LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Making Baby Jesus Cry (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=691)

Tyrone Slothrop 09-08-2005 11:04 AM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I just read the first of you evidentiary "blogs" that I have ever read. I will never read another. Do you even read this stuff before you post it?
That's not a blog, dumb-ass.

Quote:

The reform Club's article speaks of is how to eliminate corruption in the programs where money flows. The "obstruction" you cite, is trying to change the programs to which money will flow.
If you want reform at the UN, you're going to have to get other countries on board. I know diplomacy is out of style right now, but that's what it will take. Doing what Bolton has done so soon before the summit is harmful to the cause.

The people who were previously negotiating for the U.S. were working for the Bush Administration, too.

Tyrone Slothrop 09-08-2005 11:07 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
You mean, as a matter of natural law?

Laws exist to compel people to do lots of things, such as get immunizations. Is it the absence of a carrot (such as being allowed to enroll in school) that troubles you?

Or are you saying just compensation is due for a temporary "taking"?
It's not going to be all that temporary in NO, and the decision about when to go back is something of a judgment call, no? People who are prudent could doubtless manage the risk of infection. The real reason to get people out of their houses is to make sure that emergency workers don't have to worry about them and their fires, right? But that's never been enough of a reason to force someone out of their house, has it?

notcasesensitive 09-08-2005 11:16 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It's not going to be all that temporary in NO, and the decision about when to go back is something of a judgment call, no? People who are prudent could doubtless manage the risk of infection. The real reason to get people out of their houses is to make sure that emergency workers don't have to worry about them and their fires, right? But that's never been enough of a reason to force someone out of their house, has it?
In a world of perfect information the Federal government would have a carrot, no? All these people will be eligible for FEMA funds at some point down the road and they are currently costing the government money by refusing to leave. Seems to me the government should have the right to offset any future funds against costs of patrolling/aiding the poeple who refuse to leave. They are tying up resources that should be used elsewhere (like, for example, counting and picking up the deceased).

Maybe not a big enough carrot, but it is a start. Unfortunately those who are left there seem to be unwilling to use common sense.

sgtclub 09-08-2005 11:20 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
"The U.S. agency leading Hurricane Katrina rescue efforts said Tuesday that it does not want the news media to photograph the dead as they are recovered."
-- Reuters

"We are in Jefferson Parish, just outside of New Orleans. At the National Guard checkpoint, they are under orders to turn away all media. All of the reporters are turning they’re TV trucks around."
-- Bob Brigham

What's the difference between this and you prohibiting Penske from posting 9/11 and Iraq photos.

Tyrone Slothrop 09-08-2005 11:20 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
In a world of perfect information the Federal government would have a carrot, no? All these people will be eligible for FEMA funds at some point down the road and they are currently costing the government money by refusing to leave. Seems to me the government should have the right to offset any future funds against costs of patrolling/aiding the poeple who refuse to leave. They are tying up resources that should be used elsewhere (like, for example, counting and picking up the deceased).

Maybe not a big enough carrot, but it is a start. Unfortunately those who are left there seem to be unwilling to use common sense.
Yes, this makes a lot of sense.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 09-08-2005 11:20 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
In a world of perfect information the Federal government would have a carrot, no? All these people will be eligible for FEMA funds at some point down the road and they are currently costing the government money by refusing to leave. Seems to me the government should have the right to offset any future funds against costs of patrolling/aiding the poeple who refuse to leave. They are tying up resources that should be used elsewhere (like, for example, counting and picking up the deceased).

Maybe not a big enough carrot, but it is a start. Unfortunately those who are left there seem to be unwilling to use common sense.
I think they don't get the $2000 debit card if they don't leave.

Ty, I'm not trying to argue the other side, because it's a fair question. Telling them it's in their best interest to leave, and then truly leaving them to fend for themselves seems like the best approach. (I suspect we'd still need patrols for looters and such regardless of whether anyone stays). Eventually they'll see it makes sense, what with no power, no water, and general anarchy.

Tyrone Slothrop 09-08-2005 11:22 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
What's the difference between this and you prohibiting Penske from posting 9/11 and Iraq photos.
Well, to start with, FEMA is the government, and this is a private forum. Also, FEMA is preventing anyone from getting the news at all, since (e.g.) the photos won't exist. I was forcing people to click on an extra link to see the photos, which is just not that much of a burden, even for someone as lazy as Shapey. Those seem like crucial distinctions to me.

Tyrone Slothrop 09-08-2005 11:24 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I think they don't get the $2000 debit card if they don't leave.

Ty, I'm not trying to argue the other side, because it's a fair question. Telling them it's in their best interest to leave, and then truly leaving them to fend for themselves seems like the best approach. (I suspect we'd still need patrols for looters and such regardless of whether anyone stays). Eventually they'll see it makes sense, what with no power, no water, and general anarchy.
I think the biggest problem these people cause is that they burn their own houses down by knocking over candles or charcoal grills. Obviously, this becomes a problem for the neighbors and the city as well.

I figured some of the libertarians around here would have a problem with this, but I guess not.

sgtclub 09-08-2005 11:28 AM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You'll be disappointed to know that John Bolton is doing his level best to prevent reform.
I don't know enough about this, but I found this part of the article interesting:
  • Of course, there is a lot more at stake in this summit than paying verbal homage to a series of unobjectionable and nonbinding development goals. On many issues, like calling for a new Human Rights Council, the American position is right on its merits. The problem, though, is that for the United States to get what it wants on the Human Rights Council -- which, broadly speaking, is an agreement that countries with poor human-rights records be barred from the council -- it needs to give a little elsewhere, particularly on development. To that end, the G-77 and some of our European allies are not likely to be hoodwinked into thinking that lip service to development goals is a major concession. Bolton may have wanted to shift the goalposts by fomenting controversy where it did not exist, but he soon found himself isolated.

So the problem seems to be not that the US is wrong, but that it is not bending to the same old bullshit that has been endemic in the UN for decades.

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 11:29 AM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I just read the first of you evidentiary "blogs" that I have ever read. I will never read another. Do you even read this stuff before you post it?

The reform Club's article speaks of is how to eliminate corruption in the programs where money flows. The "obstruction" you cite, is trying to change the programs to which money will flow. Unless I'm whiffing here, I can chalk up another win.
2.

Tyrone Slothrop 09-08-2005 11:31 AM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
I don't know enough about this, but I found this part of the article interesting:
  • Of course, there is a lot more at stake in this summit than paying verbal homage to a series of unobjectionable and nonbinding development goals. On many issues, like calling for a new Human Rights Council, the American position is right on its merits. The problem, though, is that for the United States to get what it wants on the Human Rights Council -- which, broadly speaking, is an agreement that countries with poor human-rights records be barred from the council -- it needs to give a little elsewhere, particularly on development. To that end, the G-77 and some of our European allies are not likely to be hoodwinked into thinking that lip service to development goals is a major concession. Bolton may have wanted to shift the goalposts by fomenting controversy where it did not exist, but he soon found himself isolated.

So the problem seems to be not that the US is wrong, but that it is not bending to the same old bullshit that has been endemic in the UN for decades.
Only if you assume that the previous Bush Administration negotiators were happy to go along with the same old bullshit. He's been in office for five years now, you know.

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 11:32 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
What's the difference between this and you prohibiting Penske from posting 9/11 and Iraq photos.
2. I didn't open this wound but I am glad someone had the moral decency to point it out.

Also, that wasn't me who posted it, I think it was Dr. Whoopie, or Big Swinging Dick Cheney.

sgtclub 09-08-2005 11:32 AM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Well, to start with, FEMA is the government, and this is a private forum. Also, FEMA is preventing anyone from getting the news at all, since (e.g.) the photos won't exist. I was forcing people to click on an extra link to see the photos, which is just not that much of a burden, even for someone as lazy as Shapey. Those seem like crucial distinctions to me.
Your second point is a fair one.
I don't think the media should be banned by law, but out of respect for the families of the dead, they shouldn't publish faces.

sgtclub 09-08-2005 11:34 AM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Only if you assume that the previous Bush Administration negotiators were happy to go along with the same old bullshit. He's been in office for five years now, you know.
If this is truly a legitimate reform effort, shouldn't the goal be to get it right?

Tyrone Slothrop 09-08-2005 12:02 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
If this is truly a legitimate reform effort, shouldn't the goal be to get it right?
Not at the expense of getting it done. This summit has been in the works for a while. A lot of foreign leaders are coming. It's an opportunity, and it would be a shame to blow it.

And this is not about the Bush Administration vs. the old way of doing things. This is about different factions within the Bush Administration. Bolton previously had a reputation for not being a team player -- this is more of the same.

sgtclub 09-08-2005 12:13 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Not at the expense of getting it done. This summit has been in the works for a while. A lot of foreign leaders are coming. It's an opportunity, and it would be a shame to blow it.

And this is not about the Bush Administration vs. the old way of doing things. This is about different factions within the Bush Administration. Bolton previously had a reputation for not being a team player -- this is more of the same.
So you take the view that any legislation is good legislation?

I don't have a view on Bolton, but someone who is not a team player, in one person's view, may be a person of integrity in another's.

Tyrone Slothrop 09-08-2005 12:15 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
So you take the view that any legislation is good legislation?
Of course not, but I have faith in Condi Rice to be pushing those efforts in the right direction. By all accounts, she had been investing a lot of time in this, and this is the sort of thing she does well.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 09-08-2005 12:17 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub

someone who is not a team player, in one person's view, may be a person of integrity in another's.
That's a good justification for the Saturday Night Massacre.

Replaced_Texan 09-08-2005 12:44 PM

I'm surprised there isn't more discussion about the invasion from Mexico this morning.

Anyhow, as I was entering my local watering hole last night, my sister was leaving. We exchanged pleasantries and she let me know that some of our friends were still inside, and "half of New Orleans."

The survivors have turned to calling my fair city "Houstorleans," and they looked like they were having a good time in our bar. A 40th birthday party was going on, someone bought a round of shots, and spirits seemed to be up.

It was nice to see. I wonder how many of them will end up staying here.

Hank Chinaski 09-08-2005 12:48 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
That's not a blog, dumb-ass.
By blog I mean some asshole's opinion. If this is something more, let me know



Quote:

If you want reform at the UN, you're going to have to get other countries on board. I know diplomacy is out of style right now, but that's what it will take. Doing what Bolton has done so soon before the summit is harmful to the cause.

The people who were previously negotiating for the U.S. were working for the Bush Administration, too.
Given that there has been no reform, might it not be a good idea to fuck up the chance for more graft $$$$ to flow?

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 01:38 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski


Given that there has been no reform, might it not be a good idea to fuck up the chance for more graft $$$$ to flow?

I think the time is ripe to pull out of the UN, its an anachronism and on top of that hopelessly corrupt. Let them pick up and move to France and plot our demise while the radical Islamic hordes descend on them.

http://www.ridersforjustice.com/images/un-annan.jpg

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
A 40th birthday party was going on, someone bought a round of shots, and spirits seemed to be up.
40!?!? You hang out with old folks. Was Bilmoure there?

Southern Patriot 09-08-2005 02:02 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I think the time is ripe to pull out of the UN, its an anachronism and on top of that hopelessly corrupt. Let them pick up and move to France and plot our demise while the radical Islamic hordes descend on them.

http://www.ridersforjustice.com/images/un-annan.jpg
I agree; we also should dissolve the United States, restoring all power to the states, where it belongs.

Are you with me, brother?

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 02:06 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Southern Patriot
I agree; we also should dissolve the United States, restoring all power to the states, where it belongs.

Are you with me, brother?
Actually yes. I think the future of the US is in an evolution to a conferacy of regional areas, which would be largely autonomous in domestic policy, but share a national defence and some other essential centralized functions.

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 02:07 PM

Ouiji buses
 
the more I look at the pictures of the drowned buses the more they seem to be telling me something about who is responsible. Anyone else see it?


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...busesnagin.jpg

futbol fan 09-08-2005 02:07 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Southern Patriot
I agree; we also should dissolve the United States, restoring all power to the states, where it belongs.

Are you with me, brother?
Considering how New York gets shafted on federal taxes paid compared to federal investment, I'd be down with secession. Hell, we're already called The Empire State.

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 02:13 PM

Upgrade me!
 
BREAKING:

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin garnered a ton of publicity with a profanity-laced interview he gave to WWL radio last Thursday, where he blasted President Bush and Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco for not coming to rescue his city in time.

However, Nagin's most newsworthy comments - where he explained why he didn't use hundreds of city school buses to evacuate his city's flood victims - went almost unnoticed.

Turns out, Nagin turned his nose up at the yellow buses, demanding more comfortable Greyhound coaches instead.
"I need 500 buses, man," he told WWL. "One of the briefings we had they were talking about getting, you know, public school bus drivers to come down here and bus people out of here."

Nagin described his response:

"I'm like - you've got to be kidding me. This is a natural disaster. Get every doggone Greyhound bus line in the country and get their asses moving to New Orleans."

While Nagin was waiting for his Greyhound fleet, Katrina's floodwaters swamped his school buses, rendering them unusable.



Wow, that flies in the face of the State of Louisiana disaster plan, pg 13, para 5 , dated 01/00 where it said:

'The primary means of hurricane evacuation will be personal vehicles. School and municipal buses, government-owned vehicles and vehicles provided by volunteer agencies may be used to provide transportation for individuals who lack transportation and require assistance in evacuating'

Will anyone but God hold this idiot accountable?He should be placed under arrest now and Bush should declare martial law.

http://tinypic.com/dfvsiq.jpg

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 02:14 PM

In other news . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by ironweed
Considering how New York gets shafted on federal taxes paid compared to federal investment, I'd be down with secession. Hell, we're already called The Empire State.
You keep Hillary and I'm down with that.

NotFromHere 09-08-2005 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
40!?!? You hang out with old folks. Was Bilmoure there?
Aren't you the one too old to enlist?

Ahhh. What am I doing HERE?

NotFromHere 09-08-2005 02:19 PM

OK, last thing and I'm gone
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan

It was nice to see. I wonder how many of them will end up staying here.
Isn't Barbara Bush afraid that they'll all stay?

remarks
Ok, that's it. I'm out of my element.

Secret_Agent_Man 09-08-2005 02:22 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Is that a reference to mcbvr6?
Maybe. That name tickles the back of my memory -- who/what is it?

S_A_M

Penske_Account 09-08-2005 02:25 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Maybe. That name tickles the back of my memory -- who/what is it?

S_A_M
My kryptonite.

Sexual Harassment Panda 09-08-2005 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NotFromHere
Aren't you the one too old to enlist?
Ah, but he was so much older then - he's younger than that now.

Secret_Agent_Man 09-08-2005 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The biggest shame in all of this is that Katrina didn't hit DC.
You say a lot of stupid shit, largely on purpose, but please don't wish a Category 4 hurricane with a 24 foot storm surge on my wife and children. :mad:

S_A_M

Hank Chinaski 09-08-2005 02:31 PM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Well, to start with, FEMA is the government, and this is a private forum. Also, FEMA is preventing anyone from getting the news at all, since (e.g.) the photos won't exist. I was forcing people to click on an extra link to see the photos, which is just not that much of a burden, even for someone as lazy as Shapey. Those seem like crucial distinctions to me.
But somewhere in your heart you sympathize with those who would censor? I mean, you do understand the urge?

Replaced_Texan 09-08-2005 02:36 PM

I don't know or care whose fault it is, but this should never happen again.

Hank Chinaski 09-08-2005 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I don't know or care whose fault it is, but this should never happen again.
1 why didn't they leave? - not blaming, but shit.
2 shouldn't paramedics help out?

Secret_Agent_Man 09-08-2005 02:41 PM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I agree that forcing people to leave is a good idea. I was just asking why it's OK. What gives the government the authority to evict people from unsafe buildings? (Not a rhetorical question -- I'm asking.)
With a State of Emergency declared by the proper officials, the government can do almost anything it wants in that area.

S_A_M

Replaced_Texan 09-08-2005 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
1 why didn't they leave? - not blaming, but shit.
2 shouldn't paramedics help out?
1.) I got the impression that they rather desperately wanted to leave and tried to do so many, many times and were prevented over and over again by law enforcement, whoever comandeered their busses and other assorted idiots.

2.) Where does it say they weren't helping out?

And Grenta officials, if this account even close to true, deserve the deepest circle of hell.

Secret_Agent_Man 09-08-2005 02:43 PM

WTF?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
What's the difference between this and you prohibiting Penske from posting 9/11 and Iraq photos.
The First Amendment?

S_A_M


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:56 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com