Subj : Re: Um...no comment?
To   : Newborn
From : Finnigann
Date : Wed Sep 07 2005 08:35:00

-=> Newborn wrote to sn0w0wl <=-

 Ne>   Re: Re: Um...no comment?
 Ne>   By: sn0w0wl to Angus McLeod on
 Ne> Sat Sep 03 2005 08:16 pm

 > Angus McLeod wrote:
 > > Well perhaps you are correct, but as I understand it, money has been spent
 > > continuously over the last several decades to bring about gradual increase
 > > in the flood prevention/recovery mechanisms.  Until Monkey-boy took away
 > > their funding....
 >
 > Let's assume for a moment that every pres before W was putting money,
 > even if it was just a little, toward fixing the problem...so why wasn't
 > it at least half way better than it started out as?  even if W 'took
 > away their funding' what did they do with the funding they had received
 > prior? he didn't cut off the money and order them to tear down the
 > improvements so how is it his fault if they didn't spend it the way they
 > were supposed to?
 >
 > --
 > "You drink, you get laid and then you die." ~~Words of wisdom from Papa
 > Titus to his son Chris~~
 >
 Ne>    As I understand it they did receive some funds.  You have to
 Ne> remember
 Ne>    that much of the south has a reputation for corruption.  Lousiana is

 Ne>    one of those states that the politicans pocketmuch of the funds they
 Ne>    get.

I new it applied to Florida but I didn't know 
it had spread west. (I hope neither one of us is serious)

.... A day for firm decisions!!!!!  Or is it?
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.46

.