Arrest King Daley!

Doug Carter wrote:

I was responding to the posters assertion, not your recent remarks about
levees,

Then you should quote them and not me.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Jay Honeck wrote:

You seem to regard the Federal Government as a monolithic, unresponsive
structure located far, far away from N.O.

No, I simply feel that the owners of items in this world are the people to be
held responsible for their maintenance, enhancement, and failures.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

On 2005-09-12, George Patterson wrote:
Doug Carter wrote:

I was responding to the posters assertion, not your recent remarks about
levees,

Then you should quote them and not me.

There seems to be a bit of confusion here. You brought up levees,
apparently in response to my assertion that the local and state
governments clearly *did not* "...do everything they could..."

I responded directly to your reply, in context, correctly quoted;
copied below for easy reference.

All of this is, of course sidestepping the facts of the case and, more
importantly the original intent of this thread "Arrest King Daley"

---Reference materials---
On 2005-09-12, George Patterson wrote:
Doug Carter wrote:
In article GwNUe.4455$c27.1695@trndny01, George Patterson wrote:

Jay Honeck wrote:
I'm really, REALLY tired of New Orleans politicians pointing the
finger of blame everywhere except at their own chests.

Tough ****. They did everything they could. The Feds are the ones who
fell down on they job.

The Mayor and Governor should have admitted that they had not
prepared for a hurricane and were helpless *before* the hurricane..

And what does that have to do with the argument that the locals are
somehow responsible for the fact that the Federal government did not
reinforce the levee system which it owns?
---end of Reference materials---

Tom S. opined

"Ash Wyllie" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck opined

It was 1927 and Hoover wasn't even anyone's dark horse candidate for
nomination, by his party, in the next summer's presidential convention.

When the devastating 1927 Mississippi River flood hit, he was the man
put
in
charge of the relief effort. His successful handling of the Mississippi
River flood relief program helped launch him into the White House the
following fall.

This is but one example of what Herbert Hoover did for this country -- and
the world. He was, indeed, an amazing man who did many great things. His
legacy has been sadly (and, largely, unavoidably) been burdened with the
dark pall of the Great Depression occurring on his watch.

HH could have blocked the Depression by vetoing the Smoot-Hawling tariffs.
Had he vetoed the 1932 income tax increase years would have been removed
from the Depression.

Few presidents really screw up badly, fewer still twice in a single term.

Anyone who buys into the myth that Hoover caused the depression because he
"did nothing" should read Murray Rothbard's "The Great Depression". Not only
didn't Hoover do nothing, he did a great deal...all of it completely back
asswards.

Or the late Jude Weneski's(sp?) /The Way the World Works./



-ash
Cthulhu in 2005!
Why wait for nature?

Doug Carter wrote:

There seems to be a bit of confusion here. You brought up levees,
apparently in response to my assertion that the local and state
governments clearly *did not* "...do everything they could..."

But the statement of mine to the effect that the locals did everything they
could was a statement about the levees; nothing else. Don't take it as a
springboard to discuss disaster response efforts; that makes it appear that I
said the locals did everything perfectly there. I did not say that.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

On 2005-09-12, George Patterson wrote:

But the statement of mine to the effect that the locals did everything they
could was a statement about the levees; nothing else. Don't take it as a
springboard to discuss disaster response efforts; that makes it appear that I
said the locals did everything perfectly there. I did not say that.

Fair enough. I have no intention of misquoting anyone.

Louisiana (per a 2003 study by Texas A&M) receives about $1.60 in various
forms of Federal largess for each $1.00 paid by its citizens in federal
tax.

If local officials (Sen. Landau, her brother the Lt. Governor, her
father the ex Mayor, et al.) can't snag enough money to keep New Orleans
from drowning then either they are, at best, ineffective or perhaps the
system of routing a third of the GNP through Washington is a really bad
idea. Or both?

ThomasH wrote:

Shocking.

Sarcasm? Eventually, it'll be a "problem". Then the local bosses will
"solve" this problem by bringing in some commercial interest (ie. a
casino).

That the problem was created by the boss boss will be lost in the midst of
time (ie. a week or so back for Chicago voters).

- Andrew

When did LA. and NO secede from the Union? Also, one might ask when these
folks stopped paying their taxes.

The only real purpose for a federal government is to protect it's citizens.

The federal government owed it, I mean OWED it to the people of NO to
protect them and/or rescue them after the fact.


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:YsNUe.321865$x96.51500@attbi_s72...
Again. The levees are owned by the Federal government, not the State.

Again, who cares? It was up to the State of Louisiana to take care of New
Orleans. More importantly, it was up to New Orleans to take care of New
Orleans. Whether that meant paying for the improvements themselves, or
applying political pressure to the Army Corps of Engineers, Congress, or
Santa Claus, it should have been done BY THEM. I'm really, REALLY tired
of New Orleans politicians pointing the finger of blame everywhere except
at their own chests.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 2005-09-13, Tom wrote:

The only real purpose for a federal government is to protect it's citizens.

Do you think the city and state governments have any responsibility to
protect their citizens? Should the Mayor be held accountable for not
following the city's emergency response plan and leaving the homeless to
drown rather than use the city buses to evacuate them?

The federal government owed it, I mean OWED it to the people of NO to
protect them and/or rescue them after the fact.

The state of Louisiana takes about $1.60 from the Federal treasury for
each $1.00 its citizens pay in. Anyone have a list of what they spend
their (oops, I mean our) money on instead of protecting themselves?

On 2005-09-13, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

The only real purpose for a federal government is to protect it's
citizens.

The federal government owed it, I mean OWED it to the people of NO to
protect them and/or rescue them after the fact.


Right. The federal government had a responsibility to stop that hurricane.
It should never have been allowed to make landfall.

They were going to stop it but Carl Rove interceded. After all, NO is a
Democrat stronghold.

Carl was, of course supported by Dick who wanted to make sure
Halliburton got another juicy contract. Unfortunately the Shaw Group got
a big contract as well but some allowances have to be made for their CEO
being the Democrat Party Chair of the state. Can't win them all