: regarding point 1: washington, DC is one of america's poorest cities; tourism is a vital source of revenue for the city. turning the mall, the centerpiece of washington DC, into an emergency shelter would send the city into even greater debt and add to the already crushing poverty facing the city. it's not worth harming the poor of DC in order to make a political statement.

Not to mention using the victims of this disaster as political pawns. Never mind finding housing for these people-- let's just put them out on the mall in a big open-air camp for the next 3 years, so we can all embarass Bush. They probably won't mind, being poor and all.

0 likes

Did anybody catch what dubya's mom said? She praised the hosiptality at the astrodome. She said that tthe poor people dont expect much. Cant find a link on the net!

0 likes

CAKE - CLOCK - ZWART wrote: 5. Put a national price cap on gasoline, diesel, heating oil and natural gas, at a rate that slashes corporate profits by at least 75%.

Looks like this one's being proposed after all...

Gas Prices.

Another article-- which I can't find now-- stated that Democrats will be proposing gasoline price caps, and Republicans will be proposing drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Here's another Democratic proposal:

"If prices do not stabilize in a week to 10 days, a 30-day federal gasoline tax holiday "may very well be in order," Mr. Corzine said. "I think it needs to be paired with a windfall profits tax on the oil companies."

0 likes

bLuE oRdEr wrote: Make Levees, Not War

wow. that was fast.

and i want christopher walken back.

0 likes

AgentWood wrote: and i want christopher walken back.

I'd like to stay a bit longer...

0 likes

bLuE oRdEr wrote:

AgentWood wrote: and i want christopher walken back.

I'd like to stay a bit longer...

but you're chaste.

0 likes

Look, let me go back in there and face the peril.

0 likes

as you wish. then i want a return to a more continental picture.

0 likes

:thumb:

0 likes

I've just herd what a certain B B has had to say. I hope she's not had too much influence on her son, although it could explain the slow response.

On accomodating the dispaced in sporting arenas she said the following:

To quote loosly " Most of these people are unpriveliged anyway, so this is working quite well"

Yes it really is not too bad to be homeless many miles from home having lost all your posessions, and possibly even some members of your family and friends, and having no privacy.

0 likes

leeharveyoswaldR.I.P1963 wrote: Did anybody catch what dubya's mom said? She praised the hosiptality at the astrodome. She said that tthe poor people dont expect much. Cant find a link on the net!

My apologies I did not see this utill after I did the above post.

0 likes

patrick stewart appreciation society wrote:

digitalwaters wrote:

Steve Campbell wrote: Took me a long time to work out what was up with the US left. Could never figure why liberal was a dirty word to right wingers.And was never sure why you kept electing crazy religious whackos... But I've seen a few things lately that scared me, all i can says is....I know why most of y'all can't be arsed voting, I feel the same way here.....I refuse to waste the ink to endorse a single one of the wankers on offer (here than means various species of nazi and the local sewing circle).

TBH, this aint one for point scoring. Headscractching and futureproofing would be a beter pursuit.

It's of course everyone's right to abstain from voting, but when people do this en masse the extremists get in and scary things happen.

I think elections should be declared invalid and re-run if less than 75% of people vote (or maybe people should be compelled to vote).

Theres a whole brace of minority parties which are there for the minority opinion, but if everyone voted some of these smaller parties would have more influence.

I'm a pragmatic leftie... I voted Labour (Democrat) normally, but when they upset me by doing things like invading Iraq, I vote Green...

when was the last time 75% of the nation voted?

and whats the point in voting Green? do you not feel its a wasted vote? What would they do if they got in? nothing they don't have the foresight or the backing to plan for the big picture, has the Green party ever wona seat anywhere?

Last time 75% voted? Turnout in the 1992 election was 82% (if you are talking abou the UK). Turnouts of around 75% or higher have pretty much been the norm in the UK, right up until 97 and 2001 when it plummeted. 2001 was the first time below 70%. Presumably because of the absence of meaningful ideological differences between parties post the death of socialism.

Not that I agree with all their policies, but the Greens do have quite a few seats on the London assembly.

And anyway, what's the point of voting Tory (hopeless losers), Lib Dem (hopeless opportunists, stand for nothing) or Labour (spineless puppets of big business), for that matter?

0 likes

in america if an election with a turnout of less than 75% was declared invalid, we would still be determining the winner of the nixon/kennedy election of 1960.

0 likes

One of the missing Aussies has been found in a police cell. Aparently he had been arrested for being drunk and disorderly before K hit. A true Aussie hero. Aussie Aussie Aussie Oi Oi Oi.

Still 6 Australians missing.

0 likes

Ronald Kirsch wrote:

leeharveyoswaldR.I.P1963 wrote: Did anybody catch what dubya's mom said? She praised the hosiptality at the astrodome. She said that tthe poor people dont expect much. Cant find a link on the net!

My apologies I did not see this utill after I did the above post.

You can always count on a rich old cunt to bare her fangs as she cackles about the poor getting fucked over.

Barbara Bush on those lucky refugees

0 likes

bLuE oRdEr wrote:

Ronald Kirsch wrote:

leeharveyoswaldR.I.P1963 wrote: Did anybody catch what dubya's mom said? She praised the hosiptality at the astrodome. She said that tthe poor people dont expect much. Cant find a link on the net!

My apologies I did not see this utill after I did the above post.

You can always count on a rich old cunt to bare her fangs as she cackles about the poor getting fucked over.

Barbara Bush on those lucky refugees

man, i have always wanted to live in a shelter for months on end. and the astrodome is pretty nice, i hear. i'm pretty open, so i don't need privacy or anything. you'd get to meet some interesting people there, too, what with all the cots in rows. and all the kids could play together. sounds like paradise to me.

0 likes

And the bathrooms! Don't forget the bathrooms!

0 likes

do they need/deserve bathrooms?

0 likes

Ronald Kirsch wrote: do they need/deserve bathrooms?

during my camping excursions i've found that a deeply dug pit always works well.

0 likes

AgentWood wrote:

Ronald Kirsch wrote: do they need/deserve bathrooms?

during my camping excursions i've found that a deeply dug pit always works well.

I'm a male, so any Bush will do.

0 likes

You're leaving NewOrderOnline

This link goes to an external website we don't operate, which has its own privacy policy and terms.

Destination:
Continue ↗