tr2267

In article <>,
Mark Hickey <> wrote:
    > wrote:
    >>The idea that Bush did a good thing by not spending the $105 million is
    >>preposterous since it represents about %0.0001 of the cost of the disaster
    >>thru not only tax dollars but lost GNP and infrastructure. Let's have
    >>a little common sense please.
    >Yes, please - let's. There has been plenty of money spent on the NO
    >levee system, yet it would NOT have mattered had more been spent.

Bullshit. The professionals in the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers which has a
pretty good record determined it was worthwhile spending a relatively
insignificant $105 million to shore up the levees and pumping stations in New
Orleans. Just because the system was not designed at the beginning to
withstand a category 5 storm does NOT mean a breakdown was inevitable. The
levees did hold for nearly a whole day. Even if the $105million to shore up
the levees only descreased the odds by %40 of losing 150 BILLION DOLLARS in
taxpayer funds and $500 BILLION in lost GNP and more Americans lives lost
than the sum of every terrorism death ever is the value is plainly obvious.
If it is still not plainly obvious then calculate if it is worth spending
$10.50 to decrease the odds by %40 of losing $60,000.00 and a bunch of human
lives.

    >Even if the full amount requested every year for the last few years >had
been spent - the same result would have occurred. The system was
    >not designed to withstand the amount of water Katrina brought into it.
    >Period.

LOL. George Bush and all of top government officials seemd to be every bit as
certain that the levees WOULD hold as you are of the exact OPPOSITE result.
What does that say about how much a shit-for-brains Bush is? Of course the
real truth all along was in the middle. It might or might not have. And the
extremist viewpoints of Bush on the one extreme and you on the exact
opposite extreme with both of you being "certain" smacks of arrogance.

Becca

Kurt Ullman wrote:

> Since they divert the river and thus the silt, the delta has been
> shrinking for many years. This means less "front yard" so to speak to
> "soak up" the storm surges.

New Orleans needs a controlled flow of silt from the Mississippi in
order to raise the city above sea level.

The levee that broke was at Lake Ponchartrain, this levee should be
reinforced to withhold storm surges from a category 5 hurricane.

From what I understand, it will cost about $14 billion to solve these
problems. That is what we are spending on the war in two weeks.

http://www.time.com/time/reports/mis...i/orleans.html

Becca

Kurt Ullman

In article <>, Mark Hickey
<> wrote:

    >If only because the more afluent urban areas might tend to elect more
    >responsible local and state government... (think "Florida").
One of the mailing lists I am on was discussing the biggest
difference between 9-11 and NOLA. A participant, and a rather
left-leaning one at that, said "There was no Guiliani". The Local
response is SO important during the first couple of days while
everybody gets ramped up.
BTW: A major piece of the NOLA plan was to put people in the
Dome. It was specifically mentioned in the plan that there was to be
no supplies since it was just to ride out the storm and then teams
would come in and clear it out. However, there was no plan as to
what to do if the teams couldn't get to it or if there was no place
to clear them too.

Lloyd Parsons

In article <>,
Mark Hickey <> wrote:

    > Lloyd Parsons <> wrote:
    >
    > > Mark Hickey <> wrote:
    >
    > >> To truly believe that this disaster is GWB's fault is to be uninformed
    > >> or just naive. It's normal in our culture to want to blame someone
    > >> for everything that happens - but in this case, there's plenty of
    > >> blame to go around, and very little of it would logically land at
    > >> GWB's feet.
    > >
    > >You are right, there is plenty of blame to go around, and I'm sure there
    > >will be a continuous string of fingers pointing for quite some time.
    > >
    > >But GWB deserves nearly every bit of the blame his administration is
    > >taking, as do the state and local officials.
    >
    > I've got less than no problem with those who are calling for better
    > response from the feds and FEMA... none at all. But there's no way to
    > believe that those who are unconcerned about the horrible local
    > government's handling of the crisis, but are rev'd up about GWB's
    > personal involvement are doing so for anything other than political
    > reasons.
    >
In today's political weather, you think it might be political?

That is really funny, it IS political -- the fact that all of the finger
pointing is true just makes it better.

I don't want the locals/state/fed officials let off the hook on this.
It was a pee-poor job by all involved, from the top to the bottom.

    > >The response to the issue is and was totally FUBAR!
    >
    > State and local - you betcha. The feds could have done better too,
    > they were later than they should have been, but that, in the grand
    > scheme of things - particularly considering the amazing job they've
    > done after they did arrive - is a relatively small part of the
    > problem, IMHO.
Nah, the feds were just as FUBAR. Still are at this moment. We've got
a bunch of our first responders sitting on there ass in Baton Rouge
waiting for FEMA to tell them where to go and what to do. I believe it
is 4 days and counting now.

    > >And while I certainly hope I'm wrong, if this had happened in one of our
    > >more affluent urban areas, I can't help thinking that the response would
    > >have been quicker and more effective.
    >
    > If only because the more afluent urban areas might tend to elect more
    > responsible local and state government... (think "Florida").
    >
    > Mark Hickey

You might like to think that, but there is no indication that politics
in Florida is much better than politics in the other states. Political
hacks do what political hacks do, regardless of party affiliation.

The more affluent would get better results partially because when they
were told to get out, they would and would have had the means to do so.
Which is exactly what happened in NO. The haves got out of dodge, the
have-nots didn't. And it doesn't matter at this point why they didn't
go.

Kurt Ullman

In article <lloydparsons->,
Lloyd Parsons <> wrote:

    >Nah, the feds were just as FUBAR. Still are at this moment. We've got
    >a bunch of our first responders sitting on there ass in Baton Rouge
    >waiting for FEMA to tell them where to go and what to do. I believe it
    >is 4 days and counting now.

FEMA doesn't make those decisions. IT is the locals who are in
charge of such things. FEMA is supposed to facilitate, not send the
troops out.


    >The more affluent would get better results partially because when they
    >were told to get out, they would and would have had the means to do so.
    >Which is exactly what happened in NO. The haves got out of dodge, the
    >have-nots didn't. And it doesn't matter at this point why they didn't
    >go.
But it does matter that the locals had no plans for them. The
NOLA hurricane plan from the LA Emergency Ops department stated
specifically that people would be going to the Dome as a temporary
shelter WITHOUT supplies or other support until the winds blew over
and then teams would come inmove them out. However, there was NO
plan as to how the teams would get them out and no plan as to what
was supposed to happen if the teams did not show or the other they
could not be parsed out to other shelters. Last I heard, there were
only 150 NG troops assigned for crowd control.


LOUISIANA HOMELAND SECURITY

http://www.loep.state.la.us/plans/EOPSupplement1a.pdf



B. Last Resort Refuge
The definition of Last Resort Refuge is a place for persons to be
protected from the high winds and heavy rains from the storm. Unlike
a
shelter, there may be little or no water or food and possibly no
utilities. A Last Resort Refuge is
intended to provide best available survival protection for the
duration
of the hurricane only.
1. Once evacuation routes are closed, people who were unable to
evacuate
the risk area will be directed to last resort refuge and /or staging
areas.
2. When it is determined that weather conditions permit, rescue
teams
will be sent into areas designated for Last Resort Refuge to
transport
evacuees to designated shelters.


That is it. No plans for what to do if the rescue teams can't help
them or get them out. A friend of mine, who teaches this kind of
stuff and has about 25 years of experience called this plan
comical..and criminal.

Also, the Convention Center was NEVER mentioned in any plan as
an evacuation center. The state or the locals opened it up, if you
want to call that "open" and never did pass that fact along to the
Command Center. Thus came about the infamous "I knew nothing about
it comment".

Bill Sornson

Kurt Ullman wrote:
    > In article <>, Mark Hickey
    > <> wrote:
    >> If only because the more afluent urban areas might tend to elect more
    >> responsible local and state government... (think "Florida").
    > One of the mailing lists I am on was discussing the biggest
    > difference between 9-11 and NOLA. A participant, and a rather
    > left-leaning one at that, said "There was no Guiliani". The Local
    > response is SO important during the first couple of days while
    > everybody gets ramped up.
    > BTW: A major piece of the NOLA plan was to put people in the
    > Dome. It was specifically mentioned in the plan that there was to be
    > no supplies since it was just to ride out the storm and then teams
    > would come in and clear it out. However, there was no plan as to
    > what to do if the teams couldn't get to it or if there was no place
    > to clear them too.

Exactly right. They didn't want people to "flock there" for "freebies".
Unbelievable.

Bill Sornson

Lloyd Parsons wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Mark Hickey <> wrote:
    >> Lloyd Parsons <> wrote:
    >>> Mark Hickey <> wrote:
    >>>> To truly believe that this disaster is GWB's fault is to be
    >>>> uninformed or just naive. It's normal in our culture to want to
    >>>> blame someone for everything that happens - but in this case,
    >>>> there's plenty of blame to go around, and very little of it would
    >>>> logically land at GWB's feet.
    >>> You are right, there is plenty of blame to go around, and I'm sure
    >>> there will be a continuous string of fingers pointing for quite
    >>> some time.
    >>> But GWB deserves nearly every bit of the blame his administration is
    >>> taking, as do the state and local officials.
    >> I've got less than no problem with those who are calling for better
    >> response from the feds and FEMA... none at all. But there's no way
    >> to believe that those who are unconcerned about the horrible local
    >> government's handling of the crisis, but are rev'd up about GWB's
    >> personal involvement are doing so for anything other than political
    >> reasons.
    > In today's political weather, you think it might be political?
    > That is really funny, it IS political -- the fact that all of the
    > finger pointing is true just makes it better.

ALL of the finger-pointing is true? Even ones pointed in opposite
directions?!?

    > I don't want the locals/state/fed officials let off the hook on this.
    > It was a pee-poor job by all involved, from the top to the bottom.
    >>> The response to the issue is and was totally FUBAR!

They're doing amazing work. (Latest I heard was ~200 grand /per evacuee/ by
the way; but the feds don't care.)

    > The more affluent would get better results partially because when they
    > were told to get out, they would and would have had the means to do
    > so. Which is exactly what happened in NO. The haves got out of
    > dodge, the have-nots didn't. And it doesn't matter at this point why
    > they didn't go.

DOESN'T MATTER?!? So it's important to assign blame if it's Bush
Administration, but not if it's Nagin/Blame-co?!?

As Neil would say, fascinating.

Rd Meyer

I'm so gratefull for people like Harry Connick Jr and some of the great
Jazz musicians who are in the thick of it in what they lovingly refer
to as "OUR CITY". Some of the celebrities I see at the Dome come in,
photo op in th emiddle of a crowd and are gone in 60 seconds. There
just long enough to spew 30 seconds worth of sound bites on the
national News. Our local news here in Houston has gone out of its way
to find some of the celebs who are behind the scenes doing the "dirty
work" like sorting used clothing, cleaning, etc. These are some of the
unsung heroes. Uncredited, unknown. They don't come into town with
their entourages and press people.
Me, I'm tired of the poverty pimps like Jesse Jackson, Sheila Jackson
Lee, Oprah Winfrey, the Clintons, standing in the middle of our
Astrodome calling for another investigative commission. And you want to
talk about political gain? I'm sick of come of these people playing the
race card everytime something happens.
I don't have a PhD in Govt, but I do know that State and Local laws
prevent federal meddling in some instances. Bush can't just call out
the Nat Guard on a whim. I do think the local authorities are in charge
of that.
Don't people believe in personal responsibility anymore. Oh, I'm sorry,
I forgot... Cradle to the grave baby, cradle to the grave...
Sigh.....

Ron

Kurt Ullman

In article <>,
"RD MEYER" <> wrote:

    >I don't have a PhD in Govt, but I do know that State and Local laws
    >prevent federal meddling in some instances. Bush can't just call out
    >the Nat Guard on a whim. I do think the local authorities are in charge
    >of that.

Actually he can't call the NG domestically at all.
Constitutionally, section 8 of article says:
The Congress shall have Power To
Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the
Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Kurt's note: This certainly wasn't an insurrection and only the
hurricane invaded.

Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the
Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in
the Service of the United States, reserving to the States
respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of
training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by
Congress;

Kurt's note-part deux. This states that they can only govern
those on active duty with everything else being in the control of
the states.

tr2267

    >> The more affluent would get better results partially because when they
    >> were told to get out, they would and would have had the means to do
    >> so. Which is exactly what happened in NO. The haves got out of
    >> dodge, the have-nots didn't. And it doesn't matter at this point why
    >> they didn't go.
    >DOESN'T MATTER?!? So it's important to assign blame if it's Bush
    >Administration, but not if it's Nagin/Blame-co?!?

This was a national catastrophe with effects well outside of New Orleans.
The country was in desperate need of some leadership. Why wasn't Bush
on national TV on _Tuesday_ (instead of flying to California to speech on
Iraq) telling us his response plan for the biggest disaster in American
history. Why wasn't he requesting every city and town in the 48 states to
figure out how much shelter space they would be able to provide if or when
necessary? Why didn't he immediately negotiate reduced or suspended hotel
rates with the national chains for the masses of refugees already in hotels?
Why didn't Bush order the many naval ships capable of helping to go there
immediately? When didn't Bush immediately order a Berlin Airlift type
operation out of the New Orleans airport? Why didn't he send troops in
immediately? Why didn't he make sure there was a large fleet of vehicles
and busses getting the refugees out round the clock? The president could
have made all of these happen and I would have expected _any_ president
to do these things and more and do them _Tuesday_.