RE: NYT hack piece

RE: NYT hack piece (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

vincentML -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 8:17:43 AM)
quote: FEMA isn't always there early, either. Much of this stuff is reaction. But, it's sorta difficult to be right there with the proper help before you know what help is going to be needed. FEMA has resources and supplies on the ground as the storm approaches. Sorry they can't stand on the beach and raise their arms to shoo the storm away. I mean, wtf!

mnottertail -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 8:19:48 AM)
If anyone knew exactly what and where the storm was gonna destroy, it wouldn't be there in a perfect world, or the storm wouldn't. There are certain things in this world that conservatives or liberals in America cannot control to their everlasting benefit, among them the Middle East and Sandy.

subspaceseven -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 8:52:32 AM)
quote: FEMA isn't always there early, either. Much of this stuff is reaction. But, it's sorta difficult to be right there with the proper help before you know what help is going to be needed. Yes as we learned during katrina, but don't worry brownie is doing a heck of a job...... Cause no one knew there was a hurricane in the Gulf of Mex...... And by the way, FEMA started staging things last week, I know in ILL, the news last week Fri or Sat showed all the ComEd crews heading to the east coast per FEMA, along with the natural Gas crews....

cloudboy -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 9:20:23 AM)
quote: On what basis does the NYT think the states cannot handle their own affairs? What is it about non-federal that makes such an absurd notion? On what basis does the NYT find that only the federal government can give aid to poor people? On what basis does the NTY state that NRCC (FEMA) is a properly functioning federal agency? The assumptions made are astounding. It might be a matter of philosophy, aka, do we live in the United States of America or divided States of America? Regarding storms, NPR had an analyst who said that storm prevention investments (like the Levees in New Orleans) save $3.00 in damage / cleanup costs for every $1.00 of investment. Given climate change and the greater severity of the storms we now face, public investment in this area might be prudent, and it would best be coordinated on the federal level.

PunisherNOLA -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 9:27:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subspaceseven quote: FEMA isn't always there early, either. Much of this stuff is reaction. But, it's sorta difficult to be right there with the proper help before you know what help is going to be needed. Yes as we learned during katrina, but don't worry brownie is doing a heck of a job...... Cause no one knew there was a hurricane in the Gulf of Mex...... And by the way, FEMA started staging things last week, I know in ILL, the news last week Fri or Sat showed all the ComEd crews heading to the east coast per FEMA, along with the natural Gas crews.... FEMA was indeed in the area before Katrina hit, many screwups happened during and after that storm, but FEMA being in the area in time was not one of them. That they didn't actually do anything right away is a totally different matter.

slvemike4u -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 9:40:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PunisherNOLA quote: ORIGINAL: subspaceseven quote: FEMA isn't always there early, either. Much of this stuff is reaction. But, it's sorta difficult to be right there with the proper help before you know what help is going to be needed. Yes as we learned during katrina, but don't worry brownie is doing a heck of a job...... Cause no one knew there was a hurricane in the Gulf of Mex...... And by the way, FEMA started staging things last week, I know in ILL, the news last week Fri or Sat showed all the ComEd crews heading to the east coast per FEMA, along with the natural Gas crews.... FEMA was indeed in the area before Katrina hit, many screwups happened during and after that storm, but FEMA being in the area in time was not one of them. That they didn't actually do anything right away is a totally different matter. Of course"doing something" is what actually matters ,no? "Brownie you're doing a heck of a job" Fucking idiots....Republican leadership,not posters here....lol

subspaceseven -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 10:58:28 AM)
Maybe this is one of the reasons Katrina was so screwed up..... A quote from brownie to a paper in Denver.... “One thing he’s gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly when in…Benghazi, he went to Las Vegas?” Brown says. “Why was this so quick?… At some point, somebody’s going to ask that question…. This is like the inverse of Benghazi.”

kdsub -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 12:15:35 PM)
I think there should be a determination of what a state can afford… and the federal government should be reimbursed this amount for the cost of their emergency response if needed. If the state wishes to collect money from private or charitable contributions more power to them. Butch

PunisherNOLA -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 12:17:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subspaceseven Maybe this is one of the reasons Katrina was so screwed up..... A quote from brownie to a paper in Denver.... “One thing he’s gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly when in…Benghazi, he went to Las Vegas?” Brown says. “Why was this so quick?… At some point, somebody’s going to ask that question…. This is like the inverse of Benghazi.” LOL, Yeah, Brown was definitely one of the screwups.. The man had absolutely no business being the head of FEMA. So why DID Obama go immediately to DC? Appearances.. Bush caught a lot of crap over the fact he flew over New Orleans and didn't land. There's nothing at all the President could have done on the ground in New Orleans that he couldn't do from Air Force One, but it looked bad. No clear thinking politician is going to let that happen to them, so Obama did the best thing for appearances sake, as well as Romney in a smaller way. Much the same as Bobby Jindal making sure to be filmed surveying the area after the BP spill. That's not a knock on either Obama, Jindal or Romney; that's just how the political winds blow. The biggest screwup of all was plain and simply politics, both on the local and the national level, going back over 30 years when the ACOE informed the City of New Orleans just how inadequate the levee system was. (On both sides, there's plenty of blame to hand out...) Kathleen Blanco wasn't aware at first that she had to actually ASK for the federal government to send in FEMA once the area is declared a disaster area. Once she was made aware of that fact, she made the request and thus ensued the arguing over the wording of the request, and who would be in charge..etc. Every little thing that only added to the delay of getting FEMA in there and doing their thing. Today we use Katrina as an example of what happens when the system isn't firing on all cylinders. That's really about the only `good' thing that happened because of Katrina, the example it serves. Well, and a renovated Superdome, thanks to that FEMA money.

vincentML -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 12:36:30 PM)
quote: I think there should be a determination of what a state can afford… and the federal government should be reimbursed this amount for the cost of their emergency response if needed. Disagree. The Federal Govt acts as 'Insuror of Last Resort.' That's why we pay taxes. As citizens and States we assume a shared risk. The purpose of declaring states of emergency is to make Federal assistance available to those states that ask for it. In a reported conference call the President asked the governors of the varous States involved what they needed and what they could contribute to the most needy [NJ & NY] The President also visited the Red Cross this afternoon to urge donations from people in totally unaffected areas. However, implicit behind all the President's actions is the availability of the federal treasury as a last resort. If that is 'socialism' in the twisted phiosophies of the neoRandians . . . so be it.

tazzygirl -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 1:26:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Yes, but those types of organizations arent immediate in their response. I am thinking more along the lines of within the first few days of a disaster. Then there is clean up, repairs, security. ISOH-IMPACT starts gearing up prior to the disaster, if possible. I recall them requesting donations, etc. prior to Katrina making landfall. I think they were even already moving South so they could get in as quickly as possible after landfall. It's a top notch organization, really. If a disaster is predicted, they get started as soon as they can. FEMA isn't always there early, either. Much of this stuff is reaction. But, it's sorta difficult to be right there with the proper help before you know what help is going to be needed. What many people dont know is this... FEMA wasnt started until the late 70's. Until then, it was all local and state government. Prior to 1979, disaster management in the United States was a patchwork of on-the-spot legislation, local, state and federal agencies and volunteer groups. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers controlled some aspects of disaster mitigation, while different government agencies provided insurance for disaster damage. Eventually, more than 100 agencies existed to deal with disasters, and many of them needlessly duplicated the efforts of others. President Jimmy Carter created FEMA by executive order in 1979, and the new agency absorbed many other agencies. FEMA took on a wide range of responsibilities that included natural disasters and civil defense plans in case of war. In 2003, FEMA became part of the Department of Homeland Security. FEMA is tasked with handling all possible disasters. This includes both natural disasters, such as hurricanes and earthquakes, and man-made ones, such as hazardous substance spills, bombings and war. Although most people associate FEMA with disaster response, the agency has put a great deal of effort into disaster preparation. These preparations include hurricane-proofing homes and helping cities retrofit buildings to make them safer in the event of an earthquake. The 2001 Nisqually earthquake in Washington State could have caused far greater destruction if buildings in the area hadn't been retrofitted through FEMA's Project Impact. FEMA provides information to home and business owners that can help them take steps to prepare for disasters. A comprehensive list of FEMA advice on disaster preparation can be found here. The list includes winter driving tips, ways to upgrade and improve homes to keep storm and earthquake damage to a minimum, and grant programs that can help people pay for upgrades. http://people.howstuffworks.com/fema1.htm If you really want to know how FEMA works, thats as good an article as it gets.

dcnovice -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 1:43:45 PM)
quote: On what basis does the NYT think the states cannot handle their own affairs? Might it stem in part from the tendency of governors and mayors to request federal aid when disaster strikes? quote: This piece by the NYT is pure crap and a hack job. It may bear noting that it was clearly marked as an editorial, not a news story.

vincentML -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 2:15:38 PM)
quote: Disagree. The Federal Govt acts as 'Insuror of Last Resort.' That's why we pay taxes. As citizens and States we assume a shared risk. The purpose of declaring states of emergency is to make Federal assistance available to those states that ask for it. Not only is it a shared risk . . . it is a shared responsibility. Enough with the libertarian delusions. What a joke!

dcnovice -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 2:33:14 PM)
Me again. Thought of something else. quote: What is it about non-federal that makes such an absurd notion? I don't think the authors are dissing the states or private organizations. They're simply offering their view that some crises--such as a major storm assaulting a whole region at once--may require resources and coordination of response efforts not available at the state-local-private level. It might be interesting to invert your question:What is it about federal that makes it such an absurd notion? Why does it seem almost painful for some folks on the right wing to recognize the need for a national government?

Moonhead -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 2:46:04 PM)
Come to that, why is it assumed that Federal governance is bad but State governance is brilliant? Last time I checked, they're both funded from the same fount that libertarians should find abhorrent, but only seem to have an issue with if the agency it's paying is based in Washington not their neck of the woods.

Yachtie -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 2:56:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice It might be interesting to invert your question:What is it about federal that makes it such an absurd notion? Why does it seem almost painful for some folks on the right wing to recognize the need for a national government? I don't know anyone on the right who says the national (federal) government should not be. The question is, what should the federal government's role be? It's statements like this from the article - The agency was put back in working order by President Obama, but ideology still blinds Republicans to its value. Many don’t like the idea of free aid for poor people, or they think people should pay for their bad decisions, which this week includes living on the East Coast which make it a hit piece. It's designed to be inflammatory and unidirectional. The article treats as absurd and declares certain (It's an absurd notion) what very well may not be absurd at all. Take this turn of phrase - it’s fully in line with decades of Republican resistance to federal emergency planning. One could also talk about Democrat resistance to small government too. [8\|]

Yachtie -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 3:02:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Come to that, why is it assumed that Federal governance is bad but State governance is brilliant? Why is it assumed that government located the furthest (not geographic) from the people is brilliant? Somehow better?

DomKen -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 3:15:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Come to that, why is it assumed that Federal governance is bad but State governance is brilliant? Why is it assumed that government located the furthest (not geographic) from the people is brilliant? Somehow better? In part because the more removed it is the less biased it is. The obvious example of course is the federal government interventions during the civil rights movement.

slvemike4u -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 3:20:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice It might be interesting to invert your question:What is it about federal that makes it such an absurd notion? Why does it seem almost painful for some folks on the right wing to recognize the need for a national government? I don't know anyone on the right who says the national (federal) government should not be. The question is, what should the federal government's role be? It's statements like this from the article - [i]The agency was put back in working order by President Obama, but ideology still blinds Republicans to its value. Many don’t like the idea of free aid for poor people, or they think people should pay for their bad decisions, which this week includes living on the East Coast which make it a hit piece. It's designed to be inflammatory and unidirectional. The article treats as absurd and declares certain (It's an absurd notion) what very well may not be absurd at all. Take this turn of phrase - it’s fully in line with decades of Republican resistance to federal emergency planning. One could also talk about Democrat resistance to small government too. [8\|] I will accept that you don't like the idea of free aid for poor people but are you really of the opinion that folks should pay for their own bad decisions.....including choosing to live on the east coast ? Cause if that's the case I'm calling bullshit,that whole west coast is nothing but a disaster(tsunamis,earthquakes and such)disaster waiting to happen. So when you come down to it of the two coasts east coasters made a way better decision [:D]

OttersSwim -> RE: NYT hack piece (10/30/2012 3:33:49 PM)
Ya'll stay the hell out of Denver, ya hear? [:D]

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875