Realistically and objectivly: What has the Bush administration done right? by chrisisall

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Realistically and objectivly: What has the Bush administration done right?

POSTED BY: CHRISISALL
UPDATED: Monday, June 12, 2006 07:21
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7139
PAGE 3 of 3

Friday, June 9, 2006 1:51 PM

Dammit. Now I have to go look it up? Son of a bitch!

I'll try my best.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 2:12 PM

SASSALICIOUS

Got some stuff.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/katrina-timeline.php

Neat little timeline of events. Kind of made the FL part of the hurricane worse than it was in my opinion (having been in FL when it hit), but whatever. Bullet 3 under sept. 4 references the next article.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0509040369sep04,1,4
144825.story

Chicago Tribune article about the USS Bataan. It sounds like eventually someone got it together and started using the military, but if I'm reading correctly this ship still wasn't really used all that much. Canada sent 3 ships from Halifax and we couldn't handle authorizing one that was already in the area? I applaud Carnival Cruise Lines (even though cruises are evil) for using 3 of their ships in the relief effort.

http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/002743.html

USS Bataan down under the heading "Aiding the relief effort" Within the paragraph, the 2nd link works. The first one for the Macon paper doesn't work, but the one about wanting to do more does.

It seems like it may have been lame bureaucratic red tape, but I truly think if the president had said "dispatch them", it would have gone through. He's the commander in chief after all.

This seems like an instance where the captain probably could have gotten away with just jumping in and being like "what can we do" without permission. Taking initiative. Kind of like that helicopter in the Vietnam War that stopped the gratuitous slaughter of an entire village.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 4:58 PM

SASSALICIOUS

I'm fairly certain there's an agenda.

Agenda 1: Big corporations that support Bush love cheap labor. Example: Nike. Grossly expensive shoes that are kind of ugly. They wanted cheaper labor so they moved a bunch of their work to Vietnam. Minimum wage in Vietnam is $45/month which is $1.5/day. Nike pays less than minimum wage because they can't even be bothered to pay the people who make their shoes $1.50/day. Oddly enough, the price of the shoes stayed the same or increased.

Fact is companies like cheap labor. Most of the food service industry works for minimum wage or just over it. Unfortunately minimum wage doesn't equal a living wage.

Agenda 2: Oil. Extraneous corporate interests in the Middle East. Being Israel's bitch. Etc Etc Etc.

Agenda 3: Paying lip service to the extreme fundamentalist base because his ratings suck and he wants the elections in November to be Republican favored. Translation: He doesn't actually give a shit about anything that's going on and just wants votes. Though that's probably true about most politicians.

I do have to add that the statement "jobs American's won't do" isn't a total lie. My mom is a social worker and there are plenty of unemployed people (at least in Green Bay) that are "holding out for management" or some such nonsense, when there are legit jobs available.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 7:19 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:
I believe the term you were looking for is differing viewpoint.
Erm no I mean anti-liberal hate-filled extremist right-wing rant, reference PrairieDogg's post if you want.

I'm sorry Citizen. In the stream of the thread I thought you were refering to AMIALION. I agree that Prairiedogg came across as a bit overzealous.

Quote:

I'm the one in the wrong because I responded to personal insults by saying the exact same thing back, but the person who said them's okay, why's that?

Frankly if someone starts in on me with insults I'll reply. I didn't insult you so why the sermon? Why aren't you giving certain other posters here a telling off? Do you condone their comments?

I called you on it because you are a long time poster in this forum. IMHO, you fashion yourself the defender of the left. You wait until someone posts something that dosen't jibe with your beliefes and then you try to cut them down. I supported AMIALION because he/she actually tried to follow the topic of this thread. Being a new poster, perhaps AMIALION did not know what he/she was getting into here in RWED by trying to find something positive
about the Bush administration. You and Chrisisall responded in your usual sarcastic
ways and that immediately put AMIALION's defenses up. What could have been another great discussion ended up as another "dead right winger" notch in the side of your monitor. How many is that now?

Quote:

I didn't label anyone anything, I said someone SPAT the dummy, not that they were a dummy, because they lost their temper when I disagreed with them.

My apologies over the mix-up. I thought spat the dummy was an English way of saying to talk stupid. Which is why I placed dummy in quotation marks.

Quote:

What more do you want from me, I outright said I was joking in my post when I replied to you, do you actually want me to open a vein or do you prefer speaking from a position of outraged moral high ground?

Let's not get too overly dramatic. I am simply trying to bring some semblance of balance to RWED. IMHO, RWED has become a bash the right forum. Or at the very least, this thread has become that. Pretty confusing when you read the topic.

De-lurking to clear stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 7:56 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Thanks for the links Sassalicious. It sounds like a number of things went wrong, at local, state, and federal levels. I will say the timeline could have been a little less partisan though. Why was it necessary to include the stuff about Bush speaking about immigration and prescription drugs? The business of running a country can slow down but certainly not stop during a natural disaster. It seems like Bush was let down by the people he had in place to manage the disaster.
One question though. The timeline states that Bush declared a state of emergency in Louisiana on Saturday August 27th, two days before Katrina's landfall. What does declaring a state of emergency mean? Does that cut away some of the red tape and give local and state authorities more freedom to act? including ship captains.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 9:02 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
IMHO, you fashion yourself the defender of the left.

And if the right wasn't constantly attacking the left and blaming liberals for everything that has gone wrong, every 'evil' done since the dawn of mankind I wouldn't need to.

Quote:
You wait until someone posts something that dosen't jibe with your beliefes and then you try to cut them down.

Well this is quite an indignant way of saying I don't respond to people saying "this guy is right!" because It adds nothing, but I do respond to people I disagree with. Shock horror, I was under the impression that was the point.

Do you mean waiting to post when something is said that goes against your beliefs like every 'rightist’ poster who’s posted on this thread? Because ya’ll waited until us dirty Liberals started having our ‘circle-jerk’ (very delicately put there and not at all an attempt at an insult) before any of you decided to start posting.

Cut them down, you mean like turning the thread into an attack Citizen call him a Nazi and blame him for all the problems of the RWED thread?

Quote:
I supported AMIALION because he/she actually tried to follow the topic of this thread.

Actually AmIaLion responded to me and told me that I didn't know what I was talking about and he missed the meaning of my post completely, even though the meaning was fairly obvious. So really you're supporting AmIaLion not because I attacked him/her (because actually the reverse is true) but I suspect because you share similar political beliefs.

Don't get me wrong there's nothing wrong with that, just spare me the holier-than-thou you attack people for no reason crap.

Quote:
What could have been another great discussion ended up as another "dead right winger" notch in the side of your monitor.

A great discussion? AmIaLion devoted nearly half their opening post to attacking me. That's a great discussion for you?

Don't paint me with that brush, I have had plenty of great discussions with many of the conservative posters here, the fact that most of the ‘rightist’ posters here aren't capable of it and merely want to turn every discussion into an exposition about how all the problems of the universe are caused by Liberals because Liberals are EVIL isn't my fault. Neither is their inability to argue their case.

Quote:
How many is that now?

I'm supposed to feel sorry for showing up a petty minded little modo who likes to call people Nazis when they don't agree with them for what they are?

Who I might add went for me, not the other way around as you like to paint it.

Because I don't, you know I feel pretty good about it.

It's also interesting that you blame ChrisIsAll for being partly the cause, one of the most agreeable people on these forums and very quick to admit if he's wrong.

Quote:
Let's not get too overly dramatic.

I don't see why not, I'm getting attacked for defending myself when I was attacked while the people doing the attacking are acting like they have some sort of high moral ground.

Quote:
IMHO, RWED has become a bash the right forum.

Given that many of the posters on the right of these forums spend most of their time telling everyone they're right and anyone who disagrees is evil and a terrorist it's hardly surprising. I miss Finn because he could actually debate a subject; I miss Dreamtrove because despite his desire to blame the left for everything he at least could discuss things.

IMHO you seem to want to paint yourself as some sort of valiant crusader bringing balance and the light of your knowledge to us all. Fantastic as that maybe please cut the holier than thou crap.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
"I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: 'No good in a bed, but fine against a wall'." -- Eleanor Roosevelt.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 9:49 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
Well this is quite an indignant way of saying I don't respond to people saying "this guy is right!" because It adds nothing, but I do respond to people I disagree with. Shock horror, I was under the impression that was the point.

That is the point. I disagreed with one of your posts and I started a discussion about it with you.

Quote:

Do you mean waiting to post when something is said that goes against your beliefs like every 'rightist’ poster who’s posted on this thread? Because ya’ll waited until us dirty Liberals started having our ‘circle-jerk’ (very delicately put there and not at all an attempt at an insult) before any of you decided to start posting.

Take your own advice and reread the entire thread. I was the first poster who tried to actually follow the topic of the thread. I agree I supported someone else's insult. I thought it was completely called for given the "set-up" of the original thread title.

Quote:

Cut them down, you mean like turning the thread into an attack Citizen call him a Nazi and blame him for all the problems of the RWED thread?

There is a difference between two posters carrying on a discussion in a thread to an attack Citizen thread. I believe one of those is already archived somewhere in this site. Maybe that is why you seem to be overly defensive. That said, I completely agree that name calling has no place in these discussions. It makes it almost impossible to see the relevance in the name callers posts.

Quote:

A great discussion? AmIaLion devoted nearly half their opening post to attacking me. That's a great discussion for you?

I could be mistaken, but I do not remember any mention of you in Amialion's opening post. Please correct me if I am wrong, I can admit mistakes. Can you?

Quote:

I'm supposed to feel sorry for showing up a petty minded little modo who likes to call people Nazis when they don't agree with them for what they are?

Who I might add went for me, not the other way around as you like to paint it.

Because I don't, you know I feel pretty good about it.

It's also interesting that you blame ChrisIsAll for being partly the cause, one of the most agreeable people on these forums and very quick to admit if he's wrong.

Once again I urge you to reread the thread. I mentioned Chrisisall because he was the first responder to Amialion (though you were hot on his heels) and he was being his usual sarcastic quick to judge self. I mentioned this as a potential reason for Amialion's more hostile responses. You will see that Chrisisall is indeed quite agreeable and was able to end his discussion with Amialion without the namecalling.

Quote:

IMHO you seem to want to paint yourself as some sort of valiant crusader bringing balance and the light of your knowledge to us all. Fantastic as that maybe please cut the holier than thou crap.

IMHO, when you push you are not used to someone pushing back. How is what I am doing any different than your "legitimate rightists" Finn and Dreamtrove? I am not being high and mighty or holier than thou. I am engaging you in a discussion.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 10:24 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
There is a difference between two posters carrying on a discussion in a thread to an attack Citizen thread. I believe one of those is already archived somewhere in this site. Maybe that is why you seem to be overly defensive.

Except the discussion we're talking about is you telling me off and telling me (for want of a better term) how much of a bad man I am and me defending myself. Just because you're not calling me a big stupid head or a Nazi doesn't make it any less of an attack Citizen discussion.

Quote:
Take your own advice and reread the entire thread.

I didn't give anyone that advise, certainly not you, I said AmIaLion should re-read my post, not the entire thread.

Quote:
I could be mistaken, but I do not remember any mention of you in Amialion's opening post. Please correct me if I am wrong, I can admit mistakes. Can you?

Sorry it was AmIaLions second post which was directly aimed at me and began with the words Actually citizen, you really should read a history book. Followed by a whole load of stuff that had nothing to do with what I'd written. That's the post I replied to.

Yes I can admit mistakes and do so all the time. Was the "can you" jibe really necessary?

Quote:

Once again I urge you to reread the thread. I mentioned Chrisisall because he was the first responder to Amialion (though you were hot on his heels) and he was being his usual sarcastic quick to judge self.

Please, Chrisisall's cowboy line was hardly stinging sarcasm, you seem to be judging us by a far harsher rule than that which you judge AmIaLion. As for me being hot on his heels AmIaLion spoke directly to me, and opened with an attacking statement. Maybe you can find a way to twist that into being 'my fault', I don't know.

Quote:
I mentioned this as a potential reason for Amialion's more hostile responses.

Except his opening response to me before I'd even spoken to him was hostile and was made before he could have read Chris's post.

Quote:
You will see that Chrisisall is indeed quite agreeable and was able to end his discussion with Amialion without the namecalling.

Maybe it's because AmIaLion decided to start the name calling with me but not Chris?

Quote:
IMHO, when you push you are not used to someone pushing back.

Well you're wrong because I get 'pushed back' all the time. But of course that doesn't apply here, since you are pushing me, and I'm pushing back. Maybe you are not used to that?

Quote:
How is what I am doing any different than your "legitimate rightists" Finn and Dreamtrove? I am not being high and mighty or holier than thou. I am engaging you in a discussion.

Get off the moral high horse for one minute would you please. I never said "legitimate rightists" I said I miss them because they could actually have a discussion without calling someone a Nazi or turning the entire thing into "how evil the Liberals are" session. Something not true of AURaptor, Hero or to a slightly lesser degree Geezer.

And yes we're having a discussion, were discussing how everything is my fault, something I never did with Finn or Dreamtrove because they could discuss a topic without making it into an issue of how one's opponent is an arsehole.

When the only discussion we’ve actually had doesn’t revolve around you blaming me for all the bad feeling in the RWED, when you aren’t making excuses for other posters bad behaviour because they’re on your side but demonising myself and Chris because we are not, maybe then I can make a better estimate of your debating skills.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 10:30 AM

SOUPCATCHER

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
It seems like Bush was let down by the people he had in place to manage the disaster.

Well, here's how I look at it. A boss is always responsible for the performance of the people that he or she hires. But if you don't hire someone because of their expertise but instead as a political favor than you are doubly responsible for their poor performance (imho). Prior to James Witt being appointed director of FEMA in 1993, people were appointed to head the agency as political favors. Witt was hired because of his expertise (in addition to the political favors part). After Witt's tenure, Bush used political motivations rather than expertise to appoint the next two directors.

Quote:
excerpted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lee_Witt
During his tenure Clinton elevated FEMA to cabinet status, and Witt overturned FEMA's previously poor reputation. A 1992 interim report by the US Congress (prior to Hurricane Andrew led to further criticism of FEMA) had said that "FEMA is widely viewed as a political dumping ground, a turkey farm, if you will, where large numbers of positions exist that can be conveniently and quietly filled by political appointment..."

Witt, who from all accounts is a disaster management stud (and who I'm biased towards because of his background in construction - us engineers like people who actually build shit

), did a great job with the agency.

Quote:
continuing with the above quote
By 1996 an Atlanta Journal-Constitution editorial said that "FEMA has developed a sterling reputation for delivering disaster-relief services, a far cry from its abysmal standing before James Lee Witt took its helm in 1993. How did Witt turn FEMA around so quickly? Well, he is the first director of the agency to have emergency-management experience. He stopped the staffing of the agency by political patronage. He removed layers of bureaucracy. Most important, he instilled in the agency a spirit of preparedness, of service to the customer, of willingness to listen to ideas of local and state officials to make the system work better."

And what was the record of FEMA during Witt's tenure?

Quote:
continuing with the above quote:
Witt's term of office saw approximately 348 Presidential declared disaster areas in more than 6,500 counties and in all 50 states and territories. Witt supervised the response to the most costly flood disaster in the nation's history at that time, the most costly earthquake, and a dozen serious hurricanes.

So Witt took an agency that was a discredit to the federal government and turned it into a credit to the federal government. All well and good. However, when Bush took over the Presidency he returned to the old way of appointing FEMA directors.

His first appointee was Joe Albaugh, who had no previous experience in disaster relief management. What was his previous job? He managed Bush's 2000 presidential campaign. I think it's safe to say (unless you want to engage in snark) that managing a presidential campaign is not the same as managing disaster relief.

Albaugh left FEMA when he didn't get the DHS boss job (after FEMA got folded into DHS). And Brown was appointed to replace him. Where did Brown come from and what were his qualifications? Well, read this article and weep:
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/12554964.htm

I have no problem with making appointments as political favors. That's the name of the game. But get someone who has experience in that field and is competent. If there's no one that you owe a favor to who fits both those criteria than you might want to look outside the close knit circle of supporters and appoint someone else. Especially for an agency that is as important as FEMA.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
One question though. The timeline states that Bush declared a state of emergency in Louisiana on Saturday August 27th, two days before Katrina's landfall. What does declaring a state of emergency mean? Does that cut away some of the red tape and give local and state authorities more freedom to act? including ship captains.

What a state of emergency declaration from the President does, I think, is say that the federal government will be helping out, it outlines the nature of the help, the agencies doing the helping and who is in overall charge.

Here's the White House press release about this particular state of emergency:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html
Probably the most salient paragraph is:

Quote:
excerpted from http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html :
Specifically, FEMA is authorized to identify, mobilize, and provide at its discretion, equipment and resources necessary to alleviate the impacts of the emergency. Debris removal and emergency protective measures, including direct Federal assistance, will be provided at 75 percent Federal funding.

* edited to add some more stuff

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 1:18 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Hey Soupcatcher, thanks for getting me back on topic.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and postulate that you are a fan of Michael Lee Witt and the work he did as head of FEMA.

Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:

A boss is always responsible for the performance of the people that he or she hires.

I could not agree more. I mentioned how it was positive that FEMA was being reorganized after Katrina. The fact that FEMA started to slide after Bush became president was never part of my original post. Under the pretext of Government being reactionary, I mentioned that FEMA 'broke' under Katrina and the current Bush administration
was now working towards fixing the problems and ensuring they never happen again.

Quote:

So Witt took an agency that was a discredit to the federal government and turned it into a credit to the federal government. All well and good. However, when Bush took over the Presidency he returned to the old way of appointing FEMA directors.

Well what did you expect from a Conservative? According to some on this board a Conservative is someone wanting to conserve the old ways.

Quote:

Here's the White House press release about this particular state of emergency:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html

Thanks for the link. There is a big difference between declaring an emergency and mobilizing.

I noticed the article stated that Brown put William Lokey in charge. I could not find any info on this guy in Wikipedia. What part did he play in the mismanagement of the response to Katrina?

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 3:36 PM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Well what did you expect from a Conservative? According to some on this board a Conservative is someone wanting to conserve the old ways.

Snarky comments not withstanding, nice to see you can attack my position with a nice bitchy comment but not by actually discussing it with me.

Probably because that's what a conservative is, someone who wants to conserve the current system, the clues in the name

.

According to some on these boards liberals are evil Nazis that eat babies

.

According to others everything bad that happens round here is my fault. Must be my evil Liberal mind control powers, some one should shoot me because I'm so evil, isn't that right?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 4:07 PM

CHRISISALL

Wow, did this thread evolve into a personality confrontation!
I'm on holliday here in New York, and borrow a laptop to check on my thread, and all Heck's broke loose.
Props to you Citizen, you've kept your cool in the face of severe provocation. BDN is new, and obviously doesn't have the lay of the land. You've given him enormous slack, very generous.

To BigDamnNobody: Be thankful son, that Citizen isn't feeling particularly techy today, he's one of the best shots on this site. Could blow your head clean off if he aimed to.

Chrisisall Eastwood

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2006 7:01 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Hey Soupcatcher, thanks for getting me back on topic.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and postulate that you are a fan of Michael Lee Witt and the work he did as head of FEMA.

Heh. Yeah. I think it's more the case that I'm a fan of competence. The FEMA head is the kind of position that no one really hears anything about until they screw up. I knew pretty much nothing about Witt while he was director of FEMA but his name kept coming up after Katrina and all the stuff I read painted him in a good light. So I started reading more and came to the conclusion that he was one of those government superstars. They are few and far between but every so often the right person gets assigned to a job that fits them perfectly. And, instead of the stereotypical bureacracy, they turn their little domain into a well-oiled machine. Witt was one of those directors (imho).

Of course, as I mentioned previously, I am biased because of his professional background. Although it's too bad he isn't an engineer

. My personal belief is that government would run a whole lot better if engineers were in charge (it's been long enough since Herbert Hoover, we deserve a second chance - as long as it's not a chemical engineer, they're crazy).

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:

A boss is always responsible for the performance of the people that he or she hires.

I could not agree more. I mentioned how it was positive that FEMA was being reorganized after Katrina. The fact that FEMA started to slide after Bush became president was never part of my original post. Under the pretext of Government being reactionary, I mentioned that FEMA 'broke' under Katrina and the current Bush administration
was now working towards fixing the problems and ensuring they never happen again.

The appointment of Paulison was definitely a step in the right direction (even if he was the one who released the "plastic sheet and duct tape" advisory - at least he is eminently qualified for the job). Having FEMA folded into DHS is a problem, in my opinion. It should be remade into a cabinet level position.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:

So Witt took an agency that was a discredit to the federal government and turned it into a credit to the federal government. All well and good. However, when Bush took over the Presidency he returned to the old way of appointing FEMA directors.

Well what did you expect from a Conservative? According to some on this board a Conservative is someone wanting to conserve the old ways.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Thanks for the link. There is a big difference between declaring an emergency and mobilizing.

I noticed the article stated that Brown put William Lokey in charge. I could not find any info on this guy in Wikipedia. What part did he play in the mismanagement of the response to Katrina?

I don't know what part Lokey played in the response to Katrina. I vaguely remember the name from some testimony given to one of the House committees but it's not ringing any other bells.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 8:44 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Wow, did this thread evolve into a personality confrontation!
I'm on holliday here in New York, and borrow a laptop to check on my thread, and all Heck's broke loose.
Props to you Citizen, you've kept your cool in the face of severe provocation. BDN is new, and obviously doesn't have the lay of the land. You've given him enormous slack, very generous.

To BigDamnNobody: Be thankful son, that Citizen isn't feeling particularly techy today, he's one of the best shots on this site. Could blow your head clean off if he aimed to.

Chrisisall Eastwood

Sorry Fella's. I guess if you 'mess' with one forsaken you 'mess' with all forsaken.

One question though. What does being new have to do with it? You do not want to come across as being too elitist now do you.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 8:58 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
Snarky comments not withstanding, nice to see you can attack my position with a nice bitchy comment but not by actually discussing it with me.

I can honestly tell you that you did not even enter my mind when I typed out that comment. Please see my response to Soupcatcher about getting back on topic.

Quote:

According to others everything bad that happens round here is my fault. Must be my evil Liberal mind control powers, some one should shoot me because I'm so evil, isn't that right?

I really do not know if you are evil and the cause of all that is wrong in RWED. What do you think is wrong in RWED? Maybe you are a poor innocent soul who gets 'pushed' all the time in RWED for no good reason. Or maybe there are legitimate reasons why you seem to be singled out. I guess only you know the real answer. So I am going to take your advice and perhaps we can debate another topic in the future where you can 'rate' my debating skills against your own lofty skills.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 8:59 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
One question though. What does being new have to do with it? You do not want to come across as being too elitist now do you.

Naw, elitism is for Alliance dandys, we're all just folk here.
I think it just takes a while to learn the different folk and their ways here. I got told to chill a few times when I was new, you know, came on a little strong and such. But that's the nature of families; a little snark and snippy sometimes, but it's all good.

Home on the range moon Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 9:32 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
I think it just takes a while to learn the different folk and their ways here.

Live with a man forty years.
Share his house, his meals,
speak on every subject.
Then tie him up and hold him over the volcano's edge.
And on that day you will finally meet the man.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 12:33 PM

CHRISISALL

lol, Well, hopefully it won't come to that in order to get to know each other....

And I'm keepin' my ear Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 12, 2006 1:21 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
I can honestly tell you that you did not even enter my mind when I typed out that comment.

Uhuh.

Quote:
Please see my response to Soupcatcher about getting back on topic.

I see you spend the last four or five posts attacking me for no reason and when you run out of accusations you want to stop playing and go back on topic. Fine.

Quote:
I really do not know if you are evil and the cause of all that is wrong in RWED. What do you think is wrong in RWED?

Well apart from the recent encroachment of Trolls and demi-Trolls and their over-Troll PirateNews there's always, as Finn Mac Cumhal would say:
Also who decided that all these new people with their hate Finn and hate Citizen ‘tudes could come on this board? I don’t remember signing up for that.

Why what do you think is wrong and how is that my fault?

Quote:
Or maybe there are legitimate reasons why you seem to be singled out.

Yes there are, I'm a long time very well known poster on these boards, so I'm lit up like a Vegas bordello for Trolls. I can argue my case very effectively, so I'm someone to 'beat' and I've 'beaten' a fair few people so it just makes sense they'd be all manner of pissed off.

As far as 'enemies' go though it's taken me a year to accumulate a couple, I see you've managed to get some in just a few months. Maybe there are legitimate reasons for that.

Quote:
So I am going to take your advice and perhaps we can debate another topic in the future where you can 'rate' my debating skills against your own lofty skills.

Good on you. Maybe next time you can 'rate' my worthiness as a human being against your own lofty worth.

Oh no you've been doing that here, nevermind.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 12, 2006 6:44 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
I can honestly tell you that you did not even enter my mind when I typed out that comment.

Uhuh.

Maybe you do have mind control powers, or at the very least, mind reading powers.

Quote:

I see you spend the last four or five posts attacking me for no reason and when you run out of accusations you want to stop playing and go back on topic. Fine.

I simply took Chrisisall's advice to end the personality conflict and tried to get the discussion back on topic. I could keep debating you with circular logic until 'the cows come home' but that would be a diservice to the other members of this forum. I am more than willing to continue this on the side if you think there is a point to it. Let me know and I will get in touch with you.

Quote:

Well apart from the recent encroachment of Trolls and demi-Trolls and their over-Troll PirateNews there's always, as Finn Mac Cumhal would say:
Also who decided that all these new people with their hate Finn and hate Citizen ‘tudes could come on this board? I don’t remember signing up for that.

Perhaps if you feel your present username is to trolls what a flame is to moths, you should start fresh with a new alias. If that is not possible, than I guess you will have to continue to be 'bothered' by trolls.

Quote:

Why what do you think is wrong and how is that my fault?

I do not think anything is wrong. You were the one who brought the issue up.

Quote:

As far as 'enemies' go though it's taken me a year to accumulate a couple, I see you've managed to get some in just a few months. Maybe there are legitimate reasons for that.

I hope I do not have any enemies at this site. I have had great discussions with several members here. One's where I know I walked away more enlightened. And I hope the reverse is true as well.

Quote:

Maybe next time you can 'rate' my worthiness as a human being against your own lofty worth.

Oh no you've been doing that here, nevermind.

Sorry, I guess I do have one 'enemy' here. Though that was never my intention. Feel free to start a new thread in talk story. How about calling it the anti-BDN club.

Now I am not going to respond to you anymore in the interests of either getting this thread back on topic or letting it die. Though I can see your response now. BDN washed away in the tidal wave that is Citizen's debating skills.

*edited to clean it up.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 12, 2006 7:21 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
I could keep debating you with circular logic until 'the cows come home' but that would be a diservice to the other members of this forum. I am more than willing to continue this on the side if you think there is a point to it. Let me know and I will get in touch with you.

Yeah I'll get right on that as soon as I decide I need someone who thinks their better than me to tell me whats wrong with me.

Quote:
I do not think anything is wrong. You were the one who brought the issue up.

Actually it was you who brought it up, but whatever.

Quote:
Feel free to start a new thread in talk story. How about calling it the anti-BDN club.

Seems like more your style.

Quote:
Sorry, I guess I do have one 'enemy' here.

If you ever actually become my ‘enemy’ I’ll be sure to tell you, but since you’ve spent nearly every post to me attacking me it would hardly be a surprise. Obviously you want me as an enemy, despite what you say.

This is where you climb atop your high moral horse and act like your saint BigDamnNobody of FireFlyFans.net. Remind us all of how much better you are than me, oh here we are:

Quote:
Though I can see your response now. BDN washed away in the tidal wave that is Citizen's debating skills.

[[]SARCASM[]]Yes that's something I'd say[[]/SARCASM[]]. How about:

BDN likes to attack other posters rather than debate a topic and then acts like their 'shit don't stink'.

Must hurt your neck, looking down your nose at everyone who has a different opinion to you all the time.

Maybe your idea of a debate is telling your opponent how flawed a human being they are in comparison to you; my 'lofty' ideas of debate are somewhat different.

Good Bye

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE