You're entitled to your point of view
Posted By: American Girl on 2005-06-27
In Reply to: If Bush could learn to tell - MTME
but not everybody thinks he has lied. Just because people say he has lied does not make it true. There has been nothing substantial to support that he lied. I just wish people would just quit throwing the word lie around so freely, because they are jumping to conclusions with no substantiation.
What scares me is I wonder how many people could withstand a real threat to this country. We are so un-unified if it came across the television that we were being attacked....I'm not sure some of you would believe it....you'd just say, "another Bush lie..."
Our generation knows nothing of true hardship. The Iraq war is not a quagmire...it's not another Vietnam...it's not anything like the dems are whining about it being....
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Another point of view...
Thinking About Iraq on King Day
By Star Parker
Monday, January 15, 2007
The characteristic of greatness - whether we are talking about a great man or great art - is that it transcends time and place. It dips into that which is universally and eternally true and applies those truths to a particular moment and a particular place.
Re-reading, after many reads, Dr. Martin Luther King's words of Aug. 28, 1963, the famous I Have a Dream speech, his greatness rings clearer than ever.
Because King did indeed touch the heavens on that day and pull down kernels of eternal truths about freedom and the condition of man, those words of 40-plus years ago have relevance to our struggles today. They can serve as guidance in these difficult times.
Am I saying that King's message from 1963 can guide us in today's conundrums _ about our embroilment in Iraq, about the Middle East, about America's role in the world? Yes, I am saying this.
The power of King's message, the unquestionable reason that the movement he led was successful, was his appeal to the truth of freedom and its universal applicability to all men.
By identifying and appealing to the freedom of man as a universal and eternal truth, and going on to make clear that this truth defined what this great country is about, then King's conclusion _ the intolerability of conditions that denied any American full participation in this freedom _ could not be denied.
Beyond this central message, King made other very important points in this speech.
One of key importance was that responsibility for solving a problem does not necessarily imply direct responsibility in having caused that problem.
Although the responsibility clearly was in the hands of those Americans with power, overwhelmingly white Americans, to fix the problems in the country that limited the availability of freedom to all, this did not mean that all those same Americans were racists or had caused the problem to begin with.
The responsibility for fixing these problems came, rather, with being the beneficiaries of a country whose destiny and identity was fundamentally linked with the enterprise of freedom.
In King's words, white Americans have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny and they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.
He appealed to blacks not to allow suffering to translate into bitterness nor into categorical hate of white Americans. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.
Instead, King exhorted black Americans to Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.
So Dr. King accomplished a lot of business that August day in 1963.
He recognized the universal truth of human liberty. He recognized our country as a unique vessel of that truth. He appealed to Americans with power to assume their responsibilities as the beneficiaries of liberty to make this a better and freer country. And he appealed to black Americans to assume a different kind of responsibility _ to not allow themselves to be destroyed by unearned suffering but to be redeemed by it.
The prophet is a lonely man because he brings a message that people do not want to hear.
Dr. King's activism was not welcomed by most whites and a good many blacks.
There is natural appeal in the inertia of the status quo. Change and assumption of new responsibilities and challenges are welcomed by few.
Turmoil tells us that something is wrong and we have no choice but to open our eyes and ears and assume the responsibilities that are cast upon us.
I am, of course, not a military tactician and am in no position to speculate about how best to use American troops to midwife a portion of the world that clearly needs help in becoming more modern, more civil and freer.
However, I can say, that I am in complete sympathy with our president who senses that America has a unique and special role to play in this world. We cannot shirk responsibilities that are clearly ours.
I cannot help but think that it is not an accident that the United States stands so alone, despite many other nations that claim to have similar commitments to and stakes in civility and liberty. The way they act makes clear that they don't.
The truths that Dr. King articulated in so crystal clear a way in 1963 continue to resound today. Freedom is what this country is about. We have no choice. It is our heritage. We thrive and prosper from it. And we cannot avoid the responsibilities that come with it in our engagement with the rest of the world.
I appreciate your point of view, Just Me....
and I will be the first to admit, as I admitted right up front to GT/GW/BW/FPJ who knows what else, she pushed my buttons and took great joy in doing so. She attributed things to me I never said, condemned an entire political party en masse and had the nerve to call me a bigot and that was the nicest thing she called me. If you followed the posts you know that most of the name calling from my end was just repeating back to her what I had been called. The same kinds of exchanges happen on political talk shows every night. Have you ever watched Chris Matthews or Keith Olbermann?
Her parting shot...Time to take out the trash.
In deference to your request, I will say this...I believe that GW believes with every fiber of her being that she is right and is passionate about her beliefs, and I certainly understand that. I think she is probably a nice person to those who share her views, loves her family like the rest of us and would like to fix all the perceived injustices in the world, just like the rest of us would. But you can't move forward if you don't let go of the hate and the blame game. There is plenty of blame to go around, on both sides of the aisle. No law, no program, no nothing can be passed in this country without both Republicans and Democrats voting for it, fact. We can't blame it all on the left and we can't blame it all on the right or the middle or whoever. In fact, we shouldn't be blaming at all, just trying to fix. But...as I am sure you well know, Just Me...the radical side of BOTH parties don't see the middle road.
The irony of the whole thing is that I am not a registered Republican...registered Independent. Only register Republican in primary years because I can't vote if I don't register Republican or Democrat...that's the law. Yet I was thrown right in and condemned right along with every other "pub."
Just Me, sometimes you just have to stand for what you believe, and not let a bully pigeon hole you and call you things you are not. And sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. That is just a part of life. I apologize if you were offended by witnessing it. I truly do. I apologize to anyone who was.
Just to clarify: I don't hate immigrants or immigration. That is how this country was born. Save Native Americans, we ALL descend from immigrants. I just feel immigration should be legal, and that immigrants should become tax-paying citizens before they get the benefits of citizenship. That's it. Real simple. And not bigoted.
And for the record, I don't hate all Democrats or blame them for all the ills in the world. Like I said...plenty of blame to go around on both sides. My parents were Democrats (old school Democrats). There have been Democrats I greatly admired...John Kennedy...Zell Miller. Great Americans in my opinion.
My point of view
I really don't care if a president cheats on his or HER spouse under most circumstances. But when his little playmate testifies he was being "serviced" by her with talking on the phone with important people, that bothers me. She very well could have heard confidential things she shouldn't have. When you are in the Oval Office you are on the clock and should act like it.
Another point of view...or two (sm)
http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=17587
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-11/20/content_10388377.htm
exactly my point of view, thanks, just me'.......nm
nm
what a bigoted point of view!
I suppose it is okay for the "men" to have affairs and the other issues they have had? that's not dysfunctional? It is okay to leave it to the women to take to fix their crap?
This really makes me both mad and sad --
I'd like to see things from your point of view but
I can't seem to get my head up that far in my behind.
Someone who respected her point of view
Both similar to yours. Though her point of view was a little different from yours, she had a great sense of humor. She knew she was going to be attacked by certain posters on this board no matter what she said and she never cared and never caved in to the ridicule and the ignorance.
If they finally got to her, then I'm really sorry about that, though I can understand why. I considered her a friend, and I miss her. 
A good uplifting point of view from God.....
http://www.sjchurchofchrist.org/freeboot.shtml
Case in point...what a democratic view....NOT.
YOu have been exposed for what you are, and in typical spin, turn it on to someone else and make them the villain. You guys are like the Wizard of Oz...one head and lots of little bodies running around. :)
Simply displays a different point of view...nm
x
Clarification...do not allow dissention to their point of view...nm
x
Yes, but if it were FOX and an anti-liberal view point ad...
all liberals would be screaming "censorship".
Case in point. Complete intolerance for any view other than their own.
This is what the Democratic party has become.
Good point. I see no problem with both points of view being taught...
and letting indivdiuals decide. Isn't that what America is about?
My point of view was stated quite clearly. People on the left may be blinded....
Kind of sad, actually.
My point of view was stated quite clearly. People on the left may be blinded....
wow, youre out there arent ya?
who are u even talking to????
Youre not 'trying to get along', you're trying to
bombard the board with your narrow beliefs. In a word,
U R an
A$$H@LE.
youre babbling nonsense - does
not make any sense. Move on dot arrgh.
Make sure youre read about today's
Meet the Press with David Gregory. It's embedded in this OP's news story. It's long, but for those who did not watch Meet the Press this morning, please read the whole thing, including Rep. Boehner's interview.
And you're entitled to yours as well.
On 9/11/2001 and shortly thereafter, Bush, for whom I have never voted, became my hero. I was very proud he was my President when he stood in that rubble and vowed that "the people who knocked down these buildings are going to hear from all of us." I fully supported our invasion of Afghanistan.
While he was still flying high on his approval ratings, he told us we needed to get rid of Saddam Hussein because he represented an imminent threat to us. I (along with most members of Congress) believed him because the whole country still believed IN him after 9/11.
Its been well documented that it was all a lie. ALL OF IT. He not only jeopardized the lives of our CHILDREN by sending them to die in a bogus war, he did it on the blood of all the 9/11 victims and their families. He didnt give our soldiers adequate equipment, including body armor. THEY WERE FORCED TO DIG THROUGH LANDFILLS TO FIND ARMOR TO PROTECT THEMSELVES BECAUSE THIS PRESIDENT DIDNT CARE ENOUGH ABOUT THEM TO PROVIDE IT FOR THEM!!!!!! Instead, he made sure he included "comprehensive health benefits for all Iraqi citizens" in his war budget.
He and all his cronies promised this war would be quick. That isnt the truth.
He has personally turned Iraq into the best training ground that al Qaeda could ever hope to have.
His arrogance is only exceeded by his STUPIDITY. When I hear him speak with foreign leaders, Im truly amazed that these are people who often can speak multiple languages, when our President cant even get the hang of ONE language, and that stupid SMIRK he's always wearing as he mangles the English language does nothing but embarrass me.
The irony is that he allegedly wants to spread "freedom all over the world" (because GOD personally told him to), yet slowly but surely hes reducing personal freedoms for citizens in his own country. Try getting into an "open" town hall meeting with George Bush if you dare to disagree with even ONE of his views. Aint gonna happen. He will only accept those who blindly follow him like sheep, aggressively defend every single stupid thing he does, show unfaltering reverence to him, and NEVER question the wisdom of his actions.
And WOULD I believe Bush if he came on TV and said we were being attacked? NO FRIGGING WAY. Not unless I saw video of it and it was corroborated by as many MEDIA people as possible. (I can't even begin to described how personally depressing it is to realize that I believe in the MEDIA infinitely more than I do this President, which is a very strong sign that something is seriously wrong in this country.) This President lied about Iraq. I would find it very hard to believe ANYTHING he ever said again. Trust is a very important thing and cant just be given nilly willy. If someone twists facts to fit in with what they are trying to sell, that is a LIE. And once a person like that shows his or her true colors, I will never believe such a person again. Like Bush TRIED to say (before mangling it): Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. To me, a person who must resort to distorting facts for their own gain shows a very serious character flaw. I choose to stay away from such people because they dont have an ounce of credibility.
And youre right. This war is NOT another Vietnam. Its much, much worse. During Vietnam, our government at least respected the lives of our soldiers enough to provide them with adequate protection. But its by no stretch of the imagination going to be "quick," as was promised. It's is going to be as long and drawn out as Vietnam, if not more so. And God forbid if we should truly NEED our troops to do what their supposed to be doing, which is DEFENDING us from an attack someday. There wont be any. Theyve been spread very thinly all over the world. And recruitment quotas arent being met because young people dont want any part of this administration because they simply don't trust it or believe it. Our young people are quite intelligent.
As far as knowing about true hardship, this generation isnt SUPPOSED to know anything about it. Our parents and grandparents worked very hard to make sure their children would have a better life. Things WERE getting better before this President came into office. He inherited a surplus, squandered it, and then went on to create the largeset deficit in American history. However, when (not if) were attacked again, were going to learn plenty about it, because we have a President who hasnt cared enough to take adequate precautions in his own country to protect his own people. He hasnt put suggested precautions in place, such as protecting our nuclear/chemical plants. He hasnt bothered to secure our borders. For crying out loud, some DRUNK guy wandered into an airport the other day and took a PLANE OUT ON A JOY RIDE. How secure is THAT? If there is hardship to be experienced by us, the blood will be on his hands.
And once again, as far as using the word "lie," its the simplest, shortest, most accurate word for something that is a blatant, purposeful UNTRUTH told with the intent to mislead. It IS the appropriate word to use.
And you are entitled to that....although...
I don't think being chosen to be on the ticket for the second-highest job in the land is exploitation. I certainly don't think she feels like she is being exploited. To each his own...we can all have our opinions. :) I don't really understand, from a purely objective standpoint, someone could object to her. Obama - limited experience. Palin - Limited experience. Obama - 1st chair. Palin - 2nd chair. Obama - beautiful wife and family. Palin - handsome husband, beautiful family. Obama - wants change in Washington. Palin - wants change in Washington and has a history of doing just that. There are other similarities. Wondering why the positives for him are negatives for her?
Well you're entitled to that...sm
And I am a liberal for ya!! A somewhat conservative liberal, how about adding that to your title bank.
Let's rewind. I said I was awkwardly uncomfortable at listening to some of his jokes. It was *in your face* comedy though the most of it is how a lot of us feel. I don't apologize for saying this guy is funny, he is. And, though the most of the jokes were about Bush, Rummy, Cheney and crew he did aim jokes at liberals too.
No one said you were not entitled to an opinion.
Why is it that when challenged to step back, these kind of statements always come up? In fact, you have not addressed one single item in my post. You say you do not hate Bush but then proceed to itemise another litany of complaints. And still not a word about terrorism! This truly does boggle the mind.
Obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion, but
I hardly think it holds a candle to the awful Hilary comment - that was just in plain bad taste and I couldn't believe she even would go there.
I am simply stating what I caught with my eye and see that others out there have seen it too - it's just weird. Let's leave it at that.
You are entitled to your opinion, but...
please remember that not everyone believes in God. Your statement is your merely an opinion, not fact. Personally, religious fanatics scare me, especially ones like Sarah Palin who could possibly be placed in a position of power.
And I never said you weren't entitled!
Give me a break! You have religious freedom. I never said you didn't!
Each person is entitled to their own
opinion whether it is for or against abortion. I think your reply was uncalled for and rather childish. You can disagree with someone's opinion without being like this.
That is your choice and you are entitled to it.
I just think that you need to open your heart a little and learn to be a tad more tolerant. I don't want to see gay people making out in public but I don't like seeing straight people do that either. There is a time and place for that....not out in public for all to have to watch. Love the person, hate the sin. You seem to hate the person who sins because of the sin. Is that not too a sin?
You're entitled to your opinion.
No matter how skewed it is. 
*Entitled to your opinion but escorted
So your saying Ann's not entitled to her free speech
but you are entitled to yours? The 9/11 widows can say anything, but Ann better shut up?
The double standards rule the day here.
Ann has her opinions but at least she is not saying America is guilty of genocide.
Bedtime story entitled
"Ours is a promise that says government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves protect us from harm" ". We are more compassionate than a government thatsits on its hands while a major American city drowns before our eyes." Barack Obama, nomination acceptance speech, 08/28/2008.
This is written in response to the post below that express the "bootstrap mentality" approach to Katrina and Bush/federal government response. Bush never seems to be held accountable for any of his actions or lack thereof. What I do know is that we deserve better from our so-called leaders. I want someone in charge of the country who knows that what I am about to describe is unacceptable. I am writing this because, at the very least, we should not allow our memories to fade away too quickly about the most shameful episode of leadership/federal agency failure and breakdown in recent memory.
As for the poster who said that "if you don't live here, you don't know what you are talking about": Thing is that I do live in hurricane country on the Gulf Coast where to this day, 3 years later, we still welcome, house, employ, include, encourage and support Hurricane Katrina survivors/refugees. Hurricane Gustav is poised to make a visit here on the opening night of the RNC and will be slamming ashore and doing its thing during the opening speech by you-know-who. My memory of the last time we went through this is very clear. Where it seemed fuzzy, research filled in the blanks. I'm going to jump right in here.
When Hurricane Katrina made landfall, President Bush was on one of his marathon vacations. The August 2005 vacation, in fact, was the longest vacation of any US President (5 weeks). By the time Katrina showed up, he already had been at the ranch for 3 weeks, so he was pretty well rested up. On August 26th, Katrina strengthened to a Category 3 Hurricane and Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco declared state of emergency. Blanco asked President Bush to declare federal state of emergency for Louisiana. Next day, Bush interrupted his bike ride with Astronaut Lance Armstrong and declared a state of emergency in selected regions of Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi on Saturday, the 27th. The declaration did not include any of Louisiana's coastal parishes, an oversight that would later be addressed in Congressional hearings. Same day, New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin ordered a voluntary evacuation of all residents from the city of New Orleans.
Go here to see a map of parishes not included in the declaration. http://www.bobharris.com/content/view/637/1/. This map is an eye-opener. Mr. Harris calls it upsidedownland. Hello. Inland parishes included, coastal parishes excluded. Bushes parents live in the hurricane-prone city of Houston. He probably should have know better.
August 28th, within 9 short hours, Katrina doubled in size and strengthened from a category 3 to a 5. Nagin's evacuation became mandatory. During video conferences involving the president on August 28th and 29th, the NHC director informed Bush that Katrina might push its storm surge over the city's levees and flood walls, using such language "potential for nightmare scenarios," and that this has been known for at least the three decades he has worked at the NHC. Previous warnings, such as the one made by the Houston Chronicle in 2001, told of a disaster that "would strand 250,000 people or more, and probably kill one of 10 left behind as the city drowned under 20 feet of water" following a severe hurricane making landfall on NO. Other publications, such as Popular Mechanics, Scientific American, and The Times-Picayune had given similar doomsday scenarios in which a sinking city would drown and its residents would be left homeless.
On August 28th, the National Weather Sevice out of Baton Rogue and NO issued the following bulletin. This text is included in its entirety because the warning Bush decided to ignore just don't get any more clear than this. Before reading this, keep in mind that in response, Bush alerted FEMA Director Michael Brown, aka "Brownie," and stayed put, on vacation, since he had "done his part." No shouts in tended. This is the way cut and paste works. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Weather_Service_bulletin_for_New_Orleans_region
...DEVASTATING DAMAGE EXPECTED...
HURRICANE KATRINA...A MOST POWERFUL HURRICANE WITH UNPRECEDENTED
STRENGTH...RIVALING THE INTENSITY OF HURRICANE CAMILLE OF 1969.
MOST OF THE AREA WILL BE UNINHABITABLE FOR WEEKS...PERHAPS LONGER. AT
LEAST ONE HALF OF WELL CONSTRUCTED HOMES WILL HAVE ROOF AND WALL
FAILURE. ALL GABLED ROOFS WILL FAIL...LEAVING THOSE HOMES SEVERELY
DAMAGED OR DESTROYED.
THE MAJORITY OF INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS WILL BECOME NON FUNCTIONAL.
PARTIAL TO COMPLETE WALL AND ROOF FAILURE IS EXPECTED. ALL WOOD
FRAMED LOW RISING APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL BE DESTROYED. CONCRETE
BLOCK LOW RISE APARTMENTS WILL SUSTAIN MAJOR DAMAGE...INCLUDING SOME
WALL AND ROOF FAILURE.
HIGH RISE OFFICE AND APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL SWAY DANGEROUSLY...A
FEW TO THE POINT OF TOTAL COLLAPSE. ALL WINDOWS WILL BLOW OUT.
AIRBORNE DEBRIS WILL BE WIDESPREAD...AND MAY INCLUDE HEAVY ITEMS SUCH
AS HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES AND EVEN LIGHT VEHICLES. SPORT UTILITY
VEHICLES AND LIGHT TRUCKS WILL BE MOVED. THE BLOWN DEBRIS WILL CREATE
ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTION. PERSONS...PETS...AND LIVESTOCK EXPOSED TO THE
WINDS WILL FACE CERTAIN DEATH IF STRUCK.
POWER OUTAGES WILL LAST FOR WEEKS...AS MOST POWER POLES WILL BE DOWN
AND TRANSFORMERS DESTROYED. WATER SHORTAGES WILL MAKE HUMAN SUFFERING INCREDIBLE BY MODERN STANDARDS.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF NATIVE TREES WILL BE SNAPPED OR UPROOTED. ONLY
THE HEARTIEST WILL REMAIN STANDING...BUT BE TOTALLY DEFOLIATED. FEW
CROPS WILL REMAIN. LIVESTOCK LEFT EXPOSED TO THE WINDS WILL BE
KILLED.
On August 29th, John McCain's 69th birthday, Katrina hits New Orleans as a category 4, levies break, Bush continues his itinerary. He jets on off to Luke Air Force Base near Phoenix to join McCain and wish him happy birthday (kinda makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside). Picture available on the website cited below. Afterward, Bush spoke about Medicare to 400 guests at the Pueblo El Mirage RV Resort and Country Club in nearby El Mirage. Not to worry. Brownie's doin' a heck of a job. August 29th: FEMA press release: 'First Responders Urged Not To Respond To Hurricane Impact Areas Unless Dispatched By State, Local Authorities.'
Five hours after the hurricane hit, FEMA chief Michael Brown asks Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff for approval to send 1,000 Homeland Security workers within 48 hours to the Gulf Coast to provide assistance. Bush fires up the jet and heads out to Rancho Cucamonga, Calif. for talk on prescription drugs for seniors. Back in NO, the 17th Street Canal levee breaks. The Red Cross, while providing relief and support across the Gulf Coast, did not enter New Orleans to provide relief at the Superdome, or any other victim shelter in the city.
August 30th. The Coast Guard reports that it has rescued some 1,200 people from rooftops around the area. Of course, it's all over the TV. The number of evacuees in the Superdome swells to 20,000, as people rescued or left homeless throughout the city are brought to the stadium. Gov. Blanco says the Superdome will have to be evacuated. Bush appears in Coronado, Calif. for a V-J Day commemoration. Go to the website cited below for photo corresponding to the following caption: President Bush plays a guitar presented to him by Country Singer Mark Wills, right, backstage following his visit" The photo is very telling. For those of you who don't go ballistic when they read democratic commentary, you will find some fascinating information next to the photo.
August 31st. Evacuation of the Superdome begins. Bush cuts vacation short by 2 days and returns to Washington after a brief fly-by over New Orleans where he observed the scene from above.
September 1st: Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff claims "we have a tremendous array of forces that are currently deployed in New Orleans," as cable TV networks show live images of looting, Superdome residents awaiting evacuation and people stranded without food and water throughout the city. Bush tells "Good Morning America" that "I dont think anyone anticipated a breach of the levees." That day, Newsweek reported, "The reality, say several aides who did not wish to be quoted because it might displease the president, did not really sink in until Thursday night. Some White House staffers were watching the evening news and thought the president needed to see the horrific reports coming out of New Orleans. Counselor Bartlett made up a DVD of the newscasts so Bush could see them in their entirety as he flew down to the Gulf Coast the next morning on Air Force One. "
September 2nd: President Bush takes aerial tour of New Orleans. Relief copters grounded in New Orleans during Bush visit.
September 3rd: Construction equipment removed from broken levee after Bush visit. Louisiana Senator Landrieu Implores President to "relieve unmitigated suffering" and end FEMA's "abject failures"
September 4th: More than 4,600 active duty military personnel join almost 27,000 National Guard troops in Louisiana for disaster relief. Jefferson Parish President Aaron Broussard lambastes FEMA's response on NBC's "Meet the Press"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina
In a September 26, 2005 hearing, former FEMA chief Michael Brown testified before a U.S. House subcommittee about FEMA's response. He was questioned about why Bush's declaration of state of emergency of August 27 had not included the coastal parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, and Plaquemines (in fact, the declaration did not include any of Louisiana's coastal parishes, whereas the coastal counties were included in the declarations for Mississippi and Alabama). Brown testified that this was because Louisiana Governor Blanco had not included those parishes in her initial request for aid (can you say pass-the-buck/fib?), a decision that he found "shocking." After the hearing, though, Blanco released a copy of her letter, which requested assistance for "all the southeastern parishes including the New Orleans Metropolitan area and the mid state Interstate I-49 corridor and northern parishes along the I-20 corridor.
A couple of cliches thrown in for good measure: A picture's worth 1000 words. Actions speak louder than words.
Go here for a Katrina Timeline. August 25 to September 5. The links embedded in this timeline make for a good read as well.
http://www.ojr.org/ojr/wiki/Katrina_Timeline/
Go here for a corresponding timeline of Bush's vacation and a few photos. http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/010936.php
So be it. We have differing opinions, both of us are entitled....
No matter who gets elected, I hope things get better for you. Sincerely.
I agree, all are entitled to handle grief in their own way.
It does seem that the grieving parent who chooses not to let his loss become a big public issue deserves just as much tolerance and respect as one who does. I don't think smearing or degrading any parent who's had such a loss is appropriate. We've heard for years now from families who have had losses and still support Bush and support the current war, and to my knowledge no one on the left has made a huge effort to discredit their motives or drag them through the mud or call their behavior "politically motivated." That just wouldn't be respectful and I know I would be against any such effort.
Bedtime story from Hurricane country entitled
"Ours is a promise that says government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves protect us from harm" ". We are more compassionate than a government thatsits on its hands while a major American city drowns before our eyes." Barack Obama, nomination acceptance speech, 08/28/2008.
This is written in response to the post below that express the "bootstrap mentality" approach to Katrina and Bush/federal government response. Bush never seems to be held accountable for any of his actions or lack thereof. What I do know is that we deserve better from our so-called leaders. I want someone in charge of the country who knows that what I am about to describe is unacceptable. I am writing this because, at the very least, we should not allow our memories to fade away too quickly about the most shameful episode of leadership/federal agency failure and breakdown I have ever witnessed in my lifetime.
As for the poster who said that "if you don't live here, you don't know what you are talking about": Thing is that I do live in hurricane country on the Gulf Coast where to this day, 3 years later, we still welcome, house, employ, include, encourage and support Hurricane Katrina survivors/refugees. Hurricane Gustav is poised to make a visit here on the opening night of the RNC and will be slamming ashore and doing its thing during the opening speech by you-know-who. My memory of the last time we went through this is very clear. Where it seemed fuzzy, research filled in the blanks. I'm going to jump right in here.
When Hurricane Katrina made landfall, President Bush was on one of his marathon vacations. The August 2005 vacation, in fact, was the longest vacation of any US President (5 weeks). By the time Katrina showed up, he already had been at the ranch for 3 weeks, so he was pretty well rested up. On August 26th, Katrina strengthened to a Category 3 Hurricane and Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco declared state of emergency. Blanco asked President Bush to declare federal state of emergency for Louisiana. Next day, Bush interrupted his bike ride with Astronaut Lance Armstrong and declared a state of emergency in selected regions of Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi on Saturday, the 27th. The declaration did not include any of Louisiana's coastal parishes, an oversight that would later be addressed in Congressional hearings. Same day, New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin orders a voluntary evacuation of all residents from the city of New Orleans.
Go here to see a map of parishes not included in the declaration. http://www.bobharris.com/content/view/637/1/. This map is an eye-opener. Mr. Harris calls it upsidedownland. Hello. Inland parishes included, coastal parishes excluded. Bushes parents live in the hurricane-prone city of Houston. He probably should have know better.
August 28th, within 9 short hours, Katrina doubled in size and strengthened from a category 3 to a 5. Nagin's evacuation became mandatory. During video conferences involving the president on August 28th and 29th, the NHC director informed Bush that Katrina might push its storm surge over the city's levees and flood walls, using such language "potential for nightmare scenarios," and that this has been known for at least the three decades he has worked at the NHC. Previous warnings, such as the one made by the Houston Chronicle in 2001, told of a disaster that "would strand 250,000 people or more, and probably kill one of 10 left behind as the city drowned under 20 feet of water" following a severe hurricane making landfall on NO. Other publications, such as Popular Mechanics, Scientific American, and The Times-Picayune had given similar doomsday scenarios in which a sinking city would drown and its residents would be left homeless.
On August 28th, the National Weather Sevice out of Baton Rogue and NO issued the following bulletin. This text is included in its entirety because the warning Bush decided to ignore just don't get any more clear than this. Before reading this, keep in mind that in response, Bush alerted FEMA Director Michael Brown, aka "Brownie," and stayed put, on vacation, since he had "done his part." No shouts in tended. This is the way cut and paste works. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Weather_Service_bulletin_for_New_Orleans_region ...DEVASTATING DAMAGE EXPECTED... HURRICANE KATRINA...A MOST POWERFUL HURRICANE WITH UNPRECEDENTED STRENGTH...RIVALING THE INTENSITY OF HURRICANE CAMILLE OF 1969. MOST OF THE AREA WILL BE UNINHABITABLE FOR WEEKS...PERHAPS LONGER. AT LEAST ONE HALF OF WELL CONSTRUCTED HOMES WILL HAVE ROOF AND WALL FAILURE. ALL GABLED ROOFS WILL FAIL...LEAVING THOSE HOMES SEVERELY DAMAGED OR DESTROYED. THE MAJORITY OF INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS WILL BECOME NON FUNCTIONAL. PARTIAL TO COMPLETE WALL AND ROOF FAILURE IS EXPECTED. ALL WOOD FRAMED LOW RISING APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL BE DESTROYED. CONCRETE BLOCK LOW RISE APARTMENTS WILL SUSTAIN MAJOR DAMAGE...INCLUDING SOME WALL AND ROOF FAILURE. HIGH RISE OFFICE AND APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL SWAY DANGEROUSLY...A FEW TO THE POINT OF TOTAL COLLAPSE. ALL WINDOWS WILL BLOW OUT. AIRBORNE DEBRIS WILL BE WIDESPREAD...AND MAY INCLUDE HEAVY ITEMS SUCH AS HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES AND EVEN LIGHT VEHICLES. SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES AND LIGHT TRUCKS WILL BE MOVED. THE BLOWN DEBRIS WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTION. PERSONS...PETS...AND LIVESTOCK EXPOSED TO THE WINDS WILL FACE CERTAIN DEATH IF STRUCK. POWER OUTAGES WILL LAST FOR WEEKS...AS MOST POWER POLES WILL BE DOWN AND TRANSFORMERS DESTROYED. WATER SHORTAGES WILL MAKE HUMAN SUFFERING INCREDIBLE BY MODERN STANDARDS. THE VAST MAJORITY OF NATIVE TREES WILL BE SNAPPED OR UPROOTED. ONLY THE HEARTIEST WILL REMAIN STANDING...BUT BE TOTALLY DEFOLIATED. FEW CROPS WILL REMAIN. LIVESTOCK LEFT EXPOSED TO THE WINDS WILL BE KILLED.
On August 29th, John McCain's 69th birthday, Katrina hits New Orleans as a category 4, levies break, Bush continues his itinerary. He jets on off to Luke Air Force Base near Phoenix to join McCain and wish him happy birthday (kinda makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside). Picture available on the website cited below. Afterward, Bush spoke about Medicare to 400 guests at the Pueblo El Mirage RV Resort and Country Club in nearby El Mirage. Not to worry. Brownie's doin' a heck of a job. August 29th: FEMA press release: 'First Responders Urged Not To Respond To Hurricane Impact Areas Unless Dispatched By State, Local Authorities.'
Five hours after the hurricane hit, FEMA chief Michael Brown asks Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff for approval to send 1,000 Homeland Security workers within 48 hours to the Gulf Coast to provide assistance. Bush fires up the jet and heads out to Rancho Cucamonga, Calif. for talk on prescription drugs for seniors. Back in NO, the 17th Street Canal levee breaks. The Red Cross, while providing relief and support across the Gulf Coast, did not enter New Orleans to provide relief at the Superdome, or any other victim shelter in the city.
August 30th. The Coast Guard reports that it has rescued some 1,200 people from rooftops around the area. Of course, it's all over the TV. The number of evacuees in the Superdome swells to 20,000, as people rescued or left homeless throughout the city are brought to the stadium. Gov. Blanco says the Superdome will have to be evacuated. Bush appears in Coronado, Calif. for a V-J Day commemoration. Go to the website cited below for photo corresponding to the following caption: President Bush plays a guitar presented to him by Country Singer Mark Wills, right, backstage following his visit" The photo is very telling. For those of you who don't go ballistic when they read democratic commentary, you will find some fascinating information next to the photo.
August 31st. Evacuation of the Superdome begins. Bush cuts vacation short by 2 days and returns to Washington after a brief fly-by over New Orleans where he observed the scene from above.
September 1st: Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff claims "we have a tremendous array of forces that are currently deployed in New Orleans," as cable TV networks show live images of looting, Superdome residents awaiting evacuation and people stranded without food and water throughout the city. Bush tells "Good Morning America" that "I dont think anyone anticipated a breach of the levees." That day, Newsweek reported, "The reality, say several aides who did not wish to be quoted because it might displease the president, did not really sink in until Thursday night. Some White House staffers were watching the evening news and thought the president needed to see the horrific reports coming out of New Orleans. Counselor Bartlett made up a DVD of the newscasts so Bush could see them in their entirety as he flew down to the Gulf Coast the next morning on Air Force One. "
September 2nd: President Bush takes aerial tour of New Orleans. Relief copters grounded in New Orleans during Bush visit.
September 3rd: Construction equipment removed from broken levee after Bush visit. Louisiana Senator Landrieu Implores President to "relieve unmitigated suffering" and end FEMA's "abject failures"
September 4th: More than 4,600 active duty military personnel join almost 27,000 National Guard troops in Louisiana for disaster relief. Jefferson Parish President Aaron Broussard lambastes FEMA's response on NBC's "Meet the Press"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina
In a September 26, 2005 hearing, former FEMA chief Michael Brown testified before a U.S. House subcommittee about FEMA's response. He was questioned about why Bush's declaration of state of emergency of August 27 had not included the coastal parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, and Plaquemines (in fact, the declaration did not include any of Louisiana's coastal parishes, whereas the coastal counties were included in the declarations for Mississippi and Alabama). Brown testified that this was because Louisiana Governor Blanco had not included those parishes in her initial request for aid (can you say pass-the-buck/fib?), a decision that he found "shocking." After the hearing, though, Blanco released a copy of her letter, which requested assistance for "all the southeastern parishes including the New Orleans Metropolitan area and the mid state Interstate I-49 corridor and northern parishes along the I-20 corridor.
A couple of cliches thrown in for good measure: A picture's worth 1000 words. Actions speak louder than words.
Go here for a Katrina Timeline. August 25 to September 5. The links embedded in this timeline make for a good read as well.
http://www.ojr.org/ojr/wiki/Katrina_Timeline/
Go here for a corresponding timeline of Bush's vacation and a few photos. http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/010936.php
You're entitled to your opinion. I guess it depends on what side of the spectrum you're on.nm
x
I think BB has a point here in that the main point on the board is political discussion, and let'
face it, there is SO MUCH going on right now, changes, problems, disasters, and so much debate on what should/could be done, but so many tims the political discussion disintegrates in a finger-pointing, name-calling exercise, spouting religion all over the place. Yeah, our spiritual beliefs are dearly held and we would all strive to be the best we can be, and do whatever we can whatever the ideology is, but sometimes I wonder, since we have a board EXPRESSLY for Faith isuues, where relgious debates/discussions/forums, etc are welcome, why does THIS board have to be turned into RELIGION BOARD PART II, especially if one ideology wants to dominate or ridicule/condemn those who come on here for lively inteligent discussion, debate of issues in Congress and in our lives, and just want their beliefs held separately? CNN is not EWTN or any other Christian network, and there are constant informative, bright, lively, balanced discussions from all over the political spectrum on the credentialed news stations, as well as C-Span, but they are not constantly hiding behind a cross, rosary, bible, star of David, or whatever....can we not strive to do the same and put religious debate on the Faith board?? Just a thought to ponder, MHO, it might work beter, who knows?
My view.
I really don't think the slander/libel has anything to do with how the public is perceiving this. I do think it plays a part in how the women feel, as well it should. I have been saying all along that we have free will to read or not read what we wish. I agree with you totally on that. However, I feel the handling of this incident is definitely along political lines and I also feel that what Ward Churchill said was a lot worse. Ward says he does not regret what he said and he probably doesn't. But his career has certainly been affected. Thank you for addressing the issue and not making a personal attack. That's refreshing.
Sam we don't always have the same view but
you are welcome to post under mine at any time. We have debated a few issues without resorting to crude, name-calling and I have enjoyed that. I too am an independent, leaning more toward Dem., and I am glad you aren't going to lump all Dems together, because not all, and none I know, would do anything that you are seeing on TV or say even a tenth of the crap that is being said here.
So Sam, please debate away!
and what about JOY ON THE VIEW?
and Barbara is just about as bad.
My view............sm
based on my studies of Revelation over a period of time, are that there are 2 beasts referred to in Revelation 13. The first Beast who arises out of the sea (could be interpreted to mean a sea or mass of people or, in Obama's case, that hew was born on an island - Hawaii) and the Antichrist are one and the same. Why? Because the Beast will usher in a one-world religion that will demand he be worshiped, thereby making him the Antichrist. The 2nd beast will arise out of the earth. I believe this is likely the religious figure who will point to the first beast and build him up as one to be worshiped. Farrakhan has already said "the messiah has spoken" so could this be him? I don't know, but I do know that Obama has said that should the political winds blow in an ugly direction he would side with the Muslims and Farrakhan has very strong roots in the Islam faith.
All this remains to be seen, of course, and I'm certain that, if these conclusions are correct, it won't matter who we vote for because God will cause the events in Revelation to come to pass, whether now or at some point in the future.
God does not view us
as homosexual or heterosexual. He sees us as humans he created. We are not to be lukewarm or sit on the fence when it comes to sin. You need to either heat up the water or fall off the fence. Hopefully, it will be on the right side. ;-)
is the the starting point or the end point for the middle class?
x
I understand your view, but
Yes, you don't like government control at all. However, if insurance companies have full control -which they pretty much do - then they have the full power to deny or insure whomever they choose. What do you say then to the people who have cancer that have been denied coverage by the insurance company? I have posted a few times regarding this issue and I never get a response. I am really curious, for those who want government hands out of health care altogether, what do you say to the people that insurance has denied due to an illness? Too bad?
Just a little opposing view...
Journalistsf Tell Howard Kurtz Why Good News from Iraq Shouldnft Get Reported (updated w/video)
By Noel Sheppard | October 7, 2007 - 13:35 ET
As CNN's Howard Kurtz accurately pointed out on Sunday's "Reliable Sources," few media outlets seemed at all interested in giving much attention to the great news out of Iraq last week regarding September's sharp decline in casualties.
To Kurtz's obvious frustration, his guests - Robin Wright of the Washington Post and Barbara Starr of CNN - both supported the press burying this extremely positive announcement.
I kid you not.
*****Update: Wright responds to reader e-mail message at end of post.
After introducing the subject, Kurtz asked, "Robin Wright, should that decline in Iraq casualties have gotten more media attention?"
This was Wright's amazing answer (video available here):
Story Continues Below Ad
Not necessarily. The fact is we're at the beginning of a trend -- and it's not even sure that it is a trend yet. There is also an enormous dispute over how to count the numbers. There are different kinds of deaths in Iraq.
There are combat deaths. There are sectarian deaths. And there are the deaths of criminal -- from criminal acts. There are also a lot of numbers that the U.S. frankly is not counting. For example, in southern Iraq, there is Shiite upon Shiite violence, which is not sectarian in the Shiite versus Sunni. And the U.S. also doesn't have much of a capability in the south.
So the numbers themselves are tricky.
Wow. Numbers shouldn't be reported because they're "tricky," "at the beginning of a trend," and there's "enormous dispute over how to count" them?
No such moral conundrum existed last month when media predicted a looming recession after the Labor Department announced a surprising decline in non-farm payrolls that ended up being revised up four weeks later to show an increase.
And, in the middle of a three and a half-year bull run in stocks, such "journalists" have no quandary predicting a bear market every time the Dow Jones Industrial Average falls a few hundred points.
Yet, when good news regarding military casualties comes from the Defense Department, these same people show uncharacteristic restraint in not wanting to report what could end up being an a anomaly.
Isn't that special?
Alas, not seeing the stupidity in this position, Starr, with a straight-face nonetheless, agreed with Wright:
But that's the problem, we don't know whether it is a trend about specifically the decline in the number of U.S. troops being killed in Iraq. This is not enduring progress. This is a very positive step on that potential road to progress.
Hmmm. So, I guess a "very positive step on that potential road to progress" isn't newsworthy, huh Barbara? Even Kurtz recognized the hypocrisy here, which led to the following:
KURTZ: But let's say that the figures had shown that casualties were going up for U.S. soldiers and going up for Iraqi civilians. I think that would have made some front pages.
STARR: Oh, I think inevitably it would have. I mean, that's certainly -- that, by any definition, is news. Look, nobody more than a Pentagon correspondent would like to stop reporting the number of deaths, interviewing grieving families, talking to soldiers who have lost their arms and their legs in the war. But, is this really enduring progress?
We've had five years of the Pentagon telling us there is progress, there is progress. Forgive me for being skeptical, I need to see a little bit more than one month before I get too excited about all of this.
Hmmm. So, a shocking increase in deaths would have "certainly" been newsworthy. However, for a decrease to be reported, skeptical journalists have to be more convinced that it's a lasting improvement.
Sadly, this is what makes today's reporters more like sports fans than real journalists.
After all, it shouldn't be their position to decide when a comeback, rally, or winning streak is real enough for them to jump on the bandwagon and get excited about. News - be it good or bad - is to be reported.
That's their job.
And when folks like this make dissemination decisions to not share information on something as important as American casualties of war due to their own personal skepticism, they have indeed abdicated their solemn responsibility to the public whose interest they regularly claim to serve.
What follows is a partial transcript of this segment.
HOWARD KURTZ, HOST: The news from Iraq has been consistently depressing for several years now, a continuous tableau of death and destruction. But when the administration released more positive casualty figures this week, the media paid little attention. A couple of sentences on the "CBS EVENING NEWS" and NBC "NIGHTLY NEWS," The New York Times ran it on page 10, The Washington Post," page 14, USA Today page 16. The L.A. Times, a couple of paragraphs at the bottom of a page 4 story.
One exception was Charlie Gibson, who made it the lead story on ABC's "WORLD NEWS."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHARLES GIBSON, ABC ANCHOR: The U.S. military reports the fourth straight month of decline in troop deaths, 66 American troops died in September, each a terrible tragedy for a family, but the number far less than those who died in August. And the Iraqi government says civilian deaths across Iraq fell by half last month.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KURTZ: Joining us now to put this into perspective, Robin Wright, who covers national security for The Washington Post. And CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr.
Robin Wright, should that decline in Iraq casualties have gotten more media attention?
ROBIN WRIGHT, THE WASHINGTON POST: Not necessarily. The fact is we're at the beginning of a trend -- and it's not even sure that it is a trend yet. There is also an enormous dispute over how to count the numbers. There are different kinds of deaths in Iraq.
There are combat deaths. There are sectarian deaths. And there are the deaths of criminal -- from criminal acts. There are also a lot of numbers that the U.S. frankly is not counting. For example, in southern Iraq, there is Shiite upon Shiite violence, which is not sectarian in the Shiite versus Sunni. And the U.S. also doesn't have much of a capability in the south.
So the numbers themselves are tricky. Long-term, General Odierno, who was in town this week, said he is looking for irreversible momentum, and that, after two months, has not yet been reached.
KURTZ: Barbara Starr, CNN did mostly quick reads by anchors of these numbers. There was a taped report on "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT." Do you think this story deserved more attention? We don't know whether it is a trend or not but those are intriguing numbers.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: But that's the problem, we don't know whether it is a trend about specifically the decline in the number of U.S. troops being killed in Iraq. This is not enduring progress. This is a very positive step on that potential road to progress.
KURTZ: But let's say that the figures had shown that casualties were going up for U.S. soldiers and going up for Iraqi civilians. I think that would have made some front pages.
STARR: Oh, I think inevitably it would have. I mean, that's certainly -- that, by any definition, is news. Look, nobody more than a Pentagon correspondent would like to stop reporting the number of deaths, interviewing grieving families, talking to soldiers who have lost their arms and their legs in the war. But, is this really enduring progress?
We've had five years of the Pentagon telling us there is progress, there is progress. Forgive me for being skeptical, I need to see a little bit more than one month before I get too excited about all of this.
*****Update: Susan Duclos of Wake up America sent an e-mail message to Robin Wright concerning this matter. Here was Wright's response:
Ms. Duclos -
Thanks for your comments. The point I was trying to make on CNN is that two months do not make a permanent trend. As Gen. Odierno said last week, when he came to the Post, the numbers have been good the last couple of months but the US military has not yet reached the point of "irreversible momentum." When they do, it will certainly mean a different kind of reporting about the war in general. Unfortunately, all it will take is one or two really bad incidents and the numbers will start going up again. The numbers aren't the whole story either. The progress in Anbar has been widely covered in the US media -- and that in many ways tells us far more about both the war and the future than the death tolls.
I also think we're all a little nervous about declaring victories before we're fully confident that they represent a long-term and enduring trend and are not just a favorable blip on the screen.
With regards,
Robin Wright
Diplomatic Correspondent
The Washington Post
Telephone: 202 334-7443
Email: wrightr@washpost.com
Fax: 202 496-3883
Looks like anything good is being censored on this side by most of the major outlets here. Not surprising.
my view on experience is...
I don't think experience is that big of an issue - nobody has "experience" at being the President of the United States until they get elected - and I don't think that the experience that Hillary claims is any real experience anyway.
I am excited at the prospect of having somebody in office who has no "experience" - maybe they will really want to "change" the way the "experienced" people have been doing things!
Afraid to view it are you?
And it is the least of my worries what you consider trash...:)
By all means....don't view it. You might actually have to really know...
what you support. Can't have that, can you?
Perhaps not everyone shares your view....as to the
downward course of the nation. Just like you did not allow us to rain on your parade...you ain't gonna rain on this one. So happpeeee this morning, not even you can dampen it, try though you will. :) You have a great day, valuevoter! It is a GOOD day!!
|
