Thank you Frankie for bringin' up the topic of conservation, it's a timely subject, one that we all should be topicin' on. As I mentioned in my speech yesterday: "We can all pitch in ... by being better conservers of energy". We need to adopt a policy of what I like to call "commonsense conservationism''. Let's not get that confused with "commonsense creationism" cuz we all know that's just good 'ol commonsense.Now where was I, oh yeah "commonsense conservationism". Here's a few ways I'd suggest you commonsensely conserve on your own.#1 Don't drive#2 Don't drive, UNLESS you're the Post Office or an EMT or a Fire Department or an Airline or a FEMA First responder or Police or Government Official or Airforce One pilot.#3 NO BARBEQUE!!! (with gas or oil) Charcoal still OK!#4 Avoid traffic jams#5 Do NOT waste energy drilling for oil (U.S. territory only)#6 All Gas is now Premium Gas#7 Cheney's Gas is still nasty Gas. ZING!!! (had to throw that one in C-Dog)#8 Lawnmowing = Terrorism#9 Hand-pump fuel whenever possible#10 Ride a bike fool!!!As always I enjoy yer support and I'd like to thank the boys of BackBlow for keepin' this forum so Democtatic.GWB #43

hey bro, the LA weekly article is almost three years old.That being said, thanks for posting the link, instead of cutting and pasting.no one here is into sugarcoating, not Hussein's record, not the Reagan Adminisntration's bolstering of him during the Iran-Iraq war, not the Soviet Union's record, not FBI tampering of evidence on Peltier, not Bush's lying to the nation about weapons of mass destruction, not the dismal failure that the war in iraq continues to betell you what, we'll continue to avoid sugar-coating history, but you do the same, yeah?on the mumia case, which you must be fond of, the fact of the matter is that there is no reliable or clear cut account of what happened that night in Philly. Clearly someone killed the policeman but the circumstances do apepar to be quite muddled. (can you tell me the policeman's name, please, so that i do not refer to him as an anonymous public servant? thanks a lot)and yes, ANSWER has its own views, as does the other much broader coalition, UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICEpeople of all strips, shapes and sizes, ages, political opinions, all march, united in the opposition to this idiotic and senseless warwe despise the lies on which it was basedwe despise the wanton bloodletting that continues to occurwe despise the waste of resources that this iswe need the national guard in Louisiana, not in Baghdadoh, and we do need to deal with finding alternative forms of energy so that we do not depend on foreign sources of oiland while we're at it. let's stop consuming so much energywastefulirresponsiblebad newstake good care of yourselflet go of some of that hateyou'll feel so much better

Re: tsk tsk...Ha! Coming from you... what a laugh.You and your A.N.S.W.E.R. people are the lickspittle dupes and hirelings of some of the worst cut-throat thugs in the history of mankind. Nothing you say has any credibility merely because YOU said it.Some things will never change http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/50/news-corn.phphttp://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&artnum=1&issue=20050923&view=1

tsk tskin the face of overwhelming evidence of the complete and total ineptitude of their administration's program, not to mention their chief executive, supporters of the current ongoing bankrupt lunacy revert to shrill name-calling.The fact is that the CLinton administration, with their own policy failings, did not, i repeat, did not invade Iraq - Bush did. And things are not going well there,or are you all saying that everything is hunky dory. Almost 2000 US soldier deaths, tens of thousands of Iraquis, the shrill despairing call is "all is well; we're making gains; love it or leave it, bla bla bla, tired bla"Nothing learned from Vietnam; nothing learned from Gulf I.Yes, keep name calling, call me Franklin Al-Stein if you wish. But face the facts, buddies. You have overseen the destruction of your own country at your own hands, with the destruction of financial security, the destruction of your own once-amazing infrastructure, the destruction of any semblance of civlized discourse, the destruction of your own moral values and the destruction of your own democracy. That's why your call for pride is so shrill and so empty and so sickening. Wake up please. Smell the bodies rotting. Smell the despair of the failed response in the southern coasts. Smell the beads of sweat on all SUV owners as gas prices prepare to jump yet again. Smell your rotting roses.

Ooops... Looks like I forgot to add these quotes to my "They Lied, They Died" propaganda "adds". Please forgive the oversight...

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." — President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program." — President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." — Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." — Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." — Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…" — Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" — Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…" — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003"I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country … And I think Iraq and Saddam Hussein present the most serious and most imminent threat." — John Edwards (D, NC), February 24, 2002.

Oh boy! The loony fringe lefties are in town… Here is a taste

http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=+Cindy+Sheehan&ei=UTF-8&fl=0&c=news_photos

Thanks "Drowned school buses" even though we disagree. I appreciate the fact that you posted your thoughts instead of cutting and pasting those of others. Also, thanks for the web links. We'll definitely have to sort through all the "facts" out there.I agree that blame shouldn't be solely placed on the Administration - but that does not mean that they had nothing to do with anything and have nothing to answer for. There is a role for FEMA. Also, how can one justify the fact that aid from foreign governments has still not been cleared in?Again, for people participating in these diatribes - if you want to refer to an article, please post the link, do not cut and paste. And submit your own thoughts.So "socialism sucks"? if anything, the disaster has shown that capitalism is no better.more important, let's leave all of these terms behind and find ways to engage in a dialogue where we can achieve consensus on how to best organize society or live together. because we do.

Blame Amid the Tragedy

By BOB WILLIAMSSeptember 6, 2005As the devastation of Hurricane Katrina continues to shock and sadden the nation, the question on many lips is, Who is to blame for the inadequate response?As a former state legislator who represented the legislative district most impacted by the eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1980, I can fully understand and empathize with the people and public officials over the loss of life and property.Many in the media are turning their eyes toward the federal government, rather than considering the culpability of city and state officials. I am fully aware of the challenges of having a quick and responsive emergency response to a major disaster. And there is definitely a time for accountability; but what isn't fair is to dump on the federal officials and avoid those most responsible -- local and state officials who failed to do their job as the first responders. The plain fact is, lives were needlessly lost in New Orleans due to the failure of Louisiana's governor, Kathleen Blanco, and the city's mayor, Ray Nagin.The primary responsibility for dealing with emergencies does not belong to the federal government. It belongs to local and state officials who are charged by law with the management of the crucial first response to disasters. First response should be carried out by local and state emergency personnel under the supervision of the state governor and his/her emergency operations center.The actions and inactions of Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin are a national disgrace due to their failure to implement the previously established evacuation plans of the state and city. Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin cannot claim that they were surprised by the extent of the damage and the need to evacuate so many people. Detailed written plans were already in place to evacuate more than a million people. The plans projected that 300,000 people would need transportation in the event of a hurricane like Katrina. If the plans had been implemented, thousands of lives would likely have been saved.In addition to the plans, local, state and federal officials held a simulated hurricane drill 13 months ago, in which widespread flooding supposedly trapped 300,000 people inside New Orleans. The exercise simulated the evacuation of more than a million residents. The problems identified in the simulation apparently were not solved.A year ago, as Hurricane Ivan approached, New Orleans ordered an evacuation but did not use city or school buses to help people evacuate. As a result many of the poorest citizens were unable to evacuate. Fortunately, the hurricane changed course and did not hit New Orleans, but both Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin acknowledged the need for a better evacuation plan. Again, they did not take corrective actions. In 1998, during a threat by Hurricane George, 14,000 people were sent to the Superdome and theft and vandalism were rampant due to inadequate security. Again, these problems were not corrected.The New Orleans contingency plan is still, as of this writing, on the city's Web site, and states: "The safe evacuation of threatened populations is one of the principle [sic] reasons for developing a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan." But the plan was apparently ignored.Mayor Nagin was responsible for giving the order for mandatory evacuation and supervising the actual evacuation: His office of Emergency Preparedness (not the federal government) must coordinate with the state on elements of evacuation and assist in directing the transportation of evacuees to staging areas. Mayor Nagin had to be encouraged by the governor to contact the National Hurricane Center before he finally, belatedly, issued the order for mandatory evacuation. And sadly, it apparently took a personal call from the president to urge the governor to order the mandatory evacuation.The city's evacuation plan states: "The city of New Orleans will utilize all available resources to quickly and safely evacuate threatened areas." But even though the city has enough school and transit buses to evacuate 12,000 citizens per fleet run, the mayor did not use them. To compound the problem, the buses were not moved to high ground and were flooded. The plan also states that "special arrangements will be made to evacuate persons unable to transport themselves or who require specific lifesaving assistance. Additional personnel will be recruited to assist in evacuation procedures as needed." This was not done.The evacuation plan warned that "if an evacuation order is issued without the mechanisms needed to disseminate the information to the affected persons, then we face the possibility of having large numbers of people either stranded and left to the mercy of a storm, or left in an area impacted by toxic materials." That is precisely what happened because of the mayor's failure.Instead of evacuating the people, the mayor ordered the refugees to the Superdome and Convention Center without adequate security and no provisions for food, water and sanitary conditions. As a result people died, and there was even rape committed, in these facilities. Mayor Nagin failed in his responsibility to provide public safety and to manage the orderly evacuation of the citizens of New Orleans. Now he wants to blame Gov. Blanco and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. In an emergency the first requirement is for the city's emergency center to be linked to the state emergency operations center. This was not done.The federal government does not have the authority to intervene in a state emergency without the request of a governor. President Bush declared an emergency prior to Katrina hitting New Orleans, so the only action needed for federal assistance was for Gov. Blanco to request the specific type of assistance she needed. She failed to send a timely request for specific aid.In addition, unlike the governors of New York, Oklahoma and California in past disasters, Gov. Blanco failed to take charge of the situation and ensure that the state emergency operation facility was in constant contact with Mayor Nagin and FEMA. It is likely that thousands of people died because of the failure of Gov. Blanco to implement the state plan, which mentions the possible need to evacuate up to one million people. The plan clearly gives the governor the authority for declaring an emergency, sending in state resources to the disaster area and requesting necessary federal assistance.State legislators and governors nationwide need to update their contingency plans and the operation procedures for state emergency centers. Hurricane Katrina had been forecast for days, but that will not always be the case with a disaster (think of terrorist attacks). It must be made clear that the governor and locally elected officials are in charge of the "first response."I am not attempting to excuse some of the delays in FEMA's response. Congress and the president need to take corrective action there, also. However, if citizens expect FEMA to be a first responder to terrorist attacks or other local emergencies (earthquakes, forest fires, volcanoes), they will be disappointed. The federal government's role is to offer aid upon request.The Louisiana Legislature should conduct an immediate investigation into the failures of state and local officials to implement the written emergency plans. The tragedy is not over, and real leadership in the state and local government are essential in the months to come. More importantly, the hurricane season is still upon us, and local and state officials must stay focused on the jobs for which they were elected -- and not on the deadly game of passing the emergency buck.

Honestly, I admire Mayor Nagin's intensity and understand his frustration. It's too bad he didn't show the same sort of urgency in ordering and organizing the evacuation last week, because things might have turned out much different. When you know that the city you lead is 1) below sea-level and built to withstand only a Category 3 storm and 2) is a very difficult place to evacuate based on past history and 3) is relying on what you yourself characterize as limited local resources to conduct such an operation, there is no excuse to wait until less than 24 hours (http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/WWL082705nagin.b7724856.html) to pull the trigger on ordering a mandatory evacuation when a Category 5 storm is bearing down on you. None.When all is said and done I think we'll find that the greatest contributing factor in this tragedy was Mayor Nagin's lack of urgency on the front end and his inability to coordinate and execute an evacuation plan (even one that now looks in hindsight to have been seriously flawed) that got as many people out of New Orleans as possible.It's hard to find any redeeming qualities in Governor Blanco's conduct during this entire affair. I haven't seen any reports on just how aggressively she mobilized state assets to prepare for and to assist the evacuation effort before Katrina struck, so perhaps details will emerge that will accrue to her credit - though frankly I will be surprised if that turns out to be true.Since the hurricane hit Blanco's response has been a case study in lack of leadership; from projecting weakness and insecurity to squabbling over turf. The Governor has done little to leave the impression she has been either confident or competent in helping to manage this crisis. Again, I suspect this is an impression that will be confirmed by numerous examples once all the facts are in.Michael Brown has got to go. The bottom line is that as the man in charge of coordinating federal relief efforts the results produced on his watch were simply not good enough. Again, we don't know all that went on behind the scenes so there may be a number of mitigating factors, but from what we have seen in the press Brown looks from the outset to have been extremely ineffective if not downright confused some of the time.The other reason Brown should be fired is because he didn't belong as director of FEMA in the first place. As everyone knows by now, Brown got his original job as the General Counsel for FEMA (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/05/AR2005090501590.html) because of a personal connection with Joe Allbaugh. That's fine, because at least Brown was qualified to hold that position. But lives aren't at stake when you're FEMA's lawyer, they are when you're FEMA's director. Joe Allbaugh bears a great deal of responsibility for promoting Brown to deputy director and for (I assume) recommending his appointment to director to President Bush.When you finish sifting through all of the partisan red herrings that have been thrown out to try and blame Bush for this catastrophe (budget cuts to the Army Corps of Engineers, budget cuts to and reorganization of FEMA, National Guard troops in Iraq, wetlands policy, global warming policy, "Is President Bush a liar (of course, but this is a new lie to dissect) or is he an inept uninformed figurehead?" and on and on) the President's main responsibility lies with the fact one of the members of his administration looks to have done a poor job of managing the federal government's portion of planning and responding to this crisis.As captain of the team, Bush is responsible for his players and he should have recognized sooner that Michael Brown was not getting the job done.Having said that, it's worth noting that even a more competent, experienced FEMA director wouldn't have been able to stop the flooding or most likely to have foreseen the widespread looting and violence that followed and caused such havoc with rescue efforts. In fact, short of President Bush stepping in an using executive powers to order the National Guard to forcibly evacuate New Orleans (something I'm not sure is possible), a perfectly executed post-hurricane relief plan under the circumstances in New Orleans would have sped things up by maybe 24 hours. That's a lot of time in a crisis relief situation and certainly would have saved a few lives, but I'm not sure it would have drastically changed the dynamics of what we saw unfolding in New Orleans last week.Katrina really was a perfect storm in that she struck a city that was extremely vulnerable to flooding; a city with significant crime, drug, and poverty issues that was effectively rendered lawless for three days causing a complete social breakdown, and a city (and state) government with a long and notorious tradition for corruption and incompetence. All of the tragedy resulting from these things was compounded by a poor response by FEMA.

Bush's attempt at leadership after the New Orleans tragedy was all ready in full effect was to once again claim ignorance: “I don’t think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees.” Sounds familiar?Is President Bush a liar (of course, but this is a new lie to dissect) or is he an inept uninformed figurehead? Simple question which one. I'd say both. The quote on his desk should read: "The buck? What buck? I haven't seen the buck."I'd like to hear from someone who agrees with his quote.a few who don't: * ABC's Nightline, 9/15/04: "If it sounds overly dramatic, it is not. This city is surrounded by water on three sides. Lake Pontchartrain to the north and the Mississippi below. A major hurricane hitting right here would breach the levees. Water would cascade in, submerging the city. And because of the levees, it would have no way of escaping."* Associated Press, 5/16/04: "Officials have warned that if a major hurricane hits New Orleans, thousands of people could be killed and the city could be flooded for weeks as flood waters breach the levees ringing the city, which has the topography of a saucer that dips several feet below sea level in many places."* The Advocate, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 9/19/03: "... the Hurricane Center has developed an 'extremely detailed' map of New Orleans because the city, which sits about 6-feet below sea level and is surrounded by levees, is a 'worst-case scenario' for a major storm to hit. Knowing how far and how fast the water in the inlets will rise, evacuations and cleanups can be better planned, [LSU Hurricane Center director Ivor] van Heerden said. In the case of south Louisiana, a breach of the levees would trap the flood water on the wrong side of the bank once the bayous and rivers receded, van Heerden said."* Richmond Times-Dispatch, 8/6/02: "New Orleans, with more than 460,000 residents, lies entirely below sea level and depends on a system of levees to hold back the Gulf of Mexico. Some researchers say a Category 3 hurricane could breach the levees and kill thousands of people."

Re:“And given the poor coordination and lack of preparedness here, can you imagine Iraq?Not to mention how stupid for 2/3 of the Louisiana National Guard still being in Iraq. yet another reason why the war in iraq is so incredibly stupid - what a waste of lives and resources! of course, the private contractors are making a killing...”The FEDs have a lot of answering to do. However, FEMA is not a first response agency, the local and state governments are.Get your facts straight, Franklin. 70% of the LA Guard is STATESIDE, not deployed in Iraq.Would the additional 30% have made all the difference if the failures started BEFORE the event occurred? WOW! Imagine if the Mayor and the Governor had followed their own evacuation procedures found here: New Orleans emergency management plan http://www.cityofno.com/portal.aspx?portal=46&tabid=3Or imagine if the NOPD did their jobs the way the NYPD did on 9/11…. (Video of looting cops): http://prisonplanet.com/video/police_looting.wmvSocialism sucks, Franklin. Look what it did to personal responsibility in New Orleans.http://www.post-gazette.com/images3/20050906edit-martelle_450.jpg

Hey Franklin, I'm in a Kinko's in Asheville NC, just spent the afternoon with Nat Green and his sister Felicity. She's something of a local celebrity now, with a semi-daily blog:http://hangoverjournal.blogspot.com/Hadn't seen either of them in almost 20 years, but they're both doing well. You can catch up on both at the website. I gave them the Blowback cds you gave me last month, so you may be hearing from them shortly.

Hi everyone,What a bummer New Orleans!Maybe now people will pay attention to global warming?And given the poor coordination and lack of preparedness here, can you imagine Iraq?Not to mention how stupid for 2/3 of the Louisiana National Guard still being in Iraq. yet another reason why the war in iraq is so incredibly stupid - what a waste of lives and resources! of course, the private contractors are making a killing...All to DC for the demo on the 24th of September. One may or may not agree with every specific point of ANSWER's agenda, but the point of marching is that the war sucks and that we need to pull out now.