Subj : Re: Um...no comment? To : Frank Reid From : Angus McLeod Date : Wed Sep 07 2005 14:02:00 Re: Re: Um...no comment? By: Frank Reid to Angus McLeod on Wed Sep 07 2005 08:57:00 > It may be an eye-opener for some of the public, but it will be downplayed by > government officials and by the commission itself. The reason is quite simp > That's how our economy works! Challenging how these funds were used is to > challenge the fundamental mechanisms by which the federal government returns > tax revenue from our wealthy to our poor. After all, not every LA resident > a Caterpiller distributor or quarryman, but many could be gainfully employed > groundskeepers at a local golf course! Frankly, the alternative would be to > place half the state on a federal welfare anyway. Why *not* distribute the > funds to generate work for as many of our citizens as possible? Bullshit. If there needs to be funding for golf courses to give employment to groundskeepers, then let that money come out of the Groundskeepers Employment fund. Money budgeted for and earmarked for flood prevention systems should not build golf courses no matter HOW many unemployed groundskeepers there are! Oh, and I'm not saying that it *doesn't* happen that way, just that it *shouldn't* happen that way, and when, from time to time, as now, it hits the public in the face, heads should roll. > The issue I took was simply that certain political quarters are challenging > federal government budgeting decisions over the decades, and that's complete > disingenuous. I for one am not challenging decades of government budgeting. Only RECENT budgeting decisions which place an Iraqi war ahead of vital projects at home. You can blow all the smoke you like, but cutting the budget for flood prevention systems was a move made in pure, thoughtless, self- interest. > Why do you think you've heard this accusation only from the likes of > Sidney Blumenthal, and not from Mayor Ray Nagin or Governor Kathleen > Blanco? Nagin and Blanco both have their asses in a sling, and they both know it. they'd both kiss GWB's ass on network television if they thought it would lessen the impact of what is goping to happen to them. > The "facts" of levee funding as they relate to this disaster are: > > - Not all available federal funding directed towards levee improvements > actually applied to those efforts. In some cases, the funds were never even > expended. Then someone needs to be locked up. > - The section of levee that actually breached to flood the city had alre > been upgraded, and no future construction was even planned. So, if the section that had failed had been one whose reinforcement were curtailed due to budget cuts, you would then agree that the budget cuts were a bad idea? > - By design, the levee systems were incapable of withstanding a hurrican > of Katrina's magnitude. Even if no levee had failed and Louisiana had remained warm and dry, cutting the budget would still have been a dumb move to make. If the budget for the fire department is cut to zero and all fire stations are forced to close, must you wait for a fire to actually break out before admitting that it wasn't the right thing to do? > - A plan to institute a levee system that could withstand such a storm w > presented only in the recent years (in response to studies concluding the > vulnerability of the city). Initial funding just to conduct the study was i > the tens of millions, and actual construction was estimated to take several > decades. Cutting the budget was dumb, seld-serving and indicative of a lack of common-sense. *Or* a lack of common concern for the citizens. It was a dumb thing to do *before* the storm, and the only reason there wasn't much noise about it is because the facts were not as widely known, nor as widely understood. The actual events have not *made* the budget cuts a bad idea, just brought that fact to everyone's attention! > Now, do I believe FEMA should be dismantled and rebuilt as an independent, > streamlined federal agency? Yep, as should DHS itself, too! What you mean is, FEMA should have been *left* as an independent, federal agency. Rolling it into the Department of Homeland Security was a dumb-ass move. Uh, who was responsible for *that* bright idea? Even then, why was it's focus re-directed so strongly towards terrorism? Did someone actually think that Hussein *really* had WMD? > Should heads roll at the local, state and federal levels? Yep. Nagin shoul > be run out of town by the locals themselves for his lack of even the slighte > semblance of an evacuation or catastrophic recovery plan. Blanco should be > drummed out for her completely ineffective leadership during the crisis. > FEMA's Brown should be fired for having his head up his ass. And Chertoff > should be disassembled along with his entire agency. And Georgie should be patted on the back. > Let's hope the "commission" focuses on these things soon, so something > like this doesn't happen again. When formed, a "commission" knows exactly what to focus on and what findings to return before they start. Just ask Chief Justice Earl Warren! --- þ Synchronet þ Generated automatically on The ANJO BBS .