quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

I see from your post that you do not have basic reading comprehension, and that explains you profound confusion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

And people wonder why I don't hang out in the forums much anymore.

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

I see from your post that you do not have basic reading comprehension, and that explains you profound confusion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

thompson, whatever, I do not want to argue it anymore.  You do not care about sanitation issues, and think they are irrelevant, ok. 
  I have never said that I did not care about sanitation nor that it was irrelevant.  You seem quite intent on putting words in my mouth.
On the other hand you seem to feel that letting them starve to death or die of dehydration is a good thing.  Perhaps you might want to check with a doctor about how to deal with cholorea or at least look it up before you make such foolish statements.


To think that the poor people in NO put thier faith in people like you to save them, and you do not even care about the basic sanitation issues.  Your right 10,000 more lbs of feces and urine in the shelters would not have been a problem in any way.  Its good for people to sit in, and ingest  piles of feces. it does not cause helath problems, its like vitamins.  I apologize for caring about it. 
How you make the leap from giving people food and water to having them eat shit confuses me ...how do you do that?


The policy was to get them out as soon as possible.  I think it was the right thing to do.  So did the Gov of No and LA, because that was the plan they set up before hand.  If the leeves fail evacuate the city.  If it had happened faster it would have been better.  Since you have nothing to say about this thread or my question.  I see no need to continue this old argument.  By the way absolutly no one chimed in to defend your opinion on the matter either.
I am unclear as to what others think about my post has to do with your mindset that feeding people and giving them water leads to them eating shit.
thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

thompson because when you eat or drink it cuases you to have to poop or piss.  And it has to go somewhere, and the sewage systems in the shelters were out of commision.  People were shitting in trash cans, and it was starting to overflow.  In that sort of enviroment the germs would spread all over the place.  The fact is no one starved to death, which you keep assserting for some reason.  I pointed out that the plan decided on by the Locals before hand was that if the leeve failed the city would be evacuated.  The plan was not to bring in food and try to keep the people there longer.  That is the Plan the Locals voted for before hand.  Taking more time to bring food in would have been completely pointless, it would have delayed the evacuations.  For you to pretend otherwise makes no sense to me, except as blatant partisanship.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Nice strawman, thompson - but I never said all Liberals approve of rape. Why don't you go put words in someone else's mouth. What I will say is that most Liberals approve of Bill Clinton, therefore they approve of at least one rapist, in my estimation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

Did I fall asleep at the wheel?  When was Clinton convicted of rape?  I seem to recall he had a bevy of eager partners, who then were willing to out their relationship with him for various reasons, but rape???

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Cholera is combatted by gallons of fresh water with electrolytes if available, preferebly in an IV, and they would puke and diareha much of it out.  In the shelters surrounded by other people.  I see that as making the terrible situation there much worse.  I am glad we both agree that the plan was flawed in both design and implementation.  Whose plan was it?  I see no reason why slowing down the evacuation to bring in food and water would have been a good idea.  You keep saying I am harping about the red and blue thing.  I am not, thats in your mind.  You can be a partisan simply by hating Bush.  I do not think by your posts on other threads you hold the Dems to the same standard as Reps, but if you claim you do, ok  You are of course attakcing me on this thread because I pointed out what Clinton gave as his reason for attacking Sudan.  that Iraq was aiding Bin Laden in making Nerve Gas in Sudan.  I would appreciate your comment on that.  Was he Lying or telling the truth?  Did he kill people because of his lies, and attack an innocent nation, destroying a plant that made medicine. 
I really did not notice you condeming the democrats who ran No and LA, in this or the previous thread, just the reps, seems rather partisan to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

Did I fall asleep at the wheel?  When was Clinton convicted of rape?  I seem to recall he had a bevy of eager partners, who then were willing to out their relationship with him for various reasons, but rape???

I made it pretty clear that that is my opinion. Your "recollection" is that his victims actually liked it. We'll just have to disagree on this one puella. And I normally do not respond to your posts... and I really can't say why without being accused of making a "personal attack" so I'll just leave it at that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

It is pretty obvious that the reason you do not respond to puella's post is that she rips you a new one everytime she catches you with both feet in your mouth at the same time.
thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Cholera is combatted by gallons of fresh water with electrolytes if available, preferebly in an IV, and they would puke and diareha much of it out. 
Perhaps a quick glance at even the most rudamentry book on public health might be in order here.

In the shelters surrounded by other people.  I see that as making the terrible situation there much worse.  I am glad we both agree that the plan was flawed in both design and implementation.  Whose plan was it?  I see no reason why slowing down the evacuation to bring in food and water would have been a good idea.  You keep saying I am harping about the red and blue thing.  I am not, thats in your mind.
I notice that your non partisan stance only applauds my statement that the evacuation plan was flawed in both design and implimentation but no mention of the fact that the rescue plan was also equally flawed in both design and implimentation.  Seems pretty red and blue to me so it is not so much in my mind as in your mouth.


You can be a partisan simply by hating Bush. 
Really ???Perhaps you need a dictionary as well as a book on public health.  Let me try it again.  I do not hate bush &co.  I think they are a bunch of lying, cheating,coniving, money grubbing assholes who care only about ripping off the taxpayers for every cent that they can before they are run out of office to be replaced by another group of lying cheating coniving money grubbing assholes.

I do not think by your posts on other threads you hold the Dems to the same standard as Reps, but if you claim you do, ok  You are of course attakcing me on this thread because I pointed out what Clinton gave as his reason for attacking Sudan. 
I am not attacking you at all I am only pointing out your inability to read, write or form rational conclusions from stated evidence.

that Iraq was aiding Bin Laden in making Nerve Gas in Sudan.  I would appreciate your comment on that.  Was he Lying or telling the truth?  Did he kill people because of his lies, and attack an innocent nation, destroying a plant that made medicine. 
I really did not notice you condeming the democrats who ran No and LA, in this or the previous thread, just the reps, seems rather partisan to me.
Do you even read what you write before you put your name on it?  I said, and you thanked me for, pointing out that the original evacuation plan was flawed in both design and implimentation.  Now I do not know for sure just who came up with the plan but it is clear that it was administered by demopubs....just as it was clearly the republicrats who dropped the ball on the rescue.
thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

I have no idea if Bill is good in the sack, and have no desire to find out.  However, all these women entered into consensual and continuing relations with him... And I still have not seen any evidence to support your opinion that he is a rapist....  I suppose that means you have no proof to back that statement up.

Which is annoying... if a woman cries false rape, the men go bat-fucking crazy.  If a man calls another man a rapist with no proof for it... it is aok?

Go figure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

I have no idea if Bill is good in the sack, and have no desire to find out.  However, all these women entered into consensual and continuing relations with him... And I still have not seen any evidence to support your opinion that he is a rapist....  I suppose that means you have no proof to back that statement up.

Which is annoying... if a woman cries false rape, the men go bat-fucking crazy.  If a man calls another man a rapist with no proof for it... it is aok?

Go figure.

puella:
It is not so much one man calling another man a rapist as it is a right wing fascist calling a left wing fascist a rapist.  It has nothing to do with truth and everything to do with character assassination.
thompson

quote:

These posts are in the wrong thread - they obviously belong in the "Double Standards" thread BECAUSE President Bush has never been convicted of lying, stealing oil, or any of the other whacked-out charges that the Left likes to constantly assault his good name with,

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Let's drag Bush in front of a group to adjudicate those claims, you know, the way Clinton was impeached?

I suggest a federal Grand Jury would be the appropriate venue.