Since Bush got all the blame with Katrina I think it is time you dems stand up and give him the accolades he deserves for FEMA's response.

Bee Swell

All this and it won't even cost 127 billion. Way to go George Bush.

Bee Swell

In case you haven't looked, they're white.

East St. Louis huh. I thought Bush and FEMA hated blacks? How long till a DR lefty posts a nawlins comparison?

"East St. Louis huh."

Try reading the story, bonehead.

What little there is.

Bottled water...tough assignment.

Oh, wait...there's more.

Sandbags, generators, food, money.

Good job.

Too bad they weren't as prepared when Katrina hit.

Yeah Dave especially since Dubya would have to fill each bottle up without spilling any.

Larry

Yep, my bad. But it still did not take long for a Katrina comparison.

Since Bush got all the blame with Katrina I think it is time you dems stand up and give him the accolades he deserves for FEMA's response.

LOL. You think a dem would ever praise Bush? If could stop all wars in the world and make sure there was no such thing as a hungry person on the planet and they'd still be unable to praise him unless their sheepleherd told them to.

"But it still did not take long for a Katrina comparison."

And why shouldn't there be a Katrina comparison?

Why didn't they get visa cards?

The ONLY reason FEMA was able to do a decent job this time was dipshit was FORCED to put someone IN CHARGE of FEMA who's actually competent-"heckuva job brownie" wasn't qualified to run even a lemon aid stand-let alone FEMA.

fema's been in our tiny area on several weekends - nobody's taking - seems some people are self-sufficient and see a disaster coming and prepare ahead of time - 'magine that!

who put brownie in charge, frank?

better yet - who reelected nagin?

"who put brownie in charge, frank?"

That would be George W. Bush.

Flooding along the Mississippi was nothing like Katrina. Hurricane Katrina knocked out an area bigger than Great Britain. No FEMA under no president could have responded forcefully either--all the roads were down into N.O., it's a far larger metro area, and none of the surrounding areas had power, utilities, or even cell phone service. Tack onto that the most corrupt municipal government in the northern hemisphere, and you've got a catastrophe irrespective of whether or not FEMA people are standing around with bottles of water and extra batteries for your radio.

The ONLY reason FEMA was able to do a decent job this time was dipshit was FORCED to put someone IN CHARGE of FEMA who's actually competent-"heckuva job brownie" wasn't qualified to run even a lemon aid stand-let alone FEMA.

Exactly. How much had to be lost before Bush's crowd figured out that emergency management is a poor place to reward cronies?

better yet - who reelected Bush?

The significant point of this story isn't that FEMA is operating as it should be but that it is operating as it should while Bush is still president.
That is news worthy.

Props to Bush for FEMA Iowa response. Now it's time for you republicans (like you CPJ) to stand up and admit that Reagonomics was a lousy idea. I won't hold my breath.

"Since Bush got all the blame with Katrina I think it is time you"

YEAH!

What I want to Know is Why there Aren't any Dead Bodies in the Street?

Sincerely

Oohhra

When a tornado hit our small town in Iowa, the people kicked FEMA out along with the Red Cross and told them to quit wasting tax money. FEMA did NOTHING and just walked around with their thumbs up their butt. The residents in town and the Salvation Army did all the work. So, finally FEMA is ready to help out Iowans in need...Gee it only took them 7 years after Bush gutted the agency and loaded it with croonies!!

It is good to know that the errors made in Katrina may have been used as a learning opportunity.

The residents in town and the Salvation Army did all the work

are you saying that the local authorities and residents along with a non-profit organization were able to manage without FEMA?

I would suggest that is the defining difference between this and Katrina.

Oh, wait...there's more.

Sandbags, generators, food, money.

Good job.

Too bad they weren't as prepared when Katrina hit.

Posted by Dave

Who wasn't prepared? Are you talking about Fema? You're kidding right? I would not depend on a Federal Agency to come and "rescue" me (from myself) because I was not prepared. Do you realize that this agency was set up by Clinton? Not only is it unconstitutional, but it's imposible and costly. Fema is just as stupid and illegal as the Dept of Education and just as effective. Spending WAY too much of our money to accomplish very little. The Founding Fathers had a really good idea when they said that the individual states are responsible for the residents of that state. This is a principal that has worked for a very long time. Along come the Feds with federal agencies and the system breaks down!

The defining difference would be that Iowa isn't a bowl shape.

It is good to know that the errors made in Katrina may have been used as a learning opportunity.

Posted by 726

They don't learn too good do they?

The smart thing to do would have been to realize that Fema is a dumb idea and shut it down. Let the States take care of their own people. They've been doing just fine for so long!

The defining difference would be that Iowa isn't a bowl shape.

Being aware and recognizing the shape of your area would be more significant.

Props to Bush for FEMA Iowa response. Now it's time for you republicans (like you CPJ) to stand up and admit that Reagonomics was a lousy idea. I won't hold my breath.

Posted by igmoramus

Can you ask a better question?

How does a Federal Agency not working properly because it can't have anything to do with Reaganomics?

These are 2 separate items.

fema's been in our tiny area on several weekends - nobody's taking - seems some people are self-sufficient and see a disaster coming and prepare ahead of time - 'magine that!

Posted by nanc

Die Hard Americans! I love these people!!!

Reagonomics worked for me.

Reagonomics worked for me.

Posted by retnluvnit

It created more jobs than any Government program could ever do. A reverse FDR!!! It proved that Welfare is a drug. You take it away from people they want to kill you!

Do you realize that this agency was set up by Clinton? Not only is it unconstitutional, but it's imposible and costly.

FEMA was established in 1979 under President Carter. The federal government has been helping states and cities recover from natural disasters for decades. It's one of the best reasons to have a federal government. Letting places like New Orleans, southern California and coastal Florida languish after hurricanes or wildfires would devastate the economy. The U.S. is not a banana republic. We can afford to help each other out in an emergency.

When we were kids we set off cherry bombs, M-80's, homemade bombs and rockets. We flushed bombs down toilettes, blew the top off the little league dugout, and set fields on fire to watch them burn. Our rockets sometimes blew up on the launching pad, sometimes went straight up, and sometimes tipped and came straight at us. One friend blew three fingers of of one of his hands. Why did we do those things? Because we wanted to see what would happen! That's the reason they built the supercollider ...to see what ..happens...BOOOOM....wow cool!

Ooops! That post should be under supercollider.

The U.S. is not a banana republic...yet.

"We can afford to help each other out in an emergency."

Commie!

"How does a Federal Agency not working properly because it can't have anything to do with Reaganomics?"

The only way it would be relevant would be if the government had to borrow the money to fulfill the duties of FEMA due to Reaganomics...and we know our government would never borrow money instead of taxing citizens. Right?

What people forget about 'Reaganomics' is that his proposed budget, which included cuts in the rate of taxation also included considerable spending cuts. However, said spending cuts were near and dear to the hearts of the Democratic party and since they had a majority, they wouldn't agree to the cuts. The Reagan-years deficits were a comprimise. Remember, the House ultimately controls the purse strings.

"The Reagan-years deficits were a comprimise. Remember, the House ultimately controls the purse strings."

Yadayadayada....Bush continued Reaganomics and had six years with majorities in both houses of Congress. Don't now complain that Reaganomics failed because of Democrats, Reaganomics failed because the Republicans knowingly undercut the government's ability to tax enough to pay for the spending that was authorized. Don't start wars and enact tax cuts at the same time might be a good motto for Rethugs in the future.

Danni,

I certainly agree with you regarding Bush and his Republican majority.

I don't know that the Republican party will ever again be able to claim they are fiscal conservatives.

Danni,

I also find it pathetic that Bush didn't veto a single spending bill when it was his party doing the spending yet once the Dem's assumed the majority earmarks all of a sudden became distasteful to him.

Pathetic.

All of that being said, Bush and Reagan are 2 seperate situations.

Jeff I agree, Bush starts unnecessary wars, Reagan didn't. That alone puts Reagan far ahead in my mind but I'm still not a fan. Both were warriors in the class war against the working class.

Yet JeffJ voted FOR Dubya twice. AMAZING.

Larry

So, FEMA's handing out candy bars and bottled water? Gee, I feel so much safer now.

Somehow, I think their best work will come when martial law is declared.

Jeff I agree, Bush starts unnecessary wars, Reagan didn't. That alone puts Reagan far ahead in my mind but I'm still not a fan. Both were warriors in the class war against the working class.

Posted by danni at 2008-06-24 12:23 PM | Reply

The other thing is, Reagan (unlike Bush) could speak in complete, coherent sentences. Also, even though Reagan wasn't Ivy League educated (unlike the Yale/Harvard "educated" Bush), he wasn't a complete dumbass. Reagan also was willing to compromise with his "enemies." That is remarkably unlike our present Commander-in-Chief who has no reason to compromise since his policies are dictated directly into his ears by Almighty God.

It's amazing how fast they responded to the white people in trouble.

I'm sure all of the people who were screaming that we shouldn't rebuild NO are saying the same thing about these places....RIGHT?

In my mind (which I will admit is a very limited sphere of knowledge), At least part of the difference (if not a big part of the difference) is the people involved. Not the government agencies. The people of Iowa are used to helping themselves. They did not sit around waiting for someone to come resuce them. They for the most part do not see themselves as victims and do not expect to lie around and wait to be rescued.

Yep, my bad. But it still did not take long for a Katrina comparison.

Posted by ELCIDCE90 at 2008-06-23 09:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

I found this incredibly amusing.

The headline posted by AssPipe makes reference to a remark about Katrina and here we're talking about a new disaster and some rightard actually finds it odd that there would be a comparison?

Gee..........I wonder!

ELCID.....you're an idiot.

It is amazing how well things run when the whining and blaming by the media is not present and people turn productive.

Sunday, June 22, 2008
Martial Law: A License to Loot, a Permit to Plunder (Updated

The only way it would be relevant would be if the government had to borrow the money to fulfill the duties of FEMA due to Reaganomics...and we know our government would never borrow money instead of taxing citizens. Right?

Posted by danni

LOL. Good one Danni. Nice try.

Either you are misinformed or you're making this up. :)

Which is it?

We are borrow money because we are spending way too much money to prop up a failing empire.

What does Reaganomics have to do with this?

No wonder the Libs are so confused!

Eddie,
Reaganomics failed the vast majority of Americans. I mentioned it because Crackie wanted praise from Bush from Dems over FEMA in Iowa. I did it. And now I'm waiting (in vain) for one Republican to man up.
Admit that Reagonomics failed the majority of Americans. If you can't do that, you're just another phony Repub.

Don't now complain that Reaganomics failed because of Democrats, Reaganomics failed because the ...
Posted by danni

Who said anything about Reaganomics failing?

Bush is not using it, if that's what you are aluding to. Bush is really screwing things up!!!

Admit it, Eddie!

Danni,

As much as you don't like Reagan, his policy's did work. You an come up with all kinds of reasons why, but EVERY SINGLE reason that you seem to come up with is wrong. I understand that you might be angry about it, but that's just too bad because it's fair and it's the correct way to do things under the Constitution.

Now, if you want to change the Constitution, then we'll need to sit down and get that done. But, for now, this is the way it is.

Admit that Reagonomics failed the majority of Americans. If you can't do that, you're just another phony Repub.

Posted by igmoramus

What? Phoney Repub? Do you even know what Reaganomics is?

I would say that I am a Reagan Repub, but much more conservative. I didn't like Reagan's foreign policy.

Can you give me an example of how it failed Americans?

Admit it, Eddie!

Posted by igmoramus

if you can admit that you are somewhat a bafoon.

I already ademitted that Bush's FEMA is doing a good job in Iowa. I'm still waiting for you right wingers to admit that Reaganomics is a failure. But it won't happen. You ain't got the integrity.
Go back into your plastic bubble, Eddie. It will afford you and excellent view of America passing you by.

I already ademitted that Bush's FEMA is doing a good job in Iowa. I'm still waiting for you right wingers to admit that Reaganomics is a failure.
Posted by igmoramus

Iggi,

You're a moron, but you could try and explain why you think Reagonaonics is a failure. It would be fun to watch you make even more of an ass out of yourself.

But you think I should make consessions? Why? So we can all feel good?

My cousin in Martinsville, IN (just south of Indy) replied to my email to her about the flooding around her area. It was a 100 year flood - many homes didn't carry flood insurance given their location. Most of the people in her church lost their home or had lots of damage.

I think the issue of rebuilding NO dealt not so much with the racial make up, but rather the location. The place is below sea level.

Sure, many towns dam a river or two to make the area more liveable. I think there's a world of difference in those two scenarios, don't you?

Posted by OohRah at 2008-06-24 01:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

100 Year Flood?

Do you mean a 15 year storm?

I remember seeing the same images from the same place back in 93. I was flying back and forth across the country at that time and each time we'd get to it, the pilot would point out the disaster. The scope of the damage was incredible and we rebuilt it (rightfully so).

*replace storm with flood

FEMA was established in 1979 under President Carter.

Posted by rcade

Oops. My mistake

In case you haven't looked, they're white.

Posted by ShotgunCheney at

and that means I guess that a national agency
cared more about these white people than
they did the blacks in NO.
so that has to be what you are saying, correct?

and IF this gets TO new orleans, look out because all of your tunes will be changing IF you had any words at all GOOD for the pres or fema....

it could also be because these people had
some competent leaders instead of
someone who wants his city to be chocolate town..........

one thing though....if you like corn, you better stock up from what I have read......

The major difference in Iowa is , the Iowans did something to protect themselves, not sit around on their fat asses waiting for the government. But nawlins will only go on to prove that once you embrace the liberal, entitlement mentality, you are now owned by that government system.It just proves what I have printed before, the blacks want to got back to the plantation.Also tells you quite abit about the character of the people involved in these disasters.It's God trying to get through to you, quit blaming righty whitey for your black attitude.
we do not owe you a FUCKING thing, get off your ass and work for, you fucks have more worthless excuses than anyone on the planet.

Since Bush got all the blame with Katrina I think it is time you dems stand up and give him the accolades he deserves for FEMA's response.

Sure thing. Bush didn't put a horse-show promoter in charge of an agency that could be called upon to save people's lives. Bravo. He realized that the American people expect their government to show up and help when natural disasters overwhelm their communities. Hear hear. He realized that being president requires more than just shaking hands and making jokes. Well, seven years is a long time, maybe he learned something. Yah Bush!

And I seem to recall NeoCons saying that FEMA was nothing more than another Federal entitlement program. Darn those welfare-Queen Iowans!

Or is it possible that FEMA actually is a necessary Federal agency - in fact, since it only activates in the event of an emergency, perhaps THE necessary agency - and that government can actually do something right, given professional leadership, instead of political flacks.

Sure thing. Bush didn't put a horse-show promoter in charge of an agency that could be called upon to save people's lives.
Posted by argh

uh, for the billionth time, Fema is not the agency that rushes in to perform emergency services like resuing people from rooftops, stopping gas leaks, putting out fires, etc. Fema is set up to get to the people who need food and water 3 days or less after the initial disaster. Fema got in before 3 days but not to everyone. There were just too much to do!! Don't you remember?

With that said, the reason for me responding is that people don't understand the role that the Feds play in these situations. Individual States are responsible for their own emergency services. Don't you know that? Didn't think so.

Anyway, Fema comes in and helps to clean up and provides money to to the State, but it looks like Louisiana screwed that up. And they elected a new governor because of it. Oh, yeah He's a Republican. Any questions?

Or is it possible that FEMA actually is a necessary Federal agency - in fact, since it only activates in the event of an emergency, perhaps THE necessary agency - and that government can actually do something right, given professional leadership, instead of political flacks.

Posted by argh

Actually, Fema is an excuse for people NOT to buy insurance to protect their investments.

Since Bush got all the blame with Katrina I think it is time you dems stand up and give him the accolades he deserves for FEMA's response.

Posted by Crackpipejunkie

I thought you guys were against a president needing on-the-job training. Now you praise it?

And why are so many of you against acctually geting something back for your tax money? Those bragging about refusing FEMA are idiots. You already paid for these services, so use them.

------

Actually, Fema is an excuse for people NOT to buy insurance to protect their investments.

Posted by Eddie

Good, I'd rather see my money go to all Americans, not just into the bank account of the CEO of some insurance company.

First off, Redneckville, learn your facts before spreading untruths. The American Red Cross DOES NOT work off tax dollars, but from donations and volunteers. Do you understand the concept of a volunteer? The person who gives up time with their families to live in disaster areas, sometimes shares the shelters with the clients, and works long hours for NO pay? I know as I lead a wonderful team who were in Iowa, Ill. Wisc. Ohio, and any other part of the country who needs assistance because of a disaster, from a major flood to a single family house fire, we are there to assist those who have suffered loss.

Julvrug,

I see you are new so I will give your the 411 on redneckville. he is the most dispicable poster on this blog along with buffalobob.

stay away from those 2 idiots. It doesn't matter if you are a conservative or liberal. Redneck is abolutely nuts.