Subj : Re: It seems not everyone To : alt.tv.farscape From : Nick Date : Wed Sep 07 2005 19:14:22 From Newsgroup: alt.tv.farscape Finnigann wrote: > To: Ken McElhaney > -=> Ken McElhaney wrote to alt.tv.farscape <=- > > KM> From Newsgroup: > alt.tv.farscape > > > KM> John Iwaniszek wrote: >> "Finnigann" wrote in >> news:431E35B7.1051.farscape@bnb.synchro.net: >> >>> To: Ken McElhaney >>> -=3D> Ken McElhaney wrote to alt.tv.farscape <=3D- >>> >>> KM> From Newsgroup: >>> alt.tv.farscape >>> >>> >>>> The last poll I saw was down to 38%. >>> >>> KM> Which poll? Are you saying 38% of Republicans approve of his >>> handling KM> of the Katrina disaster? Or, are you just citing the >>> 38% (now 45%) KM> overall job approval rating? >>> >>> http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200509u/nj_schneider_2005-09-06 >>> >>> 40% >>> >>> Perhaps your poll was in Houston - Haliburton headquaters. >>> >>> Anyway it's been on a slow spiral since the declared victory in >>> Iraq. It was about at this point just prior to the World Trade >>> Center attacks. So it seems the only person to benefit from the >>> taliban - Osssama bin Laden thing is 'w'. Might explain why we are >>> chasing geese everywhere else these days. >>> >>> >>> KM> This is approximately the same level at >>>> which you've burned away everything except the rock-headed right >>>> wingers who would approve of a Republican President if he, say, >>>> lied about the reasons for starting a war that he proceeded to >>>> thoroughly f*ck up >>> >>> KM> Yea, tell that to the Kurds 'n Shia, I'm sure they think >>> getting KM> liberated, forming a constitution, and putting on trial >>> a madman who KM> killed 400,000 of them was "all screwed up". >>> >>> KM> I tell ya what, John, when the terrorists come to North >>> Carolina, we'll KM> wake you up. >>> >>>> , or dismantled a >>>> working Federal Emergency Managent Administration so it could >>>> become a patronage arm of his presidential campaign committee. >>>> You know, the Retard and Moron constituency. >>> >>> KM> Hmm, the people in Alabama 'n Mississippi (you remember them, >>> don't KM> you? the ones also hit by hurricane Katrina) don't seem >>> to share that KM> opinion about FEMA like you do. >>> >>>>> >>>>>> And while the federal response was way too slow and disasters of >>>>>> this size should NOT be handled by FEMA, but rather the US >>>>>> military (which has no buerocracy to get in the way), I do have >>>>>> some questions for the local 'n state authorities, namely; >>>>> >>>>> I disagree. I think FEMA is the proper place to handle this sort >>>>> of thing but it needs more of a military type heirarchy in which >>>>> quick decisions can be made on the spot without a long approval >>>>> process. Of course, any decisions made will not look as good a >>>>> few days later but that will happen anyway. >>> >>> >>> The _Federal_ _Emergency_ _Management_ _Agency_ isn't a state pep >>> squad. It's supposed to bring resources to bear on problems too big >>> for states to handle. Or where jurisdictions need to be combined. >>> >>> >>> From their web site: >>> >>> FEMA Mission >>> >>> DISASTER. It strikes anytime, anywhere. It takes many forms -- a >>> hurricane, an earthquake, a tornado, a flood, a fire or a hazardous >>> spill, an act of nature or an act of terrorism. It builds over days >>> or weeks, or hits suddenly, without warning. Every year, millions >>> of Americans face disaster, and its terrifying consequences. >>> >>> On March 1, 2003, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) >>> became part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). >>> FEMA's continuing mission within the new department is to lead the >>> effort to prepare the nation for all hazards and effectively manage >>> federal response and recovery efforts following any national >>> incident. FEMA also initiates proactive mitigation activities, >>> trains first responders, and manages the National Flood Insurance >>> Program and the U.S. Fire Administration. >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> It has the hierarchy. >>> >>> KM> Actually John, it doesn't have the kind of power you suggest. >>> FEMA KM> works with state 'n local officials. And when they have >>> NO PLAN and KM> spend time yelling on radio programs that they >>> can't get any help, it's KM> time to bypass FEMA and send in the >>> military. >>> >>> >>>> It just didn't occur to the dipsh*t in charge to look at it. >>> >>> KM> Ah, consistancy. I see a fist-raising, Bush-bashing, screaming >>> to the KM> heavens theme from the Democrats which will result in >>> even more Senate KM> seats to the Republicans in Nov. 2006. >>> >>> KM> Keep gritchen, John. >>> >>> As every concerned citizen must do! >>> >>> KM> Ken >>> >>> So what do you do when the person at the top is an idiot? >>> >> >> >> >> Ken is an idiot. You waste your time responding, unless it is for >> your own amusement. > > KM> John's definition of an idiot; > > KM> Idiot (noun); someone who doesn't totally agree with John. > Someone who KM> doesn't share John's complete and total hatred of > George W. Bush. KM> Someone who's willing to stand up to John's > rantings if only to show KM> just how silly John can get sometimes. > > KM> Yea, that pretty much sums it up. > > KM> Ken > > > Well it seems your recent posts adds alot to the definition of idiot. > However on the advice of council, I will refrain from answering your > posts. > > ... Nuc...Nucl... Nucular... {psst what's it called, again?} > --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.46 > Yeah, we wouldn't want to hear from people with differing views. That way spells danger. .