April 03, 2009
Massacre at American Civic Association in Binghamton, NY
Breaking news is that the
American Civic Association in Binghamton, NY today has been attacked. Casualty accounts vary depending on source, but it appears a minimum of 13 people have been killed and more than 20 have been wounded.
ABC News reports that the shooter committed suicide.
Please remember to take all early media accounts (including this blog entry) with a grain of salt until details are confirmed, and pray for the victims and their families.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
01:36 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 92 words, total size 1 kb.
February 20, 2009
The 11 Most Expensive Catastrophes in History
I received this via email this morning. I apologize in advance for not knowing who the author is, or knowing if it is particularly accurate, or who has the rights to the images, but found it interesting that it was circulating, and thought I'd share.
more...
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:32 AM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1275 words, total size 9 kb.
1
9/11 (WTC & Pentagon) should be in there around #7
Posted by: Neo at February 20, 2009 12:43 PM (Yozw9)
2
Funny, and sad.
9/11 and Spendulus are deliberate, malicious acts. Kind of a special category of catastrophe.
Posted by: Suburban Scarecrow at February 20, 2009 02:20 PM (EgFyo)
3
I think the most expensive catastrophy is the war LBJ declared on poverty in the 60's.
Posted by: Rick at February 20, 2009 04:27 PM (FWmwx)
4
Yea .. the "War on Poverty" has been the ultimate quagmire .. with no exit strategy in sight.
Posted by: Neo at February 21, 2009 11:07 AM (Yozw9)
5
Let's be realistic here. The first 10 Catastrophes that you cite from that email were accidents. President Obama was democratically elected by the American People. He inherited this mess that was created by both major political parties.
If you were the Head Potentate in Charge, what would you do or recommend be done to deal with this crisis?
Posted by: Dude at February 21, 2009 08:13 PM (byA+E)
6
I can tell you what I
wouldn't do.
I wouldn't try to solve the national debt by
doubling it.
I wouldn't eliminate millions of jobs by
taxing business out of existence.
I wouldn't instill fear in consumers by
falsely claiming this is the worst crisis in the nation's history.
I wouldn't promise one thing and
then do the opposite.
I agree the presidency is a tough job. And it takes a tough person to handle it. Time will tell just how tough our new president really is.
Posted by: Just Askin' at February 22, 2009 01:35 AM (esv00)
7
Just Askin'
Thanks for your response. I appreciate you taking the time to do so.
As I research the national debt issue I find it very difficult to find accurate information. At least that's a little easier than trying to find accurate info in regards to annual deficit spending, which generally seems to be calculated as a percentage of the yearly GDP instead of rather than in real dollars spent versus real dollars taken in by the treasury. To me, that seems to be shady accounting practices.
On October 4, 2008, Congress raised the national debt ceiling to $11.3 trillion. I'm not sure if that's what it really means or if that's calculated as a percentage of the GDP. Either way, are you suggesting that Obama has doubled that amount already?
Can you give me some examples of Obama "eliminating millions of jobs by taxing businesses out of existence", or any credible evidence that he intends to do so? I can't find any. I'll grant you that millions of jobs have been eliminated but there's no evidence that Obama's policies have contributed to that situation.
Many successful investors and respected economists the wold over with good track records for accurately predicting economic forecasts are indeed saying that our current crisis will in fact come to be known as worse than the "Great Depression". The collective wisdom and knowledge of these people suggests that this crisis will be known as the Greater Depression.
I don't claim to have enough sense to know if that's true or not. But I certainly wouldn't say that Obama's claim that we are in the midst of the worst crisis in our nation's history is false, if we're talking economic crisis.
As for promises not kept by ANY politician, well, we all know how that works. Even Senator McCain, for whom I have a lot of respect, commented on the campaign trail something to the effect of: "I think we all understand that no political candidate can keep all of the promises made during a presidential campaign". I think he nailed that correctly. Does that justify not keeping promises? No. But, I do think that's the reality of politics. That's certainly the historical track record of both major parties. Sad but true.
Posted by: Dude at February 22, 2009 09:30 AM (byA+E)
8
"I think we all understand that no political candidate can keep all of the promises made during a presidential campaign"
If you can't deliver something, don't promise it. Period.
Over promising and under delivering is the surest way to be considered a shit heel that exists. You can deliver the exact same thing, but by under promising and over delivering, you're now a hero rather than a bum.
The really good salesmen understand this intuitively and always shape customer expectations so they're more often in a position to deliver good news rather than bad.
Posted by: PA at February 24, 2009 04:02 PM (Ygf78)
9
In the real world, you're correct. Politics isn't the real world. I'm not saying that it's right, just the reality of a political campaign. All campaign promises should be taken with a grain of salt. I figure if a candidate can deliver on 50% of their promises, they're doing great!
Posted by: Dude at February 24, 2009 05:59 PM (byA+E)
10
Don't forget the Iraq War.
Posted by: Adam Stanhope at February 24, 2009 08:50 PM (O64c3)
11
I started a small business in 1991. over the years we have contributed to the health and welfare of dozens of employees and their families. Our customers are safer because of the services we offer. We have consistently discounted our prices for the elderly, widows and handicapped. 18 months ago, we totally restored a badly deteriorated chimney for a handicapped woman with no money down, and to date we have recovered about 30% of the cost. Our reputation has spread throughout N.E. PA and four additional states. HOWEVER, if I took money from a customer without delivering as promised, or stole money from their house while working there... "they" would throw MY ass in jail! Let's get real!!! These executives are taking ALL they can get because there is no one to stop them. The vacation homes, luxury cars, exotic cruises and private jets have been purchased with stolen money. Now the government has become a global "Fence" rewarding the criminals by paying for all this AND at the same time Allowing them to keep the goods they have stolen from the poor and working classes. What kind of government is THAT??? Oh, by the way, My mortgage is now 70 days past due! Dumfounded in PA.
Posted by: Ernest Houdeshell at February 25, 2009 10:23 AM (YtRc8)
12
I took out a 5 year fixed rate mortgage on my property 5 years ago as I belevived after the re election of the last cornel in chief this Credit crunch would happen 2 years ago.I though at the time the greed,creative accounting and lies must end soon.World com Ennron some one must wake up.but as with all meer mortals My influence is zero.
The questions I ask read like a Homer or Shakespear Tradegedy in sevral acts.
Act one
How much Toxic debt is there a realistic total?
why is the debt still rising when the value of everything else is in freefall.
Act two
Who is this money owed to and what cost of not paying can it get worse? write it off.
Act 3.
Who will have the nerve to realise that without effective regulation this will not end.
remember national debt gives bankers something to panic about. but it is fortune in the bank to a few individuals,and a huge burden to everyone.
they benifit you pay and pay.
Williewasp UK
Posted by: williewasp at February 27, 2009 03:01 PM (a/ayQ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 01, 2009
Obama's "Katrina on Ice"
More than 700,000 homes are
still without power in Kentucky due to a massive ice storm that struck the state
six days ago, forcing Gov. Steve Beshear to mobilize his entire state's Army and Air National Guard, a total of 4,600 men and the largest call-out in Kentucky's history.
FEMA has apparently been a no-show.
Our Hawaiian-borne President, basking in the glow of an overheated Oval Office and dining on $100/lb steak, has been utterly disinterested, indulging himself in vodka martinis at cocktail parties, as he continues to talk up the need for the $1.1 trillion dollar "stimulus" while simultaneously trying to lower expectations of its impact, knowing how little it will actually accomplish for the economy even as it furthers his political agenda.
So please pardon some of my friends if they engage in a little hyperbole as they notice that our Freshman Senator cum President is a bit too giddy with his newfound power and the D.C. cocktail circuit to notice that as many as 1.5 million Americans are in dire straits at this moment.
After all, Barack Obama probably doesn't hate white people no matter what 20-years in the pews of a racial separatist church suggests. It's just far harder to see a bunch of white people against ice and snow.
And Caleb, while I don't doubt that the sage of hopenchange has a distinct preference for the refined metropolitan areas of the nation over areas those that bitterly cling to the Bibles, guns, and snowshovels, I'm pretty sure even he doesn't consider Kentucky "southern", even on his 57-state map.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:13 PM
| Comments (44)
| Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.
1
My presidential expectation is frozen, sub-zero, and buried under generational debt. Burning through other people's money is the same old D.C. heat source. Toasty, mmmmm. It's good to be royalty!
Posted by: twolaneflash at February 01, 2009 12:36 PM (05dZx)
2
I read that piece at American Thinker's...
I think this could be a good blog to set up: a spoof of the news coverage of the Bush years.
I personally am going to consciously hold off on major attacks against Obama until he does stuff that warrant it. I'm specifically trying hard not to get into the "future telling" business that was the norm for the media in the first two years under Bush.
For example, the choice of Penetta for CIA concerns me a good bit, but I haven't said much about it.
I'd rather avoid the conservative blogsphere imitating not just the liberal one but the media itself.
But --- it might be nice to see a whole blog set up to mimic the Bush press as issues come up - like this ice storm one - complete with the type of hyperbole and doom-saying coverage in the Bush years.
Posted by: usinkorea at February 01, 2009 01:03 PM (DCtzE)
3
Has Kentucky's Governor requested Federal help? Because if he hasn't then there isn't anything the Fed's can do. This is the same reason it took forever to get Federal help in Katrina, because the Governor wasn't willing to call in Uncle Sam.
Posted by: Stan at February 01, 2009 01:06 PM (r8IAB)
4
With regard to Kentucky being southern ... he'd be wrong again if he didn't.
Mason Dixon: http://www.sonofthesouth.net/slavery/slave-maps/mason-dixon-line.htm
Posted by: Caleb Howe at February 01, 2009 01:13 PM (VyIhp)
5
Stan makes a good point. Local politicians have to request Federal help before they can get it. Otherwise it's "against the rules." Evidently Ray Nagin, New Orleans' mayor at the time of Katrina, and Governor Blanco, never took High School Civics classes or, more likely, never listened. The only Federal agency which has a mandate to intervene in a local crisis is the U.S. Coast Guard, which can act as a reinforcement of local law enforcement without being specifically requested to. The USCG did a spectacular job of rescuing citizens off rooftops and other flooded areas, while Nagin and Blanco dawdled and refused to ask for federal aid. Bush called Blanco twice urging her to request Federal help and intervention. She said she wanted to think about it.
The kicker here is that Nagin was re-elected New Orleans' mayor a few months after Katrina. What the heck were they thinking?
Marianne Matthews
Posted by: Marianne Matthews at February 01, 2009 02:24 PM (doHlr)
6
Well, he did think that Kentucky was way south in the 57 states during the campaign when actually its northwest end is adjacent to his state, Illinois.
Posted by: Al Reasin at February 01, 2009 02:27 PM (GAf+S)
7
Caleb, I could care less about the Manson-Nixon Line; it is an artifact of history at best. Ask and real southerner (or a real Yankee) what the southern states are, and you'll consistently see the Virginia and points south, and on very rare occasions, Maryland.
Kentucky? Not so much.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at February 01, 2009 02:45 PM (HcgFD)
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at February 01, 2009 03:00 PM (OmeRL)
9
Well you can consider it however you like. I was born, raised, and reside in the south, so I guess I get to count as a 'real' southerner thanks.
Posted by: Caleb Howe at February 01, 2009 03:25 PM (VyIhp)
10
Re: Kentucky, South or Not-South? Far as I'm concerned, if the natives speak with a Southern accent -- it's South. I'm in Illinois and we refer to the portion of the state that's adjacent to Kentucky as "Southern Illinois," not just for geographical reasons: They have a Southern accent.
Re: Obama's Katrina On Ice. When I read how much suffering there was I too thought about Obama's apparent lack of leadership during a weather disaster, but only as it compared to the coverage of Bush's in a similiar situation. However, unlike people who blame Bush for everything that's ever gone wrong, I know better.
That white people may be camouflaged by all that snow and ice didn't occur to me ... Funny stuff right there!
Posted by: DoorHold at February 01, 2009 03:47 PM (sw+43)
11
It sometimes appears Democrats are racist. But they aren't really. They also appear to engage in class warfare, but again not really. Democrats believe they are the Master Party, which trumps race and class every time. Non-Democrats can be divided into three groups. Hidden Democrats are people like Ralph Nader and Bernie Sanders. They are treated like Democrats. Most of the lapdog media belongs to this group. Potential Democrats, like illegal aliens and career criminals are next in line. So long as they don't oppose the Democratic agenda, they can be treated as people, Finally there are the opponents, Republicans, libertarians and conservatives. They are the enemy. They are not, in the Democrats view, strictly human. They can all die or at least just shut up and pay their taxes.
Honest Democrat is a contradiction in terms.
Posted by: Ken Hahn at February 01, 2009 05:04 PM (nHlbs)
12
Obama's well aware that the white "snow people" don't need rescuing from the ice. That's native ground for them. Of course, for the occasional non-white living in those flyover redneck states, it serves them right for leaving the plantation. They're of little utility to Obama now, so he can let them freeze.
Posted by: HatlessHessian at February 01, 2009 05:42 PM (7r7wy)
13
why should the press be concerned.....???
Bush isn't in office, and they don't want to point any bad fingers at Obie-1-Kanobee......
so guess what..... IT NEVER HAPPENED......
people in Kentucky suck and should eat shit and die, as far as the press is concerned......
Posted by: danpa at February 01, 2009 06:01 PM (/vFCA)
14
They're working on it:
http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=47383
Why the press doesn't want to mention it much is another story.
Posted by: arb at February 01, 2009 07:38 PM (x1CDD)
15
Thanks arb. Now if Confederate Yankee would bother to do a touch of research he wouldn't make claims like FEMA is a 'no show.' More weak sauce.
And I have to ask, was Mason-Nixon a typo, or did you actually think that was the name of the line?
Posted by: SPW at February 01, 2009 08:05 PM (VftLx)
16
Bob, an Air Force buddy of mine is from Lawrenceburg, KY. Tell him he's not from the south and he might want to punch you in the mouth.
Posted by: Tim at February 01, 2009 08:09 PM (sp1sQ)
17
"Manson-Nixon?"
That's a Robin Williams line. He's always felt comfortable throwing gratuitous insults at Southerners. First of all, he's usually in New York or California. Second of all, he thinks they aren't smart enough to understand him.
Posted by: pst314 at February 01, 2009 10:14 PM (XP0Bd)
18
FEMA's working on it? That's all you got? Was that enough for you during Katrina? Amazing the things that are OK as long as a Democrat is in charge. Hey, maybe it will be alright to leave Iraq victoriously, too.
Posted by: Tim at February 01, 2009 10:38 PM (sp1sQ)
19
Tim, I simply posted the facts. You have no idea what my opinion is of the situation, or my pokitics in general. But here's a clue - if I disagreed with CY in general, I wouldn't be hanging around here.
Posted by: arb at February 01, 2009 11:25 PM (tzgwl)
20
Not only my pokitics, but also my politics. :-}
Posted by: arb at February 01, 2009 11:27 PM (tzgwl)
21
Sorry, Arb. I should have been more specific and noted that I was replying to STP, or whatever he calls himself. He seemed to think that any critiscism of FEMA is 'weak sauce' because FEMA is thinking about maybe getting around to planning to respond to this situation. That'll teach me to troll around websites and watch football at the same time.
Posted by: Tim at February 01, 2009 11:36 PM (sp1sQ)
22
Well, according to some local reporting FEMA is coming up with what the state is asking for Communications support and fuel supplies.
My question is why is the MSM not covering this one way or the other.
Posted by: OldDog at February 01, 2009 11:50 PM (CRC5/)
23
That's the point. The point isn't that Obama's not doing enough or that FEMA was hampered by weather. The point is the press lied and made it sound like Bush could call out the national guard on his own (he can't) or that he should have parachuted in to NOLA with supplies, himself. Can you imagine if Bush had eaten steak with congress and gone to a cocktail party 5 days into Katrina? The point is the press crucified Bush for this, and the public bought it, and the press learned they could tell the public anything or NOT tell the public anything.
So, the public does not hear about this, and no one is saying "why isn't Obama doing something." The press sucks.
Posted by: Sally at February 01, 2009 11:57 PM (N0hv7)
24
This from a Cincinnati paper:
"President Obama has declared Kentucky a federal disaster area in the wake of an ice and snow storm that left 600,000 residents without power.
Obama approved Kentucky Gov. Steve BeshearÂ’s request for the declaration, according to a news release from the governorÂ’s office. That will activate federal programs to assist the state in its recovery effort."
The article is dated Jan. 29th.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) at February 02, 2009 12:15 AM (nas9l)
25
The storm hit on 27th.
The point still holds. If this was Bush eating steak, watching football etc, he'd be crucified for it.
But it's Obama. So most people don't even know that these people are hurting
Posted by: sally at February 02, 2009 12:18 AM (N0hv7)
26
Upon moving to Mass after growing up in St. Louis I was surprised to discover that I was from the South. Apparently anything south of Ohio is Pennsyltucky.
OTOH, my neighbor from deep-in-the-woods Kentucky claims she grew up in the Midwest. We always considered Kentucky part of the South.
Border state identity crisis. If you warrant a star on the Stars and Bars, I suppose you can go either way.
But back to the issue at hand...have there been any Sean Penn sightings?
Posted by: JohnL at February 02, 2009 06:37 AM (ywtR/)
27
At the risk of sounding like Jesse Jackson, the press believe "no blame, no fame." Kentucky is a conservative democrat state - 57% to 36% republican. Both governor and Lt governor are donks and they have only 6% blacks. Worst of all, the Bluegrass State cast its 8 electoral votes against Obama, who of course, is above all criticism. Besides, the press corp is still hot on the Obama puppy story and can't be troubled by problems in the wilderness of rural America. No one in New York or Washington cares about them.
Fortunately, the people of Kentucky, like most Southerners, already have rather low expectations of Washington. Here in Alabama, ice storms are particularly destructive. Couple people who drive too fast and have no experience with "winter" conditions with a wooded, mountainous terrain and you see extended periods of lost power. I bought a generator that powers my house as long as a propane truck can get in every 5 days. My neighbors know that when the power goes down, they can come to my house to get ice, take showers, do their laundry, check their email or cook a hot meal. It's like a block party. FEMA is for wards of the state.
If I were a Kentucky conservative, I would be helping my neighbors and quietly asking my conservative democrat friends how they feel about all democrat government now. It worked for Bobby Jindal in Louisiana.
Posted by: arch at February 02, 2009 08:19 AM (ZZW37)
28
As a native Kentuckian who lives along the Ohio River and has to tolerate the damned Hoosiers, and other Yankees, to the north, Kentucky is a southern state. Regardless of how the Civil War transpired, most Kentuckians associate themselves with the south.
Posted by: Tom Seaver at February 02, 2009 11:55 AM (T4dLI)
29
Tim,
My criticism of CY is that he publishes a post saying that FEMA has been a "no show" when that is clearly not the case. He hasn't taken anytime to look into the situation other than to cruise other blogs. Essentially his comment on FEMA is completely unsubstantiated. Hence it is 'weak sauce.'
The notion that this natural disaster is on par with Katrina seems a stretch. As of a couple of days ago, the total death toll for the ice storm was at 46. Katrina killed a little more than 1800 people and 700,000 people were displaced from their homes. Katrina was on a completely different level in terms of destruction.
I wouldn't be surprised if Obama's engagement for this ice storm is equal to what Bush has done in the past for other natural disasters. He's declared it a federal disaster, when the weather clears he'll survey the damage and meet with the citizens. It will be your standard fare, and Bush would have not done much more.
If you want true comparisons then pick any low to moderate level natural disaster during Bush's term, examine how he treated it, and then compare that to Obama's actions.
Bush's biggest mistake was he treated Katrina, from a press standpoint, like a regular low to moderate level disaster instead of the high level one. Many in the Republican party have said it was the moment Bush lost his credibility and the party started it's downward slide.
CY would like this to signal the end of Obama's political career, but that isn't gong to happen in this case. Maybe later, but not with this.
Posted by: SPW at February 02, 2009 02:01 PM (VftLx)
30
I'm confused.
How can nearly 2 million blacks get into Washington DC in sub zero temps in 1 day,
when 200,000 couldn't get out of New Orleans at 85 degrees with four days notice?
Posted by: JosephineSouthern at February 02, 2009 04:26 PM (AKl3/)
31
President Bush did not treat Katrina as a "low to moderate" disaster, as SPW says. Even before Katrina made landfall he declared it a disaster, so that money and aid would be immediately available. He followed up with everything he could do on a Federal level, including FEMA. The folks who were dilatory about their response were Mayor Nagin and Gov. Blanco. Obama declared a disaster two days after the power outage for one million people in the middle of a cold winter. FEMA hasn't showed up yet in Kentucky... ohh, wait, I think they're thinking about it.
As a resident of Houston, Texas, I think I probably know more than most folks who only listened to the mainstream press about this. The US Coast Guard, the only Federally controlled agency which is empowered to respond to local emergencies without having to be requested, did a magnificent job rescuing folks from the rooftops of their flooded homes by helicopter, and by boat, while Gov. Blanco was still "thinkin' about it."
We have always known that Louisiana is a politically corrupt state, and they acted as we expected -- too little and too late. We sheltered more than 75,000 of New Orleans refugees here in Houston with only 24 hours' notice to prepare. That's the way we do things in Texas. The right way.
Marianne
Posted by: Marianne Matthews at February 02, 2009 06:28 PM (doHlr)
32
Marianne,
I stated he treated it "from a press standpoint" as low to moderate, i.e. he sat in Crawford strumming a guitar and when he did come to New Orleans he made a fool of himself at a press conference where he joked about coming to N.O. in college to party. He did not have his game face on and that's what people remember. His "your doin' a heckuva job Brownie" to the FEMA director was pure comedy and undercut his legitimacy and leadership ability. Period.
Posted by: SPW at February 02, 2009 08:21 PM (VftLx)
33
SPW
You are a fool. George Bush was a caring president. Wait four years and you will understand
Posted by: arch at February 02, 2009 09:56 PM (ZZW37)
34
I'm a Kentuckian, born and raised, currently freezing my rump off in the Storm the Media Forgot- and we are definitely part of "the South." Forget the Maxon-Dixon line, the beverage line is a better indicator of southern-ness. If you order tea in a restaurant and it comes on ice in a glass, you're in the south. If your waitress asks, "What kind of coke do you want?" and she's offering Pepsi products, you're in the south.
Posted by: Ornithophobe at February 02, 2009 11:39 PM (axnX5)
35
Orn,
You convinced me. It don't get much more southern than that.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at February 02, 2009 11:42 PM (HcgFD)
36
I'm not sure if it's because I'm a woman, but I'm looking at the men arguing politics about these 1.5 million people without power - and thinking it's just wrong. We really SHOULD CARE about these people - and THAT'S why it matters that Obama isn't doing anything!!!! People are dying. This isn't a political chip to play to criticize Obama and compare this to Bush on a political level. This is real human suffering, clearly more help is needed, and I want to know why this isn't being resolved. Why isn't business calling in other workers from outside states? (The power company). Why isn't FEMA doing something (not that I'm "for" FEMA - but since they stole our money in taxes - do the work!!!) It's ridiculous FEMA emergency funds were used for the Obama inauguration - while 1.5 million people go with out power in the freezing cold. This is UNAMERICAN!! The fake "President-elect's" pomp more worthy of FEMA funds than freezing Americans?? What a crock. Give us our tax money back or spend it when it's really needed. People are suffering. A REAL CRY should be going out - not this political hype stuff that makes it sound like most commenters on this post really don't care. I'm not seeing sincere concern for these people. It just doesn't sound right to me that people are crying about Bush. You care more about political wrangling than you do about these 1.5 million people... seems like. Something about it doesn't ring true to me.
Posted by: l at February 03, 2009 08:23 AM (KquNY)
37
Northwest Arkansas has been hit pretty hard by this ice storm. (Nothing as vast as Kentucky.) We have had power crews come in from as far away as Mt. Airy, NC. They had to have left NC sometime Monday afternoon as soon as the ice storm hit. I don't know who contacted them or how it was arranged but they were here. Now we do still have pockets without power. I do not have power yet, out since last Tuesday am. They are having to clear trees before things can be resurrected and that takes time. We are persevering but the novelty of it all is wearing off. We do have a generator and can make it to the gas station for fuel for it. If Kentucky was as on the ball as Ark was, they should have power crews there from other areas. I don't know if this is arranged by the power companies or the state. Fortunately the weather has not been too extreme here the last few days so things have been bearable. I understand Ky is schduled for more snow. Not a good thing.
On another note, I have never understood why people think that a particular location (say New Orleans) that took several centuries to build should be back up and running again within a few weeks or years for that matter. And what do you expect is going to happen when you build it BELOW SEA LEVEL?
Posted by: Razorgirl at February 03, 2009 12:09 PM (gHNO5)
38
Actually, KY has a deal with several other states whereby they share repair crews. I've seen massive convoys of out-of-state electrical trucks moving through Louisville this week. My kids call 'em "the Lights Brigade."
Posted by: Ornithophobe at February 03, 2009 03:10 PM (axnX5)
39
remember when the governor of kentucky declared a state of emergency during Hurricane Ike
that was weird
Posted by: energon international homerule strategies at February 03, 2009 10:50 PM (T0NfL)
40
SPW posts:
I wouldn't be surprised if Obama's engagement for this ice storm is equal to what Bush has done in the past for other natural disasters. He's declared it a federal disaster, when the weather clears he'll survey the damage and meet with the citizens. It will be your standard fare, and Bush would have not done much more.
Please.
First of all, the primary responsibility for disaster response lies with the community and the state. FEMA has always been an "after-the-fact" agency that handles the long-term effects. Their minimum response time is 3 days.
Secondly, what else would you realistically expect the President to do? Disaster response isn't his job, that's what the state governors and FEMA are for! Bush did precisely what he was supposed to do, which is
stay out of the way of the first-responders and offer moral support.
Where the heck do people get this idea that the
Federal government, much less the President, is supposed be the first responder?
Posted by: PaulB at February 04, 2009 02:36 PM (tfMGP)
41
I stated he treated it "from a press standpoint" as low to moderate...
Because the "press standpoint" is the trooth! But I notice they didn't eviscerate Nagin who spewed idiocy after idiocy in the wake of Katrina, nor did they eviscerate Blanco the Blockade.
Getting things done is irrelevant. Gotta manage the press standpoint.
Posted by: Pablo at February 04, 2009 02:37 PM (yTndK)
42
Where the heck do people get this idea that the Federal government, much less the President, is supposed be the first responder?
From the "press standpoint". That's inoperative for the next 4 years, though.
Posted by: Pablo at February 04, 2009 02:39 PM (yTndK)
43
We live in north central Arkansas, and our power was finally restored last night. There are no words to describe the devastation.
We've been all over two counties, clearing roads and doing welfare checks. Other than the thousands of electric company personnel who responded from all over the South (our heroes) we've been on our own.
In ten days, here's what I HAVEN'T seen: FEMA. The Salvation Army. The Red Cross. The National Guard. The mobile units of ANY insurance company.
The single moment we were a blip on Obama's radar, he promised to send AmeriCorp (?!) to help clear roads. I guess they got lost, because they damn sure didn't show up here.
Posted by: lady red at February 06, 2009 10:27 AM (6R27R)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 16, 2009
Women and Children First
155 souls crash-landed into the freezing cold waters of the Hudson River yesterday afternoon, and through particularly brilliant examples of piloting skill, courage, heart and determination, the rapid response of an inspiring cast of everyday heroes and not a little divine providence, nobody died.
Well done.
I may get frustrated with my fellow Americans from time to time, but in those times that it all falls apart, there are simply no other people on this planet that I'd rather have at my back.
God bless you all.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:43 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.
September 06, 2008
Much Ado About Nothing
TS Hannah certainly may have had a more substantial impact south and east of here (and certainly along the beaches), but what I've seen thus far isn't anything you'd recognize from the ground as anything more than a series of showers... and I've got a pretty good vantage point:
In this satellite image snagged the image from the Weather Channel just a few minutes ago, I'm just inside the right side of the nasty little red dot, and we're not seeing much of anything right now, even though we've had an estimated 4 inches of rain overnight.
Let's hope everyone makes it out with as little damage as we have thus far.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
06:48 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Rain in Kill Devil Hills. Kind of like a mild tropical northeaster
Posted by: Delphine Amrhein at September 06, 2008 07:43 AM (e9C0j)
2
Clarification - the wind is now blowing from the southwest in mild gusts in Kill Devil Hills on the Outer Banks of North Carolina.
Posted by: Delphine Amrhein at September 06, 2008 07:51 AM (e9C0j)
3
Steady rain here in Durham. Occasional strong gusts of wind, but so far, no damage that I have seen or heard about. Getting some rain is a good thing.
Posted by: Nothere at September 06, 2008 07:54 AM (j5r0p)
4
Steady light to moderate rain, in Stafford, VA. Right on I-95, approx. 40 miles south of DC.
Posted by: Mark at September 06, 2008 08:11 AM (pJnZQ)
5
Yeah, I'm here in Apex, NC - blogging about it - taking some video.
No much to it. Still, it helps alleviate our drought situation.
Posted by: Dean Peters at September 06, 2008 08:21 AM (OvUft)
6
Well, I'm in Glendale, AZ, where it's 77, sunny, and nary a cloud in the sky! Go figure! ;-)
Actually, I originally from eastern NC and glad to hear that there's been little damage. Hopefully the rain will help with the current drought.
Posted by: formertucsonan at September 06, 2008 09:25 AM (141qm)
7
Pouring down rain now (11 am) in northern Chesterfield County (just south of Richmond). It rained all night, too, but not as hard. The sump pump hasn't kicked in yet, but I expect it to shortly. Suits me - we need the rain.
Some wind, some higher gusts. So far it's brought down several small already-dead limbs from the trees in my yard, and one decent-sized still-living (until now) limb. Radio says 4000 without power in the Richmond area, & downed power line across I-95 near Atlee interchange has northbound 95 completely stopped (about an hour ago - dunno if it's fixed or not yet).
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut at September 06, 2008 10:03 AM (0OyH0)
8
11:30 am - sump pump just kicked in.
Glorious rain! :-D
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut at September 06, 2008 10:30 AM (0OyH0)
9
Steady rain up here in Faurfax, VA...20-25 miles outside DC. No real winds though
Posted by: Nico at September 06, 2008 10:49 AM (qOSkY)
10
Not a thing here in Monroe North Carolina (just southeast of Charlotte)
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at September 06, 2008 11:21 AM (kNqJV)
11
I'm in Holly Springs. We didn't even get significant flooding here. The creek in our back yard never rose above its banks, which it certainly did during the hurricanes that have come here in the past.
Posted by: Pat Berry at September 06, 2008 11:11 PM (0suEp)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 30, 2008
Gustav Takes Aim At The Gulf Coast
I've got a
bad feeling about this.
I hope those along the Gulf coastline are in the process of packing up and heading out, especially those in New Orleans. There will be no shelters of last resort; the Superdome will be locked down.
It doesn't matter where you hide...
Fragments of the Mississippi Gulf Coast after Katrina
...storms this size don't leave much behind.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
06:30 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Thanks CY. We have done a lot of evacuations already today in Beaumont,Tx. We have a Mandatory Evacuation starting at 6am on Sunday, but the town looks like everyone is taking to the notices, not alot of heavy traffic. WB offered to come and stay here for a while, but I told him that he was close enough to us already.. say a Prayer for the Gulf coast.. Dan
Posted by: Dan Howell at August 30, 2008 06:47 PM (isArA)
2
I expect things will go much more smoothly this time around with Bobby Jindal in there as governor. We know the complete imcompetence of both Blanco and Nagin. Hopefully Nagin learned something but being a democrat I doubt it. Blaming everything on Bush worked last time so I suppose he'll just sit on his butt like during Katrina and practice blaming everything on the current administration.
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at August 30, 2008 08:37 PM (kNqJV)
3
He can't do it, though. With a Republican governor in office, and the conventioneers planning to become rescuers, Nagin is going to look like the worst sort of bum if he just sits on his assets.
Posted by: Trish at August 30, 2008 10:56 PM (lT9Th)
4
Still offering to come "house-sit" for Dan, but he keeps turning me down. Go figure...
So far, we're ok in P-cola and are just starting to get some of the rains associated with Gustov. We're told that it should not be anything more than 30mph winds here...a lot better than they're going to get over in N.O. and at Dan's house (if the storm stays its course).
Hang tight, Dan. You've done Rita in '05--I did Ivan in '04 and Dennis in '05. Our thoughts and prays are with you...Oh yeah,remind me again why we still live here?
Posted by: WB at August 30, 2008 11:21 PM (PotyX)
5
stupi, I guess, for living here in the hurricane alley. Hang tight WB and thanks for the offer of house sitting, but I know what you do to houses..
Posted by: Dan Howell at August 31, 2008 05:18 AM (isArA)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 28, 2008
Small Miracles
There was a shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, TN yesterday during a children's play. Two people have died, and seven more are recovering from injuries that resulted when an unemployed man with a long history of verbal hostility against Christians targeted this specific congregation because he also hated liberals and gays.
While many in the political blogosphere will no doubt focus on the fact that Adkisson said he hated liberals and gays, the fact of the matter is that the didn't target a gay club or local progressive political groups, he specifically targeted a church. He did so after expressing beliefs to neighbors in the past that he had an abiding anger against Christianity, an anger that appears rooted in his childhood. The church appears to have been targeted because it embodied at least three things this pathetic human being hated, not just the one or two things I know certain critics will single out as they view the world through their own warped prisms.
Adkisson had apparently planned to keep murdering church-goers until gunned down by police. He planned to keep killing innocents until he died in a hail of police bullets... suicide-by-cop. But he was instead tackled and restrained by church-goers just seconds into his attack as he attempted to reload after shooting his shotgun's magazine dry.
The two people that died were 60 and 61. Those wounded were 38, 41, 42, 68, 69, 71, and 76. Though Adkisson walked past an assembled group of children outside the sanctuary awaiting their stage call, he did not fire on them. No children were physically injured, and no parents of young children were killed, creating orphans. There is reason to be thankful for that.
Though he was found with 73 live 12-gauge shotgun cartridges, he was only able to fire 3 before being tackled while trying to reload. Most semi-automatic and pump shotguns hold 5 rounds of 12-gauge ammunition, unless plugged for bird-hunting. Those two additional shots would have taken less than a second to fire, and could have hurt several more people, at least. There is reason to be thankful that the previous owner of the gun was probably a bird hunter. There is reason to be thankful that Adkisson apparently didn't know enough to remove the plug.
Sunday was a horrible day for the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church, and there will be terrible days ahead as they seek to recover, and to heal.
But most will heal, and a day that could have been far worse was not, thanks to small miracles.
Update: Apparently there are some people who want to go on a shrieking political bender about this tragedy (both right and left), but that isn't going to happen here. Comments off.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:11 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 465 words, total size 3 kb.
1
You turned a single report of a neighbor that he had spoken about Christianity into "a long history of verbal hostility against Christians."
Sorry, not buying it.
I suggest you educate yourself about Unitarian Universalism. It's not a Christian religion. It is by its very nature a liberal religion, and was the first major American religion to first welcome and later marry gays and lesbians. Your hero's four-page manifesto made it very clear whom he viewed as the enemy--it was liberals.
So I would suggest you just own the plain fact here--your side launched a terrorist attack yesterday. Two innocent Americans died. Why does your side hate America so much?
Posted by: Charles Giacometti at July 28, 2008 12:43 PM (q+jAl)
2
Kudos to the men that tackled him.
Posted by: feeblemind at July 28, 2008 12:47 PM (DWaxb)
3
It's funny, the right is disavowing him not because he's a murderer but because he was on welfare on food stamps and therefore *couldn't* be a republican.
Just like liberals couldn't possibly be found in a church.
Posted by: angryflower at July 28, 2008 12:48 PM (uMRcI)
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at July 28, 2008 12:55 PM (kNqJV)
5
"the right is disavowing him not because he's a murderer but because he was on welfare on food stamps"
Another flat out lie from a liberal. The intellectual dishonesty on the left is stunning. As anyone here can see no one has said anything close to what the liar angryflower says we said. Is lying the strategy for the left?
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at July 28, 2008 12:58 PM (kNqJV)
6
Charles Giacometti... LOL. I recognized your name, but Googled it
just to be sure. I won't be surprised the day that we read your name in the news, as you have a tendency towards provocation, self importance, and misguided anger that I'm sure Adkisson would identify with.
angryflower you are.. well,
angry, and apparently did not read this post ( which didn't say word one about food stamps or speculate about his party affiliation).
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at July 28, 2008 01:10 PM (xNV2a)
7
Poor Cornfed Yankee. First he creates a flimsy argument that I tore to shreds, then he responds with a pure ad hominem, complete with a childish "LOL."
Then he tries to compare me with his hero Adkisson.
I guess when you get your BA and MA from Bugtussle U, this is the best you can do.
Sorry, Cornfed, Your side launched a terrorist attack yesterday. Have the courage to live with it. You have to honest ask yourself the question, why do you hate America so much?
Posted by: Charles Giacometti at July 28, 2008 01:21 PM (LY5nS)
8
CY - did you read some part of this guy's letter that nobody else has?
Giacometti was right - you seem to be whitewashing this already. You are cherry picking media quotes to create a distraction from the real issue here. Unless you read the whole letter already, by all media accounts, this guy was motivated by hate of the "liberal movement" and gays.
That's pretty clear, man.
Posted by: jesus saves all at July 28, 2008 01:26 PM (xuaxV)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
June 18, 2008
Gore Shame
The worlds greatest environmental hypocrite
wastes so much energy that his consumption would power 232 normal homes.
Sadly not content with even that level of wastefulness, the Goracle has now taken to directly belching balls of energy into the atmosphere.
Update: Steve Strum notes (correctly) that Gore's annual usage would power 232 normal homes for a month. Not quite as bad as originally thought, but still horrific.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:44 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Bob: you're mixing apples and oranges, 232 refers to the number of homes that could be powered for a MONTH by Gore's ANNUAL energy usage.
Posted by: steve sturm at June 18, 2008 08:59 AM (QVo1E)
2
True Steve but that still leaves him with about a 12 to 1 ratio for annual consumption.
Now do you want to break it down by sq ft or cubic foot volume since his house is larger than the 'average' house.
Don't bother because no matter how you cut it he is sucking up a lot more power than others no matter how you cut it.
Posted by: JustADude at June 18, 2008 09:33 AM (1aM/I)
3
Horrific is right.
The link states that Al uses 213,210 kWh per year while the average home uses 11,040 kWh. If my math is correct (and it rarely is so someone needs to check me)then Al uses 202,170 more kWh's than the average household per year. This equates to a 1831.25% increase in kWh over the average home.
That's quite a lot ...
Posted by: Dan Irving at June 18, 2008 09:39 AM (zw8QA)
4
Irony= George Bush's Western White House is much more
energy efficient than the Goracles.
Manbearpig is just another power-hungry and greedy "reformer" who sees no problem with living well while imposing hardship upon everyone else. Reminds me of the communist party apparatchiks in the old USSR who lived on western delicacies while the proles eked out a living.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 18, 2008 09:47 AM (TzLpv)
5
213,210/(232 x 12) = 72.5 kWh/month = a $4.35 monthly electricity bill where I live. Thanks for the good news! Yippie!
Posted by: erik at June 19, 2008 01:51 AM (lQA7F)
6
Of course, it would be more accurate to say that GoreÂ’s
20-room, 10,000-square-foot house in which he and his family run small businesses employing a staff of 20-odd people, and have a round-the-clock security detail — plus a guest-house and some outbuildings -– uses 19.3 times the amount of power as an average housing unit.
No shit, Sherlock.
To which we would also add that Gore participates in Nashville ElectricÂ’s Green Power Switch program, in which he pays a premium for power that comes from renewable sources. And also that the house is carbon-neutral due to offsets. And so on down the line, and so forth.
Posted by: Iggy at June 19, 2008 04:50 PM (0ZfYV)
7
Oh, goody, someone mentioned offsets!
Did you know, Iggy, that Algore "purchases" his offsets from a company called
Generation Investment Management?
Did you also know, Iggy, that Algore is,
according to the company's own website, Chairman of GIM?
In other words, he is purchasing the offsets...
FROM HIMSELF!
To put it in terms even a lefty can understand... all he is doing to "purchase" these offsets is taking money from his right pocket and putting it in his left pocket.
Gee, ain't that grand?
You might also
read up on how "offsets" really work--or don't.
Posted by: C-C-G at June 19, 2008 06:51 PM (Hc4y8)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 08, 2008
Huh?
CNN has an article posted this AM about the
on-going misery in Myanmar resulting from the recent cyclone that devastated the Irrawaddy delta and has left as many as 100,000 dead. The country's paranoid military dictatorship is hampering aid efforts, and as a result, is no doubt adding to the number of dead and injured.
In writing about the U.S. forces in the area poised to help if the dictatorship will only allow international aid, CNN makes the following curious claim (in bold):
The U.S has also been pushing for access, pledging $3.25 million and offering to send U.S. Navy ships to the region to help relief efforts.
The U.S. military had already flown six helicopters on to a Thai airbase, as Washington awaits permission to go into the south Asian country, two senior military officials told CNN's Barbara Starr.
In addition, several C-130 cargo aircraft aboard the USS Essex, which was conducting an exercise in the region, were available for relief missions.
That is one neat trick.
Essex is a Wasp-class amphibious assault ship. It is perhaps the most capable ship class in the world when it comes to providing help in the event of coastal disasters such as hurricane and cyclones due to its onboard 600-bed hospital, large helicopter contingent with search and rescue and transport capability, and well deck that houses LCACS and LCUs capable of landing heavy supplies and vehicles directly onto the beach. Essex is capable of a lot of things... but launching and landing a C-130 is not remotely among their capabilities.
Either Essex is merely being used to haul C-130s to the region that will have to be offloaded in port before being used, or CNN drastically has their story wrong. I suspect the former over the latter but you never know.
After all... "this is CNN."
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:54 AM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 306 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Wow, I knew the Hurcules is one hell of a work horse but I didnt know it was a transformer too.
Posted by: D-lo at May 08, 2008 09:44 AM (4FSAp)
2
Another fine example of the cracker jack military analysts employed by today's MSM. They're cracked, Jack!
Posted by: daleyrocks at May 08, 2008 10:22 AM (0pZel)
3
This cyclone was all Bush's fault.
The wackjobs in the Myanmar/Burmese government that won't let aid in the country--that's all Bush's fault.
The screwups in reporting by CNN--that's all Bush's fault.
I think I've got tomorrow's CNN story line down pat. But the punchline "it's all Bush's fault" never changes at CNN
Posted by: Michael J. Myers at May 08, 2008 10:35 AM (LZ3cP)
4
Furthermore, why haul C-130's? Wouldn't it be more efficient just to fly the Hercules in rather than wasting deck space?
I could be mistaken, but looking at a Wasp class list of compliment aircraft, they are all vertical take-off. (In other words, probably no catapult nor arresting lines.) Now I know the C-130 has exceptional STOL capabilities (it has unassisted landings and take-offs on the USS Forrestal - deck length 1060ft) and may even be able to land and take off on the 844ft deck of the USS Essex, but with a wingspan of 132ft, landing on the deck of ship with a beam of 106ft might be problematic.
Posted by: bains at May 08, 2008 10:58 AM (xpcgN)
5
"This is CNN. We don't need no steenking facts, man."
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at May 08, 2008 11:45 AM (0wfsk)
6
After thought: They (CNN) are probably hurting bad after the MSNBC arctic penguin coup.
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at May 08, 2008 11:47 AM (0wfsk)
7
In point of fact, C-130's
have landed aboard a U.S. Navy carrier. Unfortunately for CNN, it was one of the CVA(N)
supercarriers with a flight deck in excess of 1,000 feet. The
Wasp would fit comfortably atop one of these monsters, with room to spare.
But to the expert military reporters at CNN, who once referred to a fleet oiler as a "battleship", a
C-130 is little different than a
CH-53. After all, they both begin with "C".
Posted by: Navyvet at May 08, 2008 12:03 PM (xyyVG)
8
navyvet, you are correct... a KC-130F borrowed from the Marines was modified and used in a series of tests on the
Forrestal in
late 1963.
That said, the Forrestal was a heck of a lot bigger and more importantly,
wider than either the
Tarawa or
Wasp-class ships, and a -130 attempting to land on one of these ships would likely rip off the right wing on the ship's superstructure, which I've heard tell is detrimental to their airworthiness, and would be generally unappreciated by the ship's crew.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at May 08, 2008 12:18 PM (xNV2a)
9
My son is a Aircraft Structures Mechanic currently on the USS Essex. You are correct; there are no C-130's on board.
Posted by: Deputyjoe1 at May 08, 2008 12:26 PM (bkfTF)
10
It's too bad people didn't feel sorry for the Katrina victims!
Posted by: Dale at May 08, 2008 03:15 PM (Xv9Cu)
11
And yes, it is all Bush's fault!
Posted by: Dale at May 08, 2008 03:16 PM (Xv9Cu)
12
And yet the talkingheads on CNN are trusted by millions of Americans for their military data.
I fear for my country; I truly do.
Posted by: C-C-G at May 08, 2008 06:18 PM (cwBZ+)
13
A MEU (SOC), in this case the 31st MEU out of Oki, usually has a pair of C-130s attached to it for humanitarian aid and non-combatant evacuation missions.
But CNN is again showing its ignorance - they can't land on the ship.
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand." Bertrand Russell
Posted by: just_some_guy at May 08, 2008 08:00 PM (xIFnn)
14
I was on the Essex.
We did not carry any C130s.
We did carry the 31st MEU, a lot, and a bunch of jeeps (not sure the technical name) and LCACs, and helos, and some VTO&L jets, but no fixed-wings.
Deputy Joe! Is he AIMD? Is Chief Skrzyptchek (yes, I murdered the spelling) still there?
Posted by: Foxfier at May 08, 2008 11:00 PM (s2ydv)
15
Here is a link to a picture of a C-130 on the Forrestal:
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/odd/odd22.jpg
I've heard rumors about landing C-17s on carriers, but this image is photoshopped:
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/odd/odd55.jpg
And then there is this landing (which I offer without comment: http://home.grandecom.net/~austin/Engr/Humor/X-wing.jpeg
Posted by: Mark L at May 09, 2008 07:48 AM (AfORa)
16
To Foxflier -- My son is a Marine with Marine Aircraft Group 36, 1st Marine Aircraft Wing, based in Okinawa. This is his second mission on board the Essex. Sorry, I do not know other names on board. He emailed last night to say "we're on our way".
Posted by: Deputyjoe1 at May 09, 2008 07:57 AM (bkfTF)
17
Deputy Joe-
Ah, well. Good luck to him!
Posted by: Foxfier at May 09, 2008 08:44 AM (s2ydv)
18
This is a mistake because other AP reports stated that these same aircraft were ready to deploy from airbases in Thailand. CNN is a crap hole of a news station. The Essex is supposed to be 4 days out doing exercises so they where planing on deploying the helicopters from the ship to get there first and help out. That is what the other articles are reporting.
Posted by: Scot J at May 09, 2008 10:20 AM (mPpLn)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 18, 2008
Text Messages Don't Stop Crime
A futile effort, to say the least:
In the event of an emergency on North Carolina State University's campus, officials would send out text messages to faculty, students and staff.
Getting people to sign up to receive the "WolfAlert" messages is another issue.
Of the 40,000 faculty, students and staff at N.C. State, only 10,000 have registered their phone numbers, despite campus-wide advertising. For those who have signed-up, school officials plan to test the system this week.
N.C. State isn't the only campus trying to get this type of system off the ground. On North Carolina's 110 public and private college campuses, new safety measures have quickly become the priority.
"Our challenges are population and geography. We're the largest in terms of students and area," said David Rainer, N.C. State's associate vice chancellor for environmental health and safety.
Last year, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper formed a task force to look at crisis communication plans at colleges and universities. The task now is to make sure those plans work.
The plans being used will do very little to stop the next Virginia Tech or NIU.
Keeping involuntarily committed people from being able to purchase firearms and getting the mentally ill treatment are laudable goals, but messaging systems and alarms are reactive in nature, and would not have saved a single life at either of the universities when gunmen rampaged through classrooms in a matter of minutes. In both instances, the events would have been over, or almost over, before an alert was even issued.
These are feel-good solutions, but in general are not real solutions to stop a threat as it is occurring. They are designed merely to speed emergency response to those who are lucky enough to survive the initial onslaught, or to keep a shooter from moving from one building into another after catastrophic events have already started. If you happen to be in the room or building when such an unlikely assault takes place, there is little that can currently be done to save you.
In such situations, only luck can save you if you are unarmed. I'd like to see university administrators in North Carolina rationally discuss the pros and cons of allowing faculty, staff and students in off-campus housing with concealed carry permits to carry their handguns on campus. I can find little evidence of such a conversation having occurred.
Perhaps university administrators are under the impression that by posting policies declaring university campuses "gun free" that they in fact are. I know for a fact that is not the case from my own university days, when I knew of at least three students who chose to carry pistols because they did not feel (rightfully) that university police officers, while diligent, could be relied upon to be there at the precise moment they were needed if a violent crime was visited upon them.
This was over a decade ago. University shootings were virtually unheard of at the time, and those I knew to carry did so because of a fear of sexual assault or armed robbery on or near campus.
Those I speak with now are now typically staff and faculty-aged, and while those fears of being a victim of a case of individual violent crime are still valid, I've heard some talk from staff and faculty would would feel safer if they had the means to legally protect their fellow staff members and students if a school shooter happened upon their classroom or administration building. They aren't looking to be heroes. Like most in the education field, they only want what is best for their students, and they tend to agree that life is one of their students continuing interests.
Not all university staff and faculty are comfortable with the idea of fellow faculty and staff being armed—in fact, I'd hazard a guess that most are probably uncomfortable with the general concept of having to face the fact that firearms are indeed on university campuses. They would rather pretend them away.
But firearms are on university campuses across North Carolina, and they always will be as long as distant parking lots and night classes exist. Instead of making self-defense illegal and typically be practiced by those with no formal training, it would perhaps be far wiser to allow those who have undergone the legal training, shooting qualifications, and background investigation to earn a CCH to legally carry a defensive handgun on campuses.
Allowing CCH to legal permit holders is not guaranteed to stop any specific crime on college campuses, but what it does do is give qualified citizens the option, and that is a discussion worth having, and far more likely to help prevent or stop a violent crime on campus than a belated text message or siren.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:38 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 805 words, total size 5 kb.
1
But it will make local officials "feel good" that they are "doing something" about the problem... and when November rolls around they'll be sure to mention their "alert system" on their ads.
In short, it's the same song, 482nd verse... throw money at a solution that won't solve the problem, so you can throw more money at it next election and proclaim how much "good" you are doing.
Posted by: C-C-G at February 18, 2008 03:06 PM (Txk9z)
2
Like you said, the alert system
only works after the initial incident/attack.
I attended Mass College of Art in a rough part of Boston (the Huntington Ave Projects were right next to our dorm) from 1988 to 1991 and in 1990, we had no less than 2 shootings on what would be considered 'campus grounds', nevermind the regular muggings, assaults and other such issues that go along with a 'bad neighborhood.'
I was actually brought up on charges of having an 'illegal weapon' by the Head of the Dorm (she found my double edged Gerber boot knife during a room inspection) and during the subsequent hearing with my parents and the Provost, my father flat out told them that they were lucky that I didn't have my Ruger .357 wheelgun in my room, as he had insisted that I carry it as it was such a dangerous area to live in, and that I had told him that I didn't want to risk the possible repurcussions... That blew their minds let me tell you. (Needless to say, nothing ever came of it and I left the next semester for the Army... screw that place!)
That modern College campuses are filled with the Liberal "Feel Good We Can Talk It Out" 1960's Academicians goes to prove that until a College President or memebers of a Board of Regentsare gunned down and killed, then nothing will change.
Posted by: Big Country at February 18, 2008 09:26 PM (SIzGZ)
3
"In such situations, only luck can save you if you are unarmed."
I submit that you are always armed with your fists and feet, and running would also be a good idea, even if only in circles around the room. It's harder to hit a moving target, especially for the un/der trained. I will NOT just curl up in the corner hoping not to be executed next.
Posted by: douglas at February 19, 2008 12:01 AM (vYfHz)
4
The only thing that will stop another VT/NIU is some armed professors (a few, very few may pass a mental exam) and armed students that have not bit into the leftest brainwashing.
Posted by: Scrapiron at February 19, 2008 12:12 AM (d/RyS)
5
This is also perfectly in line with the lefty response to any other crime... you are to call the police, meaning that by the time they get to you, the murder could have been completed, you could be assuming room temperature on the floor, and the culprit could be miles away. But at least you didn't (gasp) use a gun yourself! Lefty policies have saved you from that fate worse than death! And you didn't harm the felon who just could be a Democratic voter some day (look at which party tends to propose laws restoring the vote to convicted felons).
Posted by: C-C-G at February 19, 2008 12:42 AM (Txk9z)
6
I have no problem with anyone carrying a gun with a permit as long as the same people have to take responsibility for their actions with those weapons. I understand the desire to defend one's self against attack and bodily harm. However, most arguments I've seen hear about arming professors or students to prevent attacks from continuing. There is a difference. The former is where your life is at risk while the later is when someone decides to interject themselves into an obviously volatile situation. In essence, vigilantism. Police officers have very specific scenarios when they are allowed to draw their weapon and discharge it. What would the rules be for armed professors? What if it was a drunken mob of frat boys molesting some girls? What if it was someone on drugs beating his girlfriend? rowdy fans fighting in the stands of a football games? A batter charging a pitcher for being beaned? All these situations happen way more frequently on college campuses then a campus shooting. Each situation can be a cause for bodily harm. Having armed professors charge into those scenarios can equally cause a situation to get better as get worse. Guns have a way of escalating the potential violence possible. If someone is willing to take the elevated risks and consequences of carrying a gun, they should be allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves.
Posted by: matta at February 19, 2008 08:55 AM (jRTMP)
7
Elevating the violence, Matta?
Tell me, how much would the "violence" have "escalated" if one person with a gun had shot these gunmen at the beginning of their rampage?
Not to mention the question of, would they have even tried it on a campus where they knew there would be other armed people? Perhaps they would have, but perhaps not. Even if one assumes that their motive was their own personal fame, how much fame is there in getting killed by an English professor with a 9mm after you've only shot one person?
An armed populace is the best deterrent against crime. And people like you, matta, who think that we can't trust our citizens with guns, are--consciously or unconsciously--echoing dictators since the invention of the gun, from the former Soviet Union to Castro to Saddam. All have systematically removed guns from the people's hands.
You might want to think about that, sir.
Posted by: C-C-G at February 19, 2008 09:35 AM (Txk9z)
8
I would also take exception to matta's argument. The point of having a gun isn't to use it in any circumstance where harm is being done (i.e. rushing a pitcher at a baseball game)and that isn't the point. The point is: if a person comes into a classroom with a handgun or semiautomatic, what's more effective-him shooting 4-5 people before being rushed by some courageous soul who gets killed, or having three people in that classroom pull out guns and drop the idiot before he gets a chance?
Any person who should be allowed to have a gun should understand the basic premise that a gun is a lethal weapon and you do not use it unless you are willing to take a life. I had that beaten into my head when I was still using a BB gun and I've never forgotten it. If that is the standard people use to judge whether weapons use is appropraite, I can't think of anywhere safer to be than on an armed campus
Posted by: BigSkygrl at February 19, 2008 03:10 PM (IU+BK)
9
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
Posted by: Matt at February 19, 2008 08:37 PM (tkEhn)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 06, 2007
Surviving the Mall
You should never have to shop in fear, but yesterday's senseless murders at an Omaha, Nebraska mall remind us that violence can happen almost anywhere. Because it can, it isn't a bad idea to have an exit strategy in the back of your mind.
In the very unlikely event that you find yourself in a situation like that in Nebraska yesterday or previous shootings this year in malls in Salt Lake City, Kansas City, and Douglasville, Georgia, there are simple actions you can take to increase your changes of getting out unharmed.
Get in.
The long, wide corridors and hallways lined with stores in a mall provide us with easy access from one store to another. In situations where a shooter is on the loose, they are also going to be the first route of escape for shoppers. The panicked rush of people attempting to use these corridors to escape increases the risk of being trampled in a mob. It goes without saying that these long open hallways provide next to no cover from any bullets fired.
If you happen to be walking in the mall and a shooting occurs, get into the nearest store or side hallway.
Get low.
Firearms, be they handguns, rifles, or shotguns, are typically fired from the shoulder. Most bullets or pellets travel roughly on a horizontal plane from shoulder to waist high. By going prone, you decrease your chances of getting hit. Once down, stay down. Bullets have no problem penetrating multiple layers of building materials. Just because you do not see the shooter does not mean you are out of danger.
Get out.
Stores do not bring their merchandise in through the front door. Almost all have loading docks, and to comply with fire codes, an emergency exit that leads either to a back hallway, or provide directs access to the outside of the building. Look up for the "exit" sign on the ceiling at the back of the store, and make your way there as fast as possible, keeping as low as possible.
Keep moving.
Once you make it outside, keep moving. Put as much physical space and as many physical objects between you and the scene as possible.
Putting it all together.
- Get in.
- Get low.
- Get out.
- Keep moving.
File that bit of information in the back of your mind. I'll pray you never have occasion to use it.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:25 AM
| Comments (25)
| Add Comment
Post contains 402 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Those are all excellent pieces of advice Bob and would serve folks quite well.
Me personally, I'm gonna shoot the bastard, but that's 'cuz I have a gun and minimal sense.
Cordially,
Uncle J
Posted by: Uncle Jimbo at December 06, 2007 05:50 PM (o6gWZ)
2
I'm with Uncle Jimbo...but it seems the damn Mall was a Gun Free Zone (worked real well, didn't it?)
Like the Lubby's shootings here that made for the change in carry laws, any law abiding carry permit holder was to leave their weapon behind to join the herd.
Posted by: JP at December 06, 2007 06:13 PM (VxiFL)
3
Most criminal types see "Gun Free Zone" as "No One Can Shoot Back Zone."
Posted by: C-C-G at December 06, 2007 07:52 PM (SoUge)
4
Yep. Derndest things happen in those gun free zones. I try to stay out of 'em. Strange doings afoot. I'm with Jimbo.
Posted by: HerrMorgenholz at December 06, 2007 08:10 PM (W9S9M)
5
I just did some research and discovered my home state is pretty easy to get a concealed carry permit in, all you really need is to have completed a gun safety course.
Now, where's the nearest NRA office?
Posted by: C-C-G at December 06, 2007 08:25 PM (SoUge)
6
May I copy this and pass it along in an email to family and friends? I'll be sure to include the link.
Posted by: Mom at December 07, 2007 08:46 AM (XferP)
7
Hmmm.
I'm with Instapundit. He's advocating that the survivors and the victim's families sue the hell out of the mall owners. This is because they prevented people from legally carrying firearms in the mall, which may have allowed someone to shoot the little bastard before the death count went up, and protecting themselves.
If you're a corporation and you disarm me, then it's *your* responsibility to protect me and it's your liability if you don't.
Now that I like!
Posted by: memomachine at December 07, 2007 10:29 AM (3pvQO)
8
You Dirty Harry/Rambo wannabes make me laugh.
Having a gun wouldn't have made a dime's worth of difference in this situation, since many of the dead/wounded were either ambushed as the shooter stepped out of the elevator or shot sniper-style as the shooter shot down through an atrium at people on a lower floor.
And CY, the media is reporting the shooter had an AK-47. Care to change your earlier thread about it being an SKS rifle?
Are you going to argue that the AK-47 isn't an "assault" weapon?
Posted by: yeah right at December 07, 2007 05:16 PM (MyDKI)
9
yeah right,
The media can call this an AK-47 all they want to, but there is a huge difference between a real AK-47 and an AK-47 pattern rifle, which is what this was. There is ZERO indication this was an AK-47, AKM, or other fully-autmoatic variant, which, by definition, it must be to be a
real assault rifle.
Odds are (statistically-speaking) it was a WASR-10 or a MAK-90, not that you know what those are.
Also learn to read. I never said it was an SKS, I said the original media claim said it was an SKS, which I disputed because SKS rifles typically have a fixed mag, and even in the early reports they were talking about multiple magazines. Once again, I was right.
R.I.F., sparky.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at December 07, 2007 05:36 PM (vxbTC)
10
1- If one of us armed civilians had been nearby, the whole issue could've been resolved- as it was the last time a shooter tried to do a mass murder in a mall. "Yeah right" could've done NOTHING- except try to shift blame and fail to take responsibility.
2- The media reports lots of things. Reporters are fairly ignorant about firearms and firearm-related issues, which does not stop them from acting like they're experts.
3- A civilian-legal AK is NOT an 'assault weapon', despite what teh aforementioned firearms-ignorant bunch wants to think. An assault weapon is select-fire, lwhich means that it can fire at full-automatic. There is no evidence that the shooter in this case did anything but semi-auto. Calling a chair a table doesn't make it any less a chair.
4- You Sarah Brady wannabees make ME laugh- always with the same script, same ignorance about any of the issues involved, same desire to substitute sneer for truth and lies for reality.
Posted by: DaveP. at December 07, 2007 05:38 PM (VUpJX)
11
What if you tried to stop a mass murderer by shooting him, and in the chaos, another gun owner saw you shooting? He might think YOU'RE the madman (how would he know?), and he'd then shoot you...
Just a thought.
Posted by: Anonymous reader at December 07, 2007 05:52 PM (RkwYf)
12
What if you tried to stop a mass murderer by shooting him, and in the chaos, another gun owner saw you shooting?
You are
far more likely to be shot by a police officer than concealed carry holder. There has been only once instance that I am aware of where two both CCW-permit holders drew firearms when a bad guy was on the loose, and they worked together to subdue the suspect and held him till uniformed officers arrive.
I think this falls into the realm of how collected the CCW-holders are. I think many, if not most are shooting enthusiasts, and could tell "friend from foe" based upon a number of variables, ranging from physical characteristics, mannerisms, and posture, to the difference different weapons make.
In this instance, I think if two CCW holders had been in the store where most of the victims were found and one saw the other firing at the suspect, he would immediately know the difference in sound between a rifle and a fellow handgun shooter, and he would not likely fire at the other CCW holder.
Not scientific by any stretch, of course, but I'd be interested to hear what CCW holders have to say.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at December 07, 2007 07:07 PM (HcgFD)
13
So what you're saying is that I should run when someone shoots at me? Wow, that's some valuable advice. Thanks a lot.
Posted by: Erik at December 07, 2007 10:14 PM (rljT9)
14
So what you're saying is that I should run when someone shoots at me?
Well, you could always just stand there and lecture the shooter about "gun free zones" in malls and such... if you talk fast you might even get a complete sentence out before he blows your head off.
Posted by: C-C-G at December 07, 2007 10:42 PM (SoUge)
15
So what you're saying is that I should run when someone shoots at me? Wow, that's some valuable advice. Thanks a lot.
See Erik? That's the beauty of free will. I can give you good advice about how to get out of the line of fire and out of the mall through less-used exits that you probably would have never thought of on your own, but you're free to distill that advice down into absurd, meaningless elements that you will then ignore.
By all means, do it your way.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at December 08, 2007 09:23 AM (HcgFD)
16
I think this falls into the realm of how collected the CCW-holders are. I think many, if not most are shooting enthusiasts, and could tell "friend from foe" based upon a number of variables, ranging from physical characteristics, mannerisms, and posture, to the difference different weapons make.
So you are saying that CCW permit holders profile each other. Suppose the other CCW permit holder is, gasp!, a dirty, presumably-jihad loving Ay-rab? Should I shoot the guy who is shooting or should I shoot the guy who is obviously about to succumb to Sudden Jihad Syndrome? And suppose the CCW permit holding guy who merely LOOKS like he will succumb to Sudden Jihad Syndrome is actually a patriotic, upstanding American? Who do I shoot?
Oh choices, choices...
Posted by: calipygian at December 08, 2007 12:00 PM (nlaMl)
17
Suppose the other CCW holder is a really a Plutonian, come to take revenge for our demoting of Pluto from planet status!
Or, better yet, suppose that he's a
straw man!
Posted by: C-C-G at December 08, 2007 12:52 PM (SoUge)
18
Or better yet, since crazy white boys with guns and explosives have killed way more people in the US than crazy Arab boys with planes, how about we round up all the white boys, send them to Gitmo and water board them all until they tell us where they keep their AK-47 knock-offs and promise not to be crazy anymore?
Posted by: calipygian at December 08, 2007 12:59 PM (nlaMl)
19
You must think this is a straw man contest, sir.
If and when you post something reasonable, I will probably--no guarantees--reply reasonably. As long as you keep posting absurdities, however, I'll just get more and more absurd myself.
Your move.
Posted by: C-C-G at December 08, 2007 01:29 PM (SoUge)
20
Why is it absurd? Is it or is it not true that crazy white boys with guns and explosives has killed more Americans than crazy Arabs with planes? Is it true or is it not true that you are much more likely to be killed doing something mundane, like driving down the street to work or of a heart attack while eating a hot fudge sundae than by a crazy white boy in a shopping mall or a in a terrorist attack? If it is true that crazy white boys have killed more (and it certainly is true), why aren't we cracking down on them even more strenuously than crazy Arabs?
Who is being absurd? Not me.
Posted by: calipygian at December 08, 2007 01:37 PM (nlaMl)
21
It's absurd because you're conflating those killings that were done in defense of others--like protecting the world from having to declare "sieg heil" to a flag with a swastika--with those done in naked aggression, like those committed by the people who did proclaim "sieg heil."
Therein lies the absurdity, and you're either too stupid to see it yourself, or you think I am.
Posted by: C-C-G at December 08, 2007 01:42 PM (SoUge)
22
Wait. The crazy white boy who shot up a mall in Omaha was defending the world from Nazis? Timothy McVey was defending the world from Nazis when he blew up the Federal Courthouse in OK City?
Now I understand.
And since when has the phrase "Seig Heil" replaced the phrase "Allah Huwa Akbar?"
Posted by: calipygian at December 08, 2007 02:20 PM (nlaMl)
23
See, there ya go, conflating issues again, in order to build your straw man.
By the way, why limit the Arab death toll to just those who flew planes into buildings? Why not add in
all the deaths caused by Arabs? It's obvious, because that would cause your straw man to fall apart.
As a straw-man builder, I give you a B+. As a debater, an F-.
Posted by: C-C-G at December 08, 2007 02:57 PM (SoUge)
24
To calipygian,blacks with illegal weapons kill far more people than "crazy white boys",and to yea right's comments, an AK-47 and SKS fire the same round 7.62x39,and an assault weapon is any weapon one chooses to assault another with,be it a sharp stick or a butter knife up the nose,the term assault weapon is a scary word used by the media to further thier anti-gun agenda.
Posted by: spylock at December 10, 2007 08:00 AM (7h9VZ)
25
1- If one of us armed civilians had been nearby, the whole issue could've been resolved
One of you armed civilians
was there; he killed nine people.
Posted by: Bob Munck at December 10, 2007 11:54 PM (n0BzT)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 08, 2007
"It is the Greatest Scam in History"
So says John Coleman, founder of
The Weather Channel, as he discusses global warming. He is not kind to global warming advocates, some of which preached the horrors of the impending ice ages of global cooling just several decades ago with the same cocksure fanaticism.
It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.
"Friends in government?"
Gee, I wonder which former vice president and political party he could be referring to...
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:40 AM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 170 words, total size 1 kb.
1
A blinding statement of the obvious, but nice to see nonetheless.
I hope it gets some coverage.
Posted by: daleyrocks at November 08, 2007 09:39 AM (0pZel)
2
This, to me, is the best part of that article:
In time, a decade or two, the outrageous scam will be obvious. As the temperature rises, polar ice cap melting, coastal flooding and super storm pattern all fail to occur as predicted everyone will come to realize we have been duped. The sky is not falling.
The lefties made a real bonehead mistake... they created a "crisis" out of something that simply will not happen, and that people have day-to-day experience with. It's not like the fate of the purple-beaked whoozis, whom most people will never see. We live with weather every day, so the High Priests of Global Warming won't be able to hide that their predictions
never come true.
Posted by: C-C-G at November 08, 2007 10:03 AM (PGjzz)
3
Au contrair...that is why we are now seeing the emphasis on "climate change" and not "global warming."
Tempatures could take a nose dive worldwide tomorrow, and the zealots will associate it (by whatever scatter-brained means) like the six degrees of Kevin Bacon.
Posted by: JR at November 08, 2007 10:38 AM (/Uhbl)
4
To quote Glenn Reynolds, "I'll regard this as a crisis when Global Warming advocates start behaving as if it's a crisis." Presently, the UN officials have jetted off to a conference in Bali.
Posted by: Doc at November 08, 2007 11:04 AM (4Tk6Z)
5
Very good, what Mr. Goodman stated.
How dare those scientists who took the "green" grant money come out with phony predictions! How dare them!
Posted by: mockinbird at November 08, 2007 05:10 PM (15scE)
6
Global warming is the meterological equivilent of Cold Reading. It cannot predict anything except that at some point somehwere on the planet someone is going to have some sort of bad weather. The rest of the details can only be fillled in after the event has occured. Yes, this also means that ManBearPig is a close runner to being the Biggest Douche In The Universe.
Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at November 09, 2007 08:14 AM (oC8nQ)
7
Perhaps I'm overly cynical, but it wouldn't surprise me if they really don't expect their catastrophic predictions to come true. They just want the "solutions" implemented now so that when the predictions don't come about they can claim the solutions worked and therefore we need more of the same.
Posted by: Bilby at November 09, 2007 06:57 PM (pEt4I)
8
They just want the "solutions" implemented now so that when the predictions don't come about they can claim the solutions worked and therefore we need more of the same.
Entirely possible, Bilby.
That would also explain why they insist that we must implement their solutions
now, rather than later... before it becomes clear that their predictions have no chance of ever coming true.
Posted by: C-C-G at November 09, 2007 08:31 PM (bEQr6)
9
I am a son of a meteorologist and was a physics/math major in college. I generally refrain from posting anything related to global warming. As a scientist and, therefore very big fan of the scientific method, I am highly skeptical of any hypothesis that lacks repeatable observational proof. In the case of GW, the earth has warmed and cooled many times over the 4+ billion years of its existence. The vast majority of the episodes had no ‘human’ involvement. To state humans are the main cause of what is generally accepted as a current global warming trend is the height of arrogance.
Mr. Coleman is so very correct in his characterization of GW supporters. Be they scientist or laymen, they are scam artists - confidence men – carpetbaggers - outright scientific frauds.
Posted by: Mark at November 09, 2007 10:56 PM (P8ylB)
10
So, the fouunder of the Weather Channel is a Climate Troofer. Who knew?
Posted by: Boris at November 10, 2007 12:53 PM (diZGy)
11
No, the founder of the Weather Channel is a trained meteorologist with many years' experience, unlike the High Priest of the Church of Global Warming, Algore.
Mr. Coleman knows that computer models are useless if they cannot successfully retroactively predict... that is, if you input the data from a year ago, can it accurately predict the outcome? And the current models used to predict global warming
cannot.
Sling your mud all you want, you can't get past that basic fact.
Posted by: C-C-G at November 10, 2007 01:40 PM (bEQr6)
12
Bilby and CCG
I've tried to write something like that two or three times but it gets too big (soapboxes are hell). The "problem" is cover for implementing the "solution". The solution would be the same no matter which problem is selected.
Posted by: RicardoVerde at November 11, 2007 10:45 AM (r9DD+)
13
This post really shows the difference between progressives and the right. You see, progressives know what an expert is. They look to people, like I don't know, climatologists, to understand the climate.
Right-wingers just find someone who shares their view and then publicizes it as if it was equal to actual experts.
Posted by: Erik at November 13, 2007 08:26 PM (A7nOw)
14
Erik, your comment really shows the difference, you're right.
See, we're talking about an expert on weather, but you immediately dismiss his expertise because he does not say what you want.
It's typical of the left to just ignore and denigrate those who don't toe the party line.
Posted by: C-C-G at November 13, 2007 08:55 PM (/fQMn)
15
Um, no, I'm saying he's not an expert on the subject. A meterologist is an expert on weather? Possibly, although the training for such things is not always the most stringent. But is weather the same thing as climate? No. And what about the fact that not a single article has been published in a peer-reviewed journal refuting climate change. Or that literally every climatologist (and this is different from a meterologist, who are often in effect, usually weather reporters) in the nation says that climate change is happening. Or what if I were to find another meterologist saying climate change was happening? According to your logic, that would totally prove my point because that would person would be an expert on weather.
You say I am wrong, that my meterologist wouldn't prove anything. And you would be exactly right, because a meterologist is not a climatologist. Weathermen are not climatologists. They are two entirely different things.
Posted by: Erik at November 13, 2007 09:07 PM (A7nOw)
16
I have no trouble looking to meteorologists for insight into climate change. Also, since television sports reporters watch a lot of sports and think about sports all the time, I don't see any reason to ask sociologists, psychologists or historians about other ways that sports might be meaningful. Also, the guy who plays House on
House would probably be able to cure cancer if only the liberals would stop pretending that he's just a TV character.
Posted by: goober grape at November 13, 2007 09:52 PM (9I+0q)
17
Who says the climate isn't changing? It always has and always will. So, what is the point of Grand Schemes to do what has never been done, that is, control the climate? And, even if we could, how do we know what the optimum climate is?
Do you know of a government that really takes "climate change" seriously? They talk. They throw money at studies. They sign treaties. No first world country will meet even the requirements of Kyoto (Sweden says they will, but only because of nuclear power that was envisioned well be fore Kyoto). They won't meet the goals because it is a stupid thing to do.
Posted by: RicardoVerde at November 13, 2007 10:05 PM (r9DD+)
18
I'm half expecting the next comment to claim that climate change must not be happening because America's Weatherman Willard Scott says so!
Posted by: Erik at November 13, 2007 10:06 PM (A7nOw)
19
I'm sure that scientists are amused to be told that they harbor "cocksure fanatacism."
Posted by: Xanthippas at November 14, 2007 01:51 PM (018Z+)
20
Scientists are humans, Xanthippas, not an alien species. Cocksure fanaticism is nothing new to scientists, (i.e. Nikola Tesla) and I am sure others can provide examples of other scientists acting highly unscientific due to a bee in their bonnet.
Posted by: Mikey NTH at November 14, 2007 02:30 PM (O9Cc8)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 23, 2007
Pink and Grey
Scott Lindlaw reports on the differences between the current wildfire evacuation to Qualcomm stadium and the scene in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina:
Like Hurricane Katrina evacuees two years earlier in New Orleans, thousands of people rousted by natural disaster fled to the NFL stadium here, waiting out the calamity and worrying about their homes.
The similarities ended there, as an almost festive atmosphere reigned at Qualcomm Stadium.
Bands belted out rock 'n' roll, lavish buffets served gourmet entrees, and massage therapists helped relieve the stress for those forced to flee their homes because of wildfires.
"The people are happy. They have everything here," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared Monday night after his second Qualcomm tour.
Although anxieties ran high, the misery index seemed low as the celebrity governor waded through the mob. Scarcely a complaint was registered with him.
Predictably, the completely different ways these cities are dealing with their disasters only needed the common point of a stadium refuge to set keyboards a-clattering from both the left and the right.
At right-leaning Liberty Pundit:
Because these are mostly white people, and the response has been supposedly better, you can better believe that people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have taken note and will trot this out in the future whenever it suits their purpose. TheyÂ’ll say that because these are white people and the governor is a Republican (jury is still out on that), and this was a better response, then it proves that our party hates blacks (or whatever minority they want to use to serve their purpose). Nevermind that the failures of Katrina were mostly the result of incompetent Democrats in New Orleans, it was still all George W. Bush's fault, because he didn't personally land in New Orleans and start bailing water.
At lefty blog Attytood:
Still, I can't help but think that other nations must look at these things -- the treatment of evacuees in one of America's richest cities (at least by housing price), and in one of its poorest -- and conclude that we're some kind of barbarians. The contrast between the wealth of water and food at Qualcomm, pictured at top of this post, with the scarcity at the Superdome is outrageous.
My biggest quibble with this AP article is the headline about "civility" -- which implies the contrast is the fault of the evacuees. That myth was pretty much punctured after Katrina, as in this article:
The vast majority of reported atrocities committed by evacuees — mass murders, rapes and beatings — have turned out to be false, or at least unsupported by any evidence, according to key military, law-enforcement, medical and civilian officials in positions to know. "I think 99 percent of it is [expletive]," said Sgt. 1st Class Jason Lachney, who played a key role in security and humanitarian work inside the Dome. "Don't get me wrong — bad things happened. But I didn't see any killing and raping and cutting of throats or anything ... 99 percent of the people in the Dome were very well-behaved."
They just weren't given food or water...let alone massage therapists. You have to be haunted by these words from Superdome survivor Phyllis Johnson, written shortly after Katrina and well before yesterday's evacuation:
Johnson said many of the people she met inside the dome thought they were going to die there. But she didn't want to lay down and die. She escaped the shelter, slogged through chest-high water and finally caught a ride on a stolen truck. She ended up getting onto a bus headed for Houston.
Even though President Bush said today that race played no part in the botched evacuation efforts, Johnson strongly disagrees. She is sure that if the people who were stranded in New Orleans after the storm were white, they would have been rescued immediately and treated with dignity.
"They portrayed us as savages," she said.
How can you look at that picture up top from San Diego and not agree with Phyllis Johnson?
It's interesting that on both the right and the left, the natural inclination here was to make the issue one of color. The problem with both of these opinions is that they are predicated upon skin colors of black and white, and not one of tribal colors:
That has nothing to do with me being white. If the blacks and Hispanics and Jews and gays that I work with and associate with were there with me, it would have been that much better. That’s because the people I associate with – my Tribe – consists not of blacks and whites and gays and Hispanics and Asians, but of individuals who do not rape, murder, or steal. My Tribe consists of people who know that sometimes bad things happen, and that these instances are opportunities to show ourselves what we are made of. My people go into burning buildings. My Tribe consists of organizers and self-starters, proud and self-reliant people who do not need to be told what to do in a crisis. My Tribe is not fearless; they are something better. They are courageous. My Tribe is honorable, and decent, and kind, and inventive. My Tribe knows how to give orders, and how to follow them. My Tribe knows enough about how the world works to figure out ways to boil water, ration food, repair structures, build and maintain makeshift latrines, and care for the wounded and the dead with respect and compassion.
There are some things my Tribe is not good at at all. My Tribe doesn't make excuses. My Tribe will analyze failure and assign blame, but that is to make sure that we do better next time, and we never, ever waste valuable energy and time doing so while people are still in danger. My Tribe says, and in their heart completely believes that it's the other guy that's the hero. My Tribe does not believe that a single Man can cause, prevent or steer Hurricanes, and my Tribe does not and has never made someone else responsible for their own safety, and that of their loved ones.
My Tribe doesn't fire on people risking their lives, coming to help us. My Tribe doesn't curse such people because they arrived on Day Four, when we felt they should have been here before breakfast on Day One. We are grateful, not to say indebted, that they have come at all. My Tribe can't eat Nike's and we don't know how to feed seven by boiling a wide-screen TV. My Tribe doesn't give a sweet God Damn about what color the looters are, or what color the rescuers are, because we can plainly see before our very eyes that both those Tribes have colors enough to cover everyone in glory or in shame. My Tribe doesn't see black and white skins. My Tribe only sees black and white hats, and the hat we choose to wear is the most personal decision we can make.
That’s the other thing, too – the most important thing. My Tribe thinks that while you are born into a Tribe, you do not have to stay there. Good people can join bad Tribes, and bad people can choose good ones. My Tribe thinks you choose your Tribe. That, more than anything, is what makes my Tribe unique.
[snip]
Let's not talk about Black and White tribesÂ… I know too many pathetic, hateful, racists and more decent, capable and kind people of both colors for that to make any sense at all. Do you not? Do you not know corrupt, ignorant, violent people, both black and white, to cure you of this elementary idiocy? Have you not met and talked and laughed with people who were funny, decent, upright, honest and honorable of every shade so that the very idea of racial politics should just seem like a desperate and divisive and just plain evil tactic to hold power?
If such a thing is not self-evident to you, please get off my property. Right now. I should tell you I own a gun and I know how to use it. I assure you that the pleasure I would take in shooting you would be temporary, minimal, and deeply regretted later.
Now, for the rest of you, letÂ’s get past Republican and Democrat, Red and Blue, too. LetÂ’s talk about these two Tribes: Pink, the color of bunny ears, and Grey, the color of a mechanical pencil lead.
I live in both worlds. In entertainment, everything is Pink, the color of Angelyne's Stingray – it's exciting and dynamic and glamorous. I'm also a pilot, and I know honest-to-God rocket scientists, and combat flight crews and Special Ops guys -- stone-cold Grey, all of them -- and am proud and deeply honored to call them my friends.
The Pink Tribe is all about feeling good: feeling good about yourself! Sexually, emotionally, artistically – nothing is off limits, nothing is forbidden, convention is fossilized insanity and everybody gets to do their own thing without regard to consequences, reality, or natural law. We all have our own reality – one small personal reality is called "science," say – and we Make Our Own Luck and we Visualize Good Things and There Are No Coincidences and Everything Happens for a Reason and You Can Be Whatever You Want to Be and we all have Special Psychic Powers and if something Bad should happen it's because Someone Bad Made It Happen. A Spell, perhaps.
The Pink Tribe motto, in fact, is the ultimate Zen Koan, the sound of one hand clapping: EVERYBODY IS SPECIAL.
Then, in the other corner, there is the Grey Tribe – the grey of reinforced concrete. This is a Tribe where emotion is repressed because Emotion Clouds Judgment. This is the world of Quadratic Equations and Stress Risers and Loads Torsional, Compressive and Tensile, a place where Reality Can Ruin Your Best Day, the place where Murphy mercilessly picks off the Weak and the Incompetent, where the Speed Limit is 186,282.36 miles per second, where every bridge has a Failure Load and levees come in 50 year, 100 year and 1000 Year Flood Flavors.
The Grey Tribe motto is, near as I can tell, THINGS BREAK SOMETIMES AND PLEASE DONÂ’T LET IT BE MY BRIDGE.
These paragraphs are from just a few brief moments of the excellent Bill Whittle essay Tribes, but it does much to help us understand the long-term differences between these two vastly different cities, and how different they will be in the weeks and months ahead.
The people of San Deigo and surrounding communities, liberal Democrats, moderates, and staunch conservatives of every color and creed, will rebuild and thrive again long before New Orleans does. They will do so because New Orleans, "The Big Easy," regardless of politics, is as Pink a city as there has ever been in the United States. It is a city of psychological poverty, and will be so until it finally falls into the Gulf in 5 or 50 years hence.
San Diego, evolving both demographically and politically, is often Pink, but is as Grey has it has to be, when it has to be.
It is about color. Just not the colors you think.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:50 AM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1882 words, total size 12 kb.
1
Spot on! I read this essay right after it was posted; I shared it widely then, and I will do so again. Thanks for the refresher.
You do good work--keep it up!
Posted by: Susan at October 23, 2007 02:03 PM (kKdtK)
2
Not to rain on a parade, but it has little to do with who is displaced. It has to do with the space the displaced have. The evacuees in San Diego aren't trapped in the stadium, but rather are in the parking lot. Being in a bad spot isn't improved when you're piled on top of another person in the same bad spot. While the gourmet buffett is nice, getting to a quiet spot where you can be alone with your emotions and decompress is a tad more important to your outlook and ability to interact with people. Since everyone else has that opportunity as well, there is a compounding positive impact going on in San Diego that was denied to the residents of New Orleans.
Posted by: Joe at October 23, 2007 03:22 PM (qCPXJ)
3
Joe, that's nonsense. Other shelters here in SD are packed to capacity, and there is no hue and cry. The locals are doing things stoically, helping each other out. I won't compare the citizenry of NOLA and SD, I'd just say we handled it better, FWIW
Posted by: Frank G at October 23, 2007 03:33 PM (Ydps9)
4
also FWIW - via NBCSandiego.com: Qualcomm just sent out a press release - please, no more donations, they have all they need. Apparently the locals have responded too well. This, tho' tragic, was a good test-run for a big quake response, and will be studied endlessly - how do you evacuate over 3-400,000 people? I think we did well, and learned from the Cedar fire
Posted by: Frank G at October 23, 2007 03:39 PM (Ydps9)
5
The biggest disappointment about Katrina was how politicized it was. According to all objective counts the evacuation was an historical success. The National Guard and Coast Guard succeeded in the largest evacuation in American history. It's just too bad that the city itself wasn't prepared. Remember all those buses?
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at October 23, 2007 04:09 PM (Lgw9b)
6
So, who is geeting shot and which gang is in charge?
Maybe the governer should authorize 80 million from Congress' emergency vote fund?
Posted by: FES at October 23, 2007 04:19 PM (j1Yu1)
7
Frank, at those other shelters are the residents able to go outside, or are they stuck inside packed to capacity? Also, what's the status of running water, HVAC and trash collection. If there was no escape even for a brief time from the disaster shelters how surly would whatever tribe become after a short time? Add into the mix that there is no running water or electricity for cooling and is the mood improved?
Posted by: Joe at October 23, 2007 04:42 PM (qCPXJ)
8
unfortunately for your meme, Joe, nobody here has been held at gunpoint against their will, so I can't compare your theoretical NO against reality SD. They have actually allowed people to breathe, walk outside, and leave if they wish. I guess your theory MUST be correct, with ALL due respect.
Posted by: Frank G at October 23, 2007 05:24 PM (Ydps9)
9
There have been over 350,000 homes evacuated which translates into 700,000 to 1 million people and all I'm hearing and reading is good reports. It is tragic, but even in tragedy, the people of San Diego and North County are pulling together and helping each other. These are not people who expect their government to do everything for them and for the nanny to make it all better with a snap of the fingers.
Friends of mine lost everything, a coworker of my daughter-in-law has taken in 20 people and 13 dogs. Our first home on the outskirts of Rancho Bernardo on the edge of Poway is gone and so are the homes of old neighbors and friends.
Most people in So. California are earthquake prepared with extra medicine, a get-a-way bag packed, an evac plan in place.
So far, where we are has been safe but last night we began to see flames on the hill opposite from where we live, so we went and gassed up all 3 vehicles and began to make a list of things we would want to get out if we had to evac quickly. And we talked about what our best options would be. Nowhere in our planning did we consider what the government would do to help us. That is the difference between here and NOLA.
Posted by: Sara at October 23, 2007 05:51 PM (hGL+y)
10
I'd just say we handled it better
As soon as the cannibalism starts you'll be singing a different tune!
Posted by: Purple Avenger at October 23, 2007 07:45 PM (gqU4X)
11
At one point today there were more volunteers at the stadium than evacuees. Says something about the character of the town, eh?
Come to think of it, San Diego's one of the largest military and retired military communities in the country. That would be our "Volunteer" military. Not concluding anything 'bout that. Just saying...
Posted by: dwight at October 23, 2007 09:45 PM (MxG+p)
12
Joe, for how much ever better the conditions are in SD right now then there were in NO during Katrina, do you think those conditions came about through magic? Happenstance?
The local and state governments made and implemented emergency plans and so did the citizens.
It's not magic, it's people taking responsibility and planning for the what-if events of life and then following through.
Posted by: Cindi at October 24, 2007 02:52 AM (asVsU)
13
Is there any looting going on in SD? Anyone shooting at firemen? Are the cops walking off the job? Are there San Diego cops looting?
Running water, electricity and other creature comforts help lower the stress levels at the shelters.
They're camping in the parking lot, Joe. They're not
in the Stadium. And they seem grateful that it's there for them. In NOLA they had 3 days warning to get the hell out of town and they (both citizens and local government) didn't do it. In SD, they had no such warning. They're just making the best of a bad situation.
Posted by: Pablo at October 24, 2007 04:04 AM (yTndK)
14
Joe, I hated to do it, but I deleted your comment because of profanity. Please do not use that here.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at October 24, 2007 05:32 AM (HcgFD)
Posted by: Frank G at October 24, 2007 06:41 AM (Ydps9)
16
In New Orleans, there were many individuals who were part of the Tribe. They helped one another and shared resources. The greatest evacuation this country has seen was not shown. The National Guard were headquartered by the Superdome. They rationed food and water. But the news media didn't report on any of that. Instead, they put on the air unconfirmed reports of murders and rapes.
When Katrina hit, I was on the Mississippi Gulf Coast so I missed most of the reports about New Orleans and after things settled down here, I read about what went on in New Orleans. It seems to me the biggest failure was the local and state government response. And it is not just the lack of implementing emergency plans and the school buses and other things. The biggest failure was the mayor of New Orleans being too scared to go and talk to the people in the Supedome. Instead, he was on the radio crying.
It was Blanco trying to place the blame on FEMA and Bush. She did do some things correctly, like getting the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries in place to rescue people. But it seems there was a lot of the blame game going on.
All I had for news during the days after Katrina was a battery powered radio that I only turned on when the Emergency Management officials were on. I heard encouragement from my mayor, my governor, and all other officials. This is what kept the despair and numbness down. There was no blame. There was just the message that though 69,000 homes were destroyed, businesses washed away, and loved ones unaccounted for, we were all in this together and we would get through together. And we have been getting through together.
It seems the same is going on in California. Government officials and citizens are working together to make sure all members of the Tribe are cared for.
Posted by: shira at October 24, 2007 11:12 PM (hiy5E)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 14, 2007
Weather Woes
Well,
thanks to this I might continue my fund-raising efforts for a few more days.
I haven't been outside to check the damage to any great degree yet, but know that the straight-line winds in my area were strong enough to damage homes under construction within view of my house, down trees, and lift my rather substantial grill into the air and toss it into my neighbor's yard. I'll retrieve it tomorrow, but my guess is that it's toast.
If anyone hasn't donated yet and could, I'd appreciate it.
I really liked that grill.
Update: Picture added above. For us, that's all we lost, and for that I'm very thankful.
Talking to folks in the area and surveying the damage, it appears out area took a hit from a very minor tornado (there were a total of six in the area, all blessedly weak). Not a lot of damage in my neighborhood, but there was in the older neighborhood nearby where there were far more mature trees, a lot of which lost branches, and several large oaks that were totally ripped apart.
Nobody got seriously injured or killed, and that is what really matters.
The "Liberal Braintrust" Update: It seems that several lefty bloggers have seized upon this post as proof of great hypocrisy on my part, as I've stated publicly on several occasions that New Orleans should not be rebuilt in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
The reasoning behind not rebuilding New Orleans is scientifically-driven and practical in nature. The Mississippi delta silt upon which the city was built is rapidly compacting, and hence the city itself is literally and inevitably sinking. This is combined with the fact that the marshlands protecting the city are eroding at a rate of 25-35 square miles/year, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, along with noted scientists from coastal and marine studies programs including LSU, have stated the geological inevitability of the city merging with the Gulf of Mexico prior to 2100, and quite possibly by 2050 or sooner with the landfall of any major hurricanes (which Katrina was not when it hit; New Orleans suffered category 1-2 winds), or a sudden rise in sea level, which could occur if global warming is as dramatic as some expect.
Simply put, New Orleans is a sinking hole in a swamp surrounded on three sides by hungry waters: rebuilding the city with an anemic patchwork of small levee improvements is a colossal exercise in stupidity, when relocating the population is a much more intelligent and more viable long-term option. It may also ultimately lead to a far greater loss of life the next time the city is inundated.
Liberal Logic: New Orleans = Bobs' Grill.
Somehow, this bit of scientifically-supported common sense means I'm a hypocrite because I extended my already running week-long yearly fundraising effort, mentioning specifically late Friday that that I'm going to need to replace my storm-tossed grill.
Said grill was up-ended and tossed into my neighbor's yard by what appears to be a very small tornado that spun out of a line of thunderstorms that developed quickly as a line of storms passed through Friday evening. The line of storms was the leftovers of what was Humberto, the storm that hit minimal hurricane status before it made landfall on Texas last week and quickly dissipated.
According to these esteemed liberal thinkers, asking my readership to continue a voluntary fundraiser is the exact same thing, somehow, as demanding billions of taxpayer dollars from the federal government to replace a city doomed by geology, oceanography, and hydrology.
Perhaps if I lobbied taxpayers for the funds that argument would have some merit, but I'm not applying for a grant, or demanding that taxpayers fund anything. I didnÂ’t do that. I extended a pre-existing weeklong fundraiser where I asked for voluntary donations from my readers. My "crime" was continuing a voluntary fundraiser for a specific reason?
Heaven forbid. How do I live with myself.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:49 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 664 words, total size 10 kb.
1
CY, are you around Asheville? I'm in Monroe and we had something similar a few weeks back. I don't think anyone has been able to determine exactly what knocked down 23 electric polls starting at
my place. It was either a tornado, lightening, or what most believe a microburst.
Do you have any information about a town up there called Sylva? I have an old friend who lives up there. Well, more like an ex who still hates me but I hope she's ok.
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at September 15, 2007 03:14 PM (Lgw9b)
2
Sorry CI, I'm near Raleigh...
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 15, 2007 09:21 PM (HcgFD)
3
Sorry about your grill. I live in a coastal area up north and we get funky little gale storms all the time when things start to go flying.
But I have to say that seeing the photo documenting the tidy little disaster of your grill made me laugh out loud.
You see, I had just clicked over after having read some god awful report on the godawfulness that is Iraq's infrastructure (you know: very little electricity, a shortage of potable water, an outbreak of cholera, food distribution problems, and the like), and I thought, How typically American. A toppled-over grill is a calamity.
Just shows how fortunate we are.
Posted by: Grace Nearing at September 16, 2007 03:21 AM (DMnkh)
4
"I really liked that grill."
I bet you say that to all the grills.
Posted by: Bill Smith at September 16, 2007 05:28 AM (4FExI)
5
That was some wild weather Friday. I was watching a tornado try and form near the Triangle Town Center mall. Fortunately, just didn't have the energy at that time.
Sorry about the grill, CF.
Posted by: William Teach at September 16, 2007 08:29 AM (NaHh8)
6
I want a grill just like the grill that harried the neighbors' yard.
Posted by: Sissy Willis at September 16, 2007 03:05 PM (Q6JEL)
7
Also, if you didn't mourn the loss of your grill, the terrorists would have won.
Posted by: Sissy Willis at September 16, 2007 03:17 PM (Q6JEL)
8
Looks like an original "Charbroil". Can't get those anymore.
I still have the grates if that is all it takes--I've been meaning to try and build a replacement for mine, but I probably won't get it done in this lifetime.
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at September 16, 2007 06:23 PM (QwUYy)
9
It's actually a version of
this Royal Oak. I like cooking with charcoal more than gas, but they don't make them heavy enough to stay on the ground around here, apparently.
Kinda scary something about a hundred pounds like that can get airborne.
Grace, what you say is so true.
Bill, Sissy...get help.
;-)
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 16, 2007 07:02 PM (HcgFD)
10
Why should we help you replace the grill if you're going to keep on living in a hurricane area? You're living on 'sand' like the foolish man and it will just be washed away again.
Posted by: Michael at September 17, 2007 09:11 AM (c900z)
11
Show some initiative, man.
Just use your burning cross the next time you want to grill some weenies.
Posted by: Luke Duke at September 17, 2007 10:40 AM (6Nz4N)
12
If I remember correctly didn't say that we shouldn't pay to rebuild NO? But now we should all chip in for your crappy grill?
I think this is just a warning shot from God - you had better get your life right with Him or it will only get worse from here.
Posted by: frankly at September 17, 2007 10:55 AM (rjqvO)
13
Michael, you're obviously not bright enough to get this, but living over 130 miles from the ocean. I'm not what would typically be considered any more of a "hurricane area" than is San Antonio, Texas.
Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised, however.
You did come from a blog that thinks that there is some sort of equivalence to be made from me asking my readers to donate private funds if they so desire because they like my blog, and the demand to use public tax dollars to rebuild New Orleans.
It is rather pathetic how far they'll go to set up a false moral equivalence, but it is even more pathetic that their readers allow themselves to be so easily fooled.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 17, 2007 11:01 AM (EPsu8)
14
Well, I'm sure you donated plenty of money to America's Second Harvest or some other charitable organization when Katrina blew through.
Posted by: Run Up The Score at September 17, 2007 11:27 AM (P8MNB)
15
You tell 'em, CY!
You are *so* right: there's no equivalence between asking the Public to fork out their hard-earned cash to save a city and asking the public to fork out their hard earned cash to save a grill.
Quite apart from the fact that one involves a capital "P" and the other doesn't, a grill is like waaay more important.
Posted by: Andrew at September 17, 2007 11:35 AM (R09+d)
16
CY: What are those round, circular doohickeys attached to each leg of the barbecue? Hint: they aren't meat tenderizers.
Maybe, just maybe, you might want to move stuff you don't want to lose into the house or garage when a hurricane blows through.
Posted by: Bob's Trick Knee at September 17, 2007 12:22 PM (y67bA)
17
Well, I'm sure you donated plenty of money to America's Second Harvest or some other charitable organization when Katrina blew through.
Well, our church took in a few refugees when they came to Raleigh and we contributed to helping htem get clothing and housing, and our church also sent down teams to help rebuild (which is where I got many of the Katrina damage photos used ont his blog). I couldn't go because of work commitments, but I did help collect food, clothing, and money for survivors in the aptly-named Waveland, Missisippi, which was hit directly by the storm surge. We "adopted" a retired couple that had moved there only months befor the stormm and got them some basics as they waited for their home to be rebuilt. We prayed for them, and continue to send letters back and forth with them, providing the psychologicla support that is every bit as important as money, with "Tom" becoming my daughter's pen pal.
I'm also very much involved with Beauchamp Tower Corporation, a not-for-profit that is attempting to get the federal government to turn over some "moth-balled" ships slated for the scrapyard, which will be retrofitted by civilian and corporate donors to provide major disaster emergency response. I communicate directly with BTC CEO Ward Brewer, though that isn't anything I've talked about much on my blog lately. What we're talking about is something I've dubbed the "Savaltion Navy," and what may become the greatest part of our nation's mass disaster response planning.
That said, what have you done, Run?
And other knee, there was no hurricane here, just a line of thunderstorms which spun off tornadoes. Not that you come here from a blog smart enough to know the difference between hurricanes and tornadoes.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 17, 2007 12:32 PM (WwtVa)
18
BTW, the BTC OES effort is just so much vapor.
The idea suffers from several fatal flaws: 1.) the ships are generally unsuitable for relief operations unless massively retrofitted; 2.) BTC hasn't anywhere near the monies needed to accomplish the repairs and mods; 3.)many of the ships require significant environmental remediation--another cost BTC can't fund.
Posted by: Bob's Trick Knee at September 17, 2007 01:29 PM (cqZXM)
19
It depends on the ships being targeted, BTK, and there are specific candidates in mind.
You are not in a position to determine how much the remediation will cost, or for that matter, know the assets, commitments, or capabilities at BTC's disposal.
Like so much you spew, you have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 17, 2007 01:36 PM (WwtVa)
20
It seems to me that you lost your grill due to your own carelessness. If we come in and purchase you a new grill, you will have no incentive to properly take care of that one either. Pretty soon, you'll be leaving your grill out in all manner of nasty weather, and we'll be buying you a new one each week. It'd be grill-welfare.
Incidentally, I live in Durham and went through pretty much the same storm. As it started, I went outside and moved my grill in the garage, like any reasonable Conservative would do. You should learn to do the same. Perhaps the financial burden of having to replace it yourself will teach you that lesson, and maybe a bit of self-reliance as well.
Posted by: Conservative Scholar at September 17, 2007 01:36 PM (l8GOp)
21
Michael, you're obviously not bright enough to get this, but living over 130 miles from the ocean. I'm not what would typically be considered any more of a "hurricane area" than is San Antonio, Texas.
You were obviously not around for Hurricane Fran.
Posted by: barry at September 17, 2007 02:03 PM (2Sabn)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 29, 2007
Rebuilding New Orleans: A Continuing Mistake
Two years ago today, Hurricane Katrina made landfall near Buras-Triumph, Louisiana as a large Category 3 storm. While parts of coastal Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama suffered the onslaught of the storm's surging waves and wind, most of the world's attention was paid, and is still being paid, to the City of New Orleans, where dozens of levee failures flooded most of the city.
More than 1,800 people were confirmed killed by Hurricane Katrina or in its wake, with 705 still missing, according to Wikipedia.
Literally millions of words have been written ascribing blame for the human failures that contributed to the loss of lives and property brought by this hurricane. The blame and blame-shifting continues to this day, and will be echoed, no doubt, long after the second-hand memories of the storm fade.
But this is not a post about past culpabilities, but those mistakes we are currently making in our all-too-human arrogance as we try to reclaim a disaster.
This is map of what the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers expected the Louisiana coastline to look like in 50 years, prior to the massive erosion and seafloor damage caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and also before the current fervor over global warming began predicting significant sea-level rise. The effects of Katrina and Rita have obviously shortened this timeline, and any sea-level rise that occurs will only hasten the demise of the city known as the Big Easy which is being killed, not protected, by the very levees and dikes that politicians seem so eager to keep building and rebuilding. Experts at LSU predict that the delta protecting New Orleans from a hungry Gulf of Mexico will be gone by 2090.
Several days ago, Presidential candidate Barack Obama unwittingly cited an appropriate passage from the Bible, even though, like most politicians, he drew exactly the wrong conclusions from the scripture he noted:
"Getting ready to talk to you today, I recall what Jesus said at the end of the Sermon on the Mount," Obama said at New Orleans' First Emmanuel Baptist Church. "He said, whoever hears these sayings of mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on a rock."
"The rains descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house. But it did not fall, because it was founded on the rock," he continued.
Most foundations and cities in America are built on rock, clay, or similarly durable soils, while New Orleans exemplifies the agonizing reality of the other house in that parable, the one that Obama didn't mention... that one made by foolish builders upon the sand, as noted in Matthew 7:24-27:
24"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash."
The shattered fool's house in Matthew was built upon the sand.
New Orleans is built upon an even more unstable soil, silt, that is constantly compacting and sinking. What's more, that sinking, unstable soil is in a bowl below sea-level surrounded by the Mississippi River, the Gulf of Mexico, and Lake Pontchartrain, bodies of water that are eating away the coastline at a rate of 25 square miles or more each year.
In September of 2005, I interviewed a geologist who was the former Dean of his southern university's Coastal and Marine Studies program. His closing, unsolicited recommendation was that New Orleans "should be largely abandoned as a city."
New Orleans is doomed city, a geographical mistake destined to fall to geologic and hydraulic forces beyond our control. It is sad they we are too arrogant to concede this failed city to the sea, and seem destined to waste the billions of dollars that could be spent moving the inhabitants to higher ground.
Instead we seem intent on enticing back the poor and the destitute with promises of rebuilding what should not be rebuilt, just to put their lives in danger once more.
8/31 Update: Over at Reason, Steve Chapman is on the same page:
Before the nation undertakes the extravagant project of rebuilding New Orleans and securing it from the elements, we might ask if there isn't a better option, not only for the nation but for the flood victims.
The Democratic debate over the future of New Orleans somehow passed over the instructive example of Valmeyer, Ill. In 1993, the town of 900 was swamped, not for the first time, by a rain-swollen Mississippi River. It hasn't been swamped since, because it's not there anymore. Rather than remain in a vulnerable spot, the residents voted to relocate their village to a bluff 400 feet above the river.
But no one wants to suggest similar discretion in Louisiana.
New Orleans, like Valmeyer, had long been a natural disaster waiting to happen. Most of the city lies below sea level, surrounded by water on three sides, and it's sinking. On top of that, it's steadily grown more exposed to hurricanes, thanks to the loss of coastal wetlands that once served as a buffer. It's a bathtub waiting to be filled.
As one scientist said after Katrina, "A city should never have been built there in the first place." Now that we have a chance to correct the mistake, why repeat it?
Gee, that sounds familiar.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:41 AM
| Comments (34)
| Add Comment
Post contains 977 words, total size 7 kb.
1
I can't believe that people still want to send money down here.
First, our politicians will take every bit of it. They might build something that looks adequate for its purpose, but the expense will be at least 5 times over cost and then the structure will fall apart in a few years.
Second, New Orleans is under water as you said. It is a swamp that is merging with the ocean. It is gone. There is nothing remotely cultural about keeping it alive with expensive projects. The city had begun to die in the 70's and this hurricane only completed the death process.
Third, if you bring those people from the 9th ward back here, Louisiana will never progress. They consistently voted Dem. and any give away program that could be thought of. I think the real reason that other states want to rebuild NO is to get the refugees out of there towns. Any where they have gone there has been trouble.
Posted by: David Caskey,MD at August 29, 2007 09:58 AM (G5i3t)
2
Trackbacked by The Thunder Run -
Web Reconnaissance for 08/29/2007
A short recon of whatÂ’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.
Posted by: David M at August 29, 2007 10:20 AM (gIAM9)
3
If Katrina hadn't destroyed NO, NPR would have had a dearth of commentary-disguised-as-news over the last 2 years. Just about every week there is an interview with some unfortunate soul who is still waiting for a handout, a slow banjo playing in the background in pathetic sympathy. The communities that have rebuilt themselves (in particular, the Korean Christian community) are for the most part relegated to a fleeting comment.
Today was particularly bad. It seemed every single show (even Marketplace) had some sort of Katrina angle thrown in, with no end to the interviewees trotted out with sly (and not-so-sly) digs at Bush. They also bemoaned that it looks like Louisiana will elect a Republican governor since Blanco was so inept. Although they did note that the tards in New Orleans re-elected the King Tard Nagin.
Posted by: negentropy at August 29, 2007 11:08 AM (27KAF)
4
If you recall, shortly after the hurricane, the people at the Super Dome were asking "who is going to take care of me now". That is the over rideing theme with these people. They can not do at thing for themselves, the government has made sure of that. If, by some miracle, they were provided with houses in NO, they would still not move from their current location at that would take too much effort. I know this as I have to work with these people every day.
As to Nagan, he is the choice of the white business men in the city. He was chosen due to their ability to manuplate him. Any of the other choices would have been horrible. It shows you what we have to work with in terms of leadership down here. All a politician has to do is promise a social program and he is immediately in.
Posted by: David Caskey,MD at August 29, 2007 11:17 AM (G5i3t)
5
I know this is a bit off point but "Katrina made landfall near Buras-Triumph, Louisiana as a large Category 3 storm"
NOT says Paul: http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/08/29/the-katrina-video-congress-didnt-want-you-to-see-ii.php
It's long but the most in depth piece i've seen.
Posted by: markm at August 29, 2007 12:37 PM (hVOTO)
6
To be honest, I don't care about NO too much one way or the other. It does seem odd, though, that in this day of global warming politics, that there are _any_ politicians on the left who are in favor of doing anything other than abandoning NO as a city. How idiotic _is_ it to be truly concerned that sea levels are going to rise by 1-? meters and still want to rebuild a city that is already below sea level? It really falls into the "are you lying now or were you lying then" category.
Posted by: suek at August 29, 2007 06:06 PM (9yDpm)
7
Damned fine point, suek.
Better we should save Gaia than NOLA.
Posted by: Pablo at August 29, 2007 09:04 PM (yTndK)
8
The adage that those who learn nothing from their mistakes are destine to repeat them seems appropriate here.
Posted by: czekmark at August 29, 2007 10:09 PM (5Jrbj)
Posted by: ahem at August 30, 2007 10:48 AM (dS04S)
10
ahem, who is that comment directed towards?
You're making a completely irrelevant, and frankly stupid argument is you are attempting to equate New Orleans with Greensburg. Greensburg was felled by a meteorological possibility; New Orleans is facing a geological certainty.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 30, 2007 11:18 AM (0BhZ5)
11
Ahem's comment misses the mark, but not by much. Hurricanes regularly rip various parts of Florida. The feds pony up millions/billions in aid, things get rebuilt, and nobody seems bothered by it. A few years go by, and the sames places get smacked again, and again: federal aid, rebuilding, life goes on. All around the world, cities are built in geographically unfortunate places. New Orleans was located where it was for a good reason.
The only difference is the political will to protect a place. The Dutch live below sea level; they simply spend the money required to make it possible.
New Orleans drowned because the federal government failed it. The wetlands could be reclaimed; the levess could be proplerly built, and New Orleans could continue. Unfortunately, in the current climate, where Grover Norquist wants a federal govt that can "be drowned in a bathtub", this is not the solution that people want to hear. So, instead, we've chosen to abandon an American city, which just happened to be one of the great cities of the world. I'd prefer not to think that racism is involved, but it's hard to come to any other conclusion.
Posted by: montysano at August 30, 2007 12:09 PM (QQhMz)
12
Obviously, no one here has ever understood what New Orleans was to the people that lived there. Grandstanding about how the land is eroding is just insensitive and stupid. New Orleans was and still remains one of the most cosmopolitan cities in the United States. It's one of the few cities recognized worldwide for it's contributions to culture, art and music. It's very easy as someone that doesn't understand living in a place like New Orleans to just dismiss it and call those that love it idiots for wanting to be there, but what this really comes down to is not supporting a city that's eventually going to sink anyways, but supporting a population that chooses to live in a part of the U.S. The earlier comment about Greensburg was dismissed because it isn't inevitable that the land there will constantly be destroyed, but it is constantly destroyed year after year by that so called meteorological possibility. The people of California don't get lambasted every time an earthquake happens do they? No one says L.A. should be abandoned, so why does that argument come so easy for LA? Face it, New Orleanians are going to stay there, they're going to rebuild and their going to continue to raise issues about how federal response to real problems is far more important than pet wars created by a President with too much power.
Posted by: dr4lom at August 30, 2007 12:13 PM (H/epk)
13
Confederate Yankee,
I'm completely amazed that I could be reading your blog all this time and not realize you had such opinions on N.O. Attitudes such as yours truly scare me and make me wonder what country I live in. Contrary to what you may think of People who live in or near N.O. we are intelligent and realize the lack of respect we have from the rest of our great nation. The problem is all you can think of is 'my tax dollars'. Well, in order to bring N.O. to Cat 5 levees it may cost each person in this country $5 over 30 years. Problem is if N.O. gets this, everyone wants their share. I have yet to see scientific proof that the end is only 80 years away not one frustrated LSU prof. I think if you reviewed all the evidence from multiple sources, you'll see that there are workable plans to rebuild the wetlands that have been robbed from us by the oil companies and other interest. I could go on, but your selfish and indiscriminant attitude makes me feel sorry for anyone in this nation that suffers from the next calamity.
Posted by: DwnSth at August 30, 2007 12:47 PM (Jr0+0)
14
While we're at it, let's get rid of the critical path for midwest grain shipments, crude oil, coffee imports, rubber imports, steel...hell, you name it. I mean, New Orleans is only the largest inland port in the U.S. and one of the top five largest ports in the country period.
Moron.
The Federal Government has to spend so much on New Orleans because without that city, we wouldn't be able to ship any grain, coal, or a multitude of other things out of the country or to the lower half of the nation.
Posted by: Marquis de Lafayette at August 30, 2007 01:11 PM (ODRQI)
15
"if you bring those people from the 9th ward back here"
Those people = the blacks. That's what you mean, right? I can hear the lowering of your voice, good Dr., as you intone "those people". The wrong side of the tracks. The wrong side of the canal. The wrong skin color. The wrong attitude. I grew up in the south. I know exactly what you mean.
You do know that over 60% of the homes in the ninth ward were owned by the people who lived in them, right? I think you'd be awfully hard-pressed to find that rate of home ownership in any lilly-white Baton Rouge suburb.
Posted by: Marquis De Sade at August 30, 2007 01:20 PM (ODRQI)
16
Dr. Caskey:
Stop using the university's resources to post racist comments on web boards, and report to my office. We're taking your purple and gold confederate flag away.
Posted by: Sean O' Keefe at August 30, 2007 01:29 PM (ODRQI)
17
I see that Sadly No! is once again sending over the smug but ignorant. As none of you have apparently any knowledge of geology or coastal and marine studies, let me pass on a few bits of knowledge.
The Dutch have reclaimed land from the sea, and have done a marvelous engineering job in doing so, but the geology of Holland is completely different than that of New Orleans, which is built upon a bed of ever-compacting alluvial silt.
The fact of the matter is that the practice of building levees and dikes in Louisiana has choked off the delta region's supply of silt. Instead of seasonal flooding leaving sediments to replenish the ever-compacting delta silt below it, the Mississippi's sediments are instead ejected into the Gulf of Mexico and dispersed. Mankind, in attempting to control the river's course and flooding, has interfered with and largely destroyed the only natural mechanism the delta has of replenishment.
In addition, if we are leaving the current interglacial period and entering a period where we can expect sea level to rise as many suggest (hello, global warming), this problem is only going to be exacerbated as rising seas more rapidly encroach upon the protective marshes.
There is precisely one way, and one way only, to even hope of rebuilding the Mississippi delta and the marshes that protect it, and that is to eliminate the levee system, and allow the river to flood, deposit replenishing sediments, and chart its own course. That, of course, will not happen, because politics is getting in the way of sound science. For these replenishment practices to work, the levee system that protects New Orleans and guides the path of the river must be removed.
We know that river deltas replenish themselves through sediments deposited through seasonal flooding, and that is the same the world over, on all continents. When sediments are not deposited, the natural effects of erosion and compression still apply to the land where the waters are no longer allowed to reach. When you starve a delta from the sediments that built it, it will erode and compact away. This is why New Orleans will die.
This is far more than a matter of political will.
Further, New Orleans will drown because the silt-based soils in the area will not, and cannot be relied upon to hold. The soilbed simply lacks the cohesive physical properties it needs to hold together, which is precisely why these levees failed before they were overtopped. They were undermined, from the base. If you spend tens of billions of dollars (and probably closer to the trillions) to build systems comparable to those of Holland, the system will still fail; no known system build up such a weak foundation will be resistant to intrusion, undermining, and eventual collapse.
The attempted resurrection of New Orleans is based upon current political realities, and is perhaps inevitable as a result of human arrogance. When the city is swept underwater once more, and once more, several thousand people (and hopefully no more) are once again listed as dead or missing, perhaps weÂ’ll start listening to the real scientists, instead of social scientists, for the proper solutions.
WeÂ’re relocated flood-prone cities before, and that is the responsible course of action here. It makes for more sense to move the port further up the river beyond the alluvial fan if at all possible, than continue to poor more money into building levees that only compound the problem and promise a great catastrophe and loss of life in the future.
dr4lom, IÂ’m not making any sort of cultural judgments about the people or sociology of New Orleans, IÂ’m simply basing recommendations upon what scientists at LSU, the Corps of Engineers, and other coastal and marine studies programs have already established about the mechanisms of how the geology, hydrology, biology, and oceanography of the area are understood to work.
No one disputes the unique cultural or artistic contributions New Orleans has made to our society. Nor does anyone have any trouble at all understanding why so many would love such a unique culture.
What we have to concern ourselves with, however, is pragmatism. At what point does it become far more advisable to attempt to move the people, the port, and the culture, than watch it all get swept away in one savage stroke?
It seems to me that many people are far more interested in using the people of New Orleans as political pawns than anything else. Republicans want to help them rebuild so that they can claim some sort of moral high ground; Democrats claim Republicans arenÂ’t rebuilding fast enough so they can claim the moral high ground.
Neither side seems to have enough sense
to move the people themselves to high ground.
As a result, one day, in this year or another, New Orleans will once again see thousands of people die when the levees once again fail. It is sad that these additional thousands—most of them the poor and impoverished, no doubt—will have to die before people will finally start thinking that relocation is the best way to preserve their culture and their lives from a sinking land at the mouth of a hungry sea.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 30, 2007 01:47 PM (0BhZ5)
18
I don't know what else to say Confederate Yankee. Since you are obviously a geologist and wetlands expert (I hope you're not spouting ideas you may have simply read) then I cannot argue. On the other hand, I would like to see you host a true group of true experts both local and international to see what they have to say. Again, your ignorance is amazing and sad. Sorry C.Y. I'm done with you 'reveling the truth in media'. You're a sham!
Posted by: DwnSth at August 30, 2007 02:21 PM (Jr0+0)
19
I never claimed to be a geologist or wetlands "expert" by any stretch of the imagination. I took geography and oceanography courses before declaring my undergraduate degee, and retain enough from those classes to understand the basic mechanisms involved, but that is all, other than what I've gleaned from readily accessible scientific studies and an interview I've done with a
real expert.
I've yet to encounter a single scientist or paper that suggests New Orleans has long-term viability. Should you be able to provide links to a scientist who does, I'd be quite interested in reading his research and conclusions. I suspect you can't readily do that, and that you've let your emotions get in the way of logic.
I've invited experts to discuss the topic previously, sending out email to close to two dozen experts in related research, two years ago when I first wrote about the subject.
Only two replied. As I recall, one replied only to state that no scientist in his right mind would touch the issue because of the political angle, and the other was the one expert who shared his thoughts only under the cover of anonymity, for precisely those same concerns.
If you are so certain that New Orleans can be saved, please provide a practical solution.
I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 30, 2007 02:41 PM (0BhZ5)
20
Since you are a supposed advocate of fact finding, I will be researching my contacts within the accedimic and professional field in order to provide a valid and meaniful response. I would invite others to pursue the same so we can all compare notes.
Posted by: DwnSth at August 30, 2007 03:02 PM (Jr0+0)
21
By all means, please do so.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 30, 2007 03:07 PM (0BhZ5)
22
I've yet to encounter a single scientist or paper that suggests New Orleans has long-term viability.
Ummm...... Ivor van Heerden from the LSU Hurrican Center would be one. You're often sloppy with your sources, CY. I'm certainly not aware of some great chorus of scientists who advocate abandoning NO.
If you are so certain that New Orleans can be saved, please provide a practical solution.
Today? Right now? Get the levees built, get 'em built right, get 'em built now. I hate to put it in these terms, but the numbers I've seen quoted for the cost of the levee system, and for wetland reclamation, are essentially equal to a couple of months in Iraq.
To suggest that we abandon an American city based on what may happen some decades hence seems to me to be the most slippery of slopes.
Posted by: montysano at August 30, 2007 03:10 PM (QQhMz)
23
Very good, Monty, you've produced the name of a one scientist, and even one who has published a book. I stand corrected: I am now aware of a single scientist that states as a matter of policy that he thinks that New Orleans should be rebuilt. I'm sure there are more that feel precisely the same way.
I'll contact Dr. van Heerden. I have some very specific questions to ask him.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 30, 2007 03:31 PM (0BhZ5)
24
What's missing in that picture is your decency.
Posted by: Nimrod Gently at August 30, 2007 03:49 PM (LGz0B)
25
CY: if you read the lede of that link I posted, you'll note that Greensburg, KS had been counting its luck in tornado alley for many years. Now will you spare the mock scorn and say whether it's worth your federal tax dollars?
There are many, many places in the US that fail your test. The history of settlements shows that they often flourish in spite of environmental risks for the advantages the afford. Rivers flood; coastal areas are hit by storms and are subject to erosion. The French weren't being capricious in 1718, and neither was Jefferson in 1803.
So why can't I help thinking that those condemning NOLA would shrug and play amateur seismologist were the Big One to hit San Francisco, but would somehow morph into amateur meteorological statisticians to spare those small-town dwellers who finally crapped out in tornado alley, or would sigh and nod at their federal tax dollars going to
drought-affected farmers?
Posted by: ahem at August 30, 2007 04:29 PM (dS04S)
26
ahem, perhaps I need to type slower so you'll be able to catch up, and understand something very basic: New Orleans will probably not exist in 50 years. The land on which it resides
will cease to exist.
All the other places you mention can suffer temporary disasters of varying intensity, from which they can recover and perhaps not experience another such calamity for generations.
Becoming part of the Gulf of Mexico?
Rather permanent.
Of course, you don't have to ask me... ask the residents of Indianola, once the second largest port in Texas.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 30, 2007 07:18 PM (HcgFD)
27
CY, perhaps you need to think a bit slower! Odd how you go after posters who question your opinion. Back in 2006 wasn't it you who said to the Washington Post "Whether you are a Pulitzer-winning journalist or a Weblog Award nominee, your value comes from your credibility and your ability to substantiate what you say, and your ability to admit and correct mistakes."
What you didn't say was how grudgingly you admit mistakes (your response to montysanto).
Rather than citing one 'credible' source perhaps you can give names and dates for your resources. I've reviewed your body of investigative journalism and it leaves a bit to be desired as far as this debate goes. What's your stance on global warming. Do you buy into that myth also? You can sit on your bully pulpit and spout whatever nonsense you wish. Put some of that myth-busting bad reporting research to good use and give us some backup for this view from a misguided northerner stuck in the south. By the way, my investigation continues and unlike you I have to do this on my own time. Back to the Washington Post, you said "I try to establish credibility by doing research the reader may not have time to conduct on his own". I say prove that statement.
Posted by: DwnSth at August 30, 2007 10:23 PM (Jr0+0)
28
DwnSth - Montysano provides a very good analogy to your query on global warming in his comment at 3:10:
"To suggest that we abandon an American city based on what may happen some decades hence seems to me to be the most slippery of slopes."
Essentially the AGW types are suggesting we radically alter our behavior, change our economies, and spend untold billions of dollars on what is essentially junk "science." The purported consensus doesn't exist and more debunking of supposed evidence is making it through the media and academic censorship filter all the time now. I can't answer for CY, but any rational person should be able to determine that based on the manipulated evidence and debunked evidence produced to date and the small amount of green house gasses produced by mankind relative to the overall total, AGW is a religion, a cult, not a science. Follow the money.
Posted by: daleyrocks at August 30, 2007 10:42 PM (0pZel)
29
I would also venture to say that there is a much better body of science on the study of coastal erosion and marshes than AGW.
Posted by: daleyrocks at August 30, 2007 10:47 PM (0pZel)
30
DwnSth, I'll admit mistakes when I know I've made them. To date, I've seen not the first bit of documentation provided to show that I'm incorrect here, while I've linked the sources I drew from in the article. I'm hearing whining, but seeing no facts.
Global warming is not a myth; we've know for some time we're coming out of an interglacial period. What no one knows conclusively is if mankind has had any impact on this. The data sure doesn't support that conclusion at this time, where it seems solar activity may be more responsible.
Just for kicks, I've contacted 58--almost five dozen--scientists from relevant disciplines. We'll see what those who respond have to say next week, but I already have one response, from a Research Specialist at the Division of Nearshore Research, Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi.
His response was that he agree that we should move everyone out of New Orleans and not let it be rebuilt.
I'll post whatever other responses I get midweek next week, as we are entering a holiday weekend, and I'm still working on two other investigations that I find far more interesting.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 31, 2007 12:11 AM (HcgFD)
31
CY, like you have sent out many queries and received back few. From Dean at LSU School of Coast and Environment:
Whether you feel New Orleans is worth rebuilding depends very much on the timeframe you are concerned about. If you are concerned about the next 50 years, then it probably makes sense. If you are looking 500 years into the future, then it probably does not.
There's more to this response but that can wait until next week.
Again, the science of NOLA being part of the Gulf in 80 years is what I'm questioning here. If the science is there then fine, let's put our vast national resources to work and move it somewhere (not really sure how that would work). If it's 200 or 300 years out, let's fix what's there, protect the people and have real thought on how to handle the situation over a long term.
BTW, this research stuff is kinda fun. I can see why you've made a career out of it.
Have a great Labor Day weekend! I'll be in my new FEMA funded pool (Just kidding, FEMA is always good for a laugh around here).
Posted by: DwnSth at August 31, 2007 08:02 AM (Jr0+0)
32
CY,
I think if you read the uniformed, illogical, mean comments by those on this thread that have been arguing with you, then you will understand the personality of NO. This is how the whole city acts. I lived there for 4 years and they are some of the meanest, most ignorant people on earth.
As to my bigoted statements. If you look at the population of the 9th ward you will find that it is made up of both races. Both act in consort as a liberal voting block that sells its vote to whatever liberal offers the most "give me" social programs at the expense of the rich (those who make any money in Louisiana).
Your assessment of the loss of wet lands and is correct and it has nothing to do with the "oil companies". This loss was the product of government action that began in the early 1900's and thinking individuals warned against it at that time. But true to form, our government felt that "something had to be done" to combat periodic flooding of low areas and this was an excellent way to accomplish that goal and steal from the taxpayer all at the same time.
I might pass on a conversation I recently had with a lawyer from NO. He said that his prominent neighborhood still did not have appropriate sewage removal. Daily a truck is brought in by the government and hooked to the lines. If is then removed and replaced by another truck the following day. The reason the main lines can not be fixed is that FEMA can not decide if the damage to the lines was due to the hurricane or aging. They worked well before the hurricane. That is the mentality we deal with.
Posted by: David Caskey at August 31, 2007 09:24 AM (G5i3t)
33
A man of reason studies an issue carefully and closely; consults with experts; gathers and weighs evidence; arrives at a logical conclusion; puts pen to paper; writes with clarity; dots every I and crosses every T to craft a seamless blog entry.
He is not worried about falsifiability tests because he wants to get things right, to see the world correctly. He just gets aggravated about all the out-of-the-woodwork crack brained lunatics (like Marquis de Sade, ahem, DwnSth...) who answer rational discourse with inchoate "feelings" and shameless dishonesty (non-stop fallacies and tricks of rhetoric).
Posted by: Janes Randi Rocks at August 31, 2007 10:34 AM (6MeZY)
34
The credibility of this site would be greatly enhanced if you could demonstrate that you knew what a liberal was -- but, then you would have to confront the awful truth that YOU are liberals and I doubt you can handle the truth.
But, just in case, you have some intellectual honesty left here goes...
This nation was founded as a REPUBLIC, not a democracy. A republic is a form of governance where the rule of law is codified and published (Re-Pulbios) in a civil contract of constituted (Constitution) authority.
By definition, a Constitution is a NEGATIVE (restraining) document -- that is, it defines what the prevailing political powers CANNOT DO. Where there is NO Constitution, the prevailing political powers have UNLIMITED authority.
Since UNLIMITED authority is the starting base point of all political powers; the purpose of a Constitution is to restrain that power. It therefore follows that the more LIBERALLY the Constitution is interpreted the MORE power the prevailing political powers have; and the more CONSERVATIVELY the Constitution is interpreted the LESS power the prevailing political powers have.
You people who advocate increases in government authority whether it is through economic assaults on individuals and private property (taxation and redistribution) or military assaults on individuals and private property (war) are the REAL LIBERALS regardless of what you choose to call yourselves.
The state is not a benevolent parent, rather it is a massive bureaucratic system dominated by the selfish self-interest of hundreds of thousands of government employees.
Any "service" these people render you is only because their needs and yours just happen to intersect -- a rare serendipitous accidental conjunction; and hardly a reliable expectation. If you REALLY want freedom; stop relying on handouts and have the guts to be independent.
Posted by: Carl Street at September 04, 2007 12:51 PM (ObDOe)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 01, 2007
Prayers for Minneapolis
As you are no doubt well aware of by now, the I35W bridge spanning the Mississippi River in Minneapolis
collapsed during rush our this evening.
Dozens of vehicles have fallen into the river or the ground below; others have been crushed by the falling span. As I write this, authorities are stating that they can confirm seven people have died, that more than 30 are injured, and that 20 people or more are thought to be missing.
My heart goes out to those who have loved ones involved in this disaster, and I ask those readers who are religious to please consider saying prayers for those involved in this disaster, their families, the first responders, and attending medical personnel.
Update: James Lileks is continuing to update the story.
Worth noting are the stories of the heroism of ordinary people amid the disaster, as many people nearby and on the bridge rushed to aid others.
From Lileks at 10:21 PM:
I’m listening to a story on the news about a man who survived the fall – then ran to help the kids on the bus. I’d guess the fellow never considered what he might do in such a situation. Never thought about it much. Who would? But then you find yourself on a bridge that’s crashed down into the Mississippi, and you’re struggling with the seat belt buckle. It works , but your hands feel thick. You’re alive – which doesn’t seem that odd, really, you’ve always been alive, so this is just different, but you have strange thoughts about insurance and a mad swirl of panic and there’s blood in your hair but you can stand – and then you see a school bus. So you go to the bus. Of course you go the bus.
Most of us would. ItÂ’s a remarkable instinct that wells up and kicks in, and itÂ’s something you never expected to experience. As someone said about humans: WeÂ’re at our best when things are worst.
Would you have run to the bus? I'll answer for you: yes.
And from what I'm hearing, many did exactly that.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:15 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 358 words, total size 2 kb.
May 26, 2007
who i are and what this blog needs
I'm still not quite sure why CY volunteered to let me guest blog, unless he's looking for
ace type posting, without teh funny, snide remarks and esoteric wit. Which if you're familiar with ace's site leaves us with poking fun at Andy "Patron Saint of the Man Pooter" Sullivan, a mutual hatred of
Ice-Wops and pr0n.
If you're unfamiliar with my work, which you almost assuredly are, most recently I've been posting at agent bedhead, who was nice enough to take me in when I got too lazy busy to post at my own site. I'm also as CY mentioned part of the team at apothegm designs and responsible for the design of this site, which to those ever cleaver and uniquely refreshing liberal commenters means I'm a bigot hoping to enslave brown people so they'll pick my vast nonexistent fields of cotton and call me masta.
Anyhoo, enough about me and on with what this blog needs.
Since I've already numbed your minds enough and posted a link to an Snow Porker getting his, I'll bring on teh pr0n.
How's this news? Well the Australian lass pictured above, Kylie Minogue, is according to the bosh desperate for a man. She was engaged to a French(man?), so more than likely she's still as pure as the driven snow. Me, I'd take care of her, but I'm happily married, so I figured I'd let you guys have the first, um, crack at her. Consider yourselves warned, she's a naughty little minx, so you'd best be, "up" to the challenge, so to speak.
More of what this blog needs, food pr0n, is on the way, with pictures, just as soon as I get the ham, ribs and sausage off the smoker.
Since absolutely none of this interests 99.92735% if CY's normal readers I'll have analysis of what blind hogs, sadly no and the democratic underground have in common and how they've changed my life for the better. But first, pork.
Posted by: phin at
02:22 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 344 words, total size 2 kb.
1
If you think she's hot, check out her little sister Dannii.
Just do a search.
Belive me.
Posted by: Dan at May 26, 2007 02:58 PM (JfUNh)
2
I agree whole heartedly that she's hot, the problem is she ain't desperate. If she is she isn't nearly as desperate as she'd have to be for me to have a shot.
Kylie on the other hand, she's launched a search party and that's my kind of desperate...
Posted by: phin at May 26, 2007 03:14 PM (YgMQV)
3
Having read that
Kylie Minogue is easily bored in bed clarify the meaning of the word
bored. Years ago I made my living as a tool & die maker, in that industry
bored means the past tense of enlarging a pre-existing hole.
Posted by: Dave at May 27, 2007 07:16 AM (3+0jc)
4
For the record, I approve of this new theme.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at May 27, 2007 07:55 AM (VgTsb)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 22, 2007
Virginia Tech Shooter Had Plenty More Ammo
Seung-Hui Cho fired
less than half of the 377 rounds of ammunition he brought with him into Norris Hall on April 16 before commiting suicide after killing 32 students and faculty at Virginia Tech:
The gunman who killed 30 people at a Virginia Tech building was "well-prepared" to continue his shooting spree with more than 200 additional rounds of ammunition, a state panel was told Monday.
Police found 203 live rounds in Norris Hall, where Seung-Hui Cho killed 25 students and five faculty members before committing suicide on April 16, State Police Superintendent W. Steven Flaherty told a panel investigating the massacre. Cho also shot two other students elsewhere.
"He was well-prepared to continue on," Flaherty said.
Cho fired 174 shots from two handguns on the second floor in a span of nine minutes, taking his own life at 9:51 a.m. as police on the stairwell approached the floor, Flaherty said.
I suspect, but certainly cannot prove, that Cho chose to take his life when he did because he heard the sounds of police shooting through the locks on the first-floor doors he had chained shut, and he did not want to risk of being wounded by police and captured.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:41 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 1 kb.
May 09, 2007
A Little Early This Year: CY's Hurricane Survival Guide
I'd not planned on reposting this for several more weeks, but
Andrea has other ideas.
WARNING: This is not comprehensive hurricane survival guide. I've only been through a few, and hardly consider myself an expert. Anyone who claims to be able to tell you everything you need to do to survive in every situation is lying. Adjust the following accordingly to your circumstances, but remember the only way to beat a hurricane is to not be there when it arrives.
Before the Storm: General
- Listen to the radio, watch television news, or read online news sources to keep abreast of developing tropical systems. Keep close track of storms that may head in your general direction. Don't be caught flat-footed.
- Know the hurricane evacuation routes for your area. By a state map or better yet, an atlas that can provide you with parallel routes away from an impending storm.
- Make sure any vital medical prescriptions are filled in advance of an impending storm.
- Make hotel reservations further inland several days in advance "just in case." Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
Before the Storm: Around the House
- Secure any lightweight objects outside the home. Bikes, toys, plants and other outdoor items can be carried away by wind and water, often at unpleasant velocities.
- Board up your windows if possible, or tape them with duct tape in an asterisk pattern (*) if that is your only option. This serves to reinforce the glass, and in the event of a window shattering, may keep the shattered glass together so that it falls to the floor instead of spraying.
Before the Storm: Transportation
- Fill your gas tank several days in advance, and keep it topped off.
- Check your vehicle's fluids, and belts, making sure to top off your windshield washer fluid and coolants.
- Make sure your tires are in good shape, and make sure your spare tire is inflated.
- Make sure your tires have adequate tread. See manufacturers guidelines.
- Leave when storm impact seems imminent. Do not wait for the official evacuation order if you can leave earlier.
Before the Storm: Personal
- Create a "bug-out bag."
This is an emergency evacuation bag of bare essentials you make need in an emergency. In this bag (preferably a backpack) include:- a small battery-operated AM/FM radio, and fresh batteries for same.
- two waterproof flashlights and/or battery operated lanterns with fresh batteries for same.
- cell phone (and charger).
- disposable lighter and waterproof matches.
- personal toiletries including toothbrush, toothpaste, deodorant, hand sanitizer, and other personal hygiene products as applicable.
- a first aid kit with painkillers, bandages and band aids.
- duct tape (min. 2 rolls)
- sturdy pocket knife
- hammer & prybar
- box of 8D nails
- blankets (multiple)
- clothes
- socks
- raingear
- study boots
- general-purpose leather gloves
- enough non-perishable, ready-to-eat food and water (1 gallon per person per day) for three days.
- last but not least, all insurance information, property, vehicle, life, and medical.
- create a contacts list. Include a I.C.E. "in case of emergency" number.
- put an I.C.E. notification with your ID and store it in your cell phone.
Before the Storm: Evacuation
- pack bug-out bag, and supplies including food and water into vehicle.
- make one last check to make sure outdoor items are secured.
- cut off all electrical switches, appliances, televisions, lights, etc.
- before you leave, contact your I.C.E. person and let them know where you are going and when you expect to arrive.
- make sure all windows are closed tightly and locked.
- lock all doors.
- leave.
- anticipate high winds and driving rain. Stay calm, drive cautiously. Allow plenty of time to arrive at your destination. Beware of standing water.
- Call your I.C.E. contact when you arrive safely.
During the Storm
Moving away from the hurricane will most likely reduce the effects of a hurricane, but it cannot eliminate risks entirely, even hundred of miles inland.
- Duct tape windows in asterisk or "star" pattern (*). stay away from windows. draw blinds and curtains, if possible, to contain glass in the event of a window breaking.
- stay inside, away from windows and doors especially during the eye of the storm. Winds restart again quickly with extreme velocities as the eyes passes and the wind shifts 180 degrees.
- stay near interior walls. If the winds are very strong move into an interior bathroom where the building is likely to be strongest.
- do not leave unless flooding is imminent or you are instructed to do so by authorities.
After the Storm
- stay off the road and away from affected areas until authorities clear the area for your return.
- watch for downed power lines and other debris in roads.
- be very careful of standing pools of water and especially flowing water. It is ofnte deeper and more powerful than it appears.
- watch for displaced wildlife. poisonous snakes, fireants, and abandoned pets. all can present hazards.
- watch for dangerous debris.
- lookout for injured people and animals. Call authorities if possible.
- do not become a tourist. go home, and stay home.
- secure your property. take stock of any damage. Catalog damage for insurance purposes.
Again, this list is hardly comprehensive, and cannot anticipate special needs or unexpected situations. It is however, a start, and can help you get ready for the 2007 storm season.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:37 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 854 words, total size 6 kb.
1
If they live in NO you might suggest they learn how to swim.
Posted by: David Caskey at May 09, 2007 11:10 AM (G5i3t)
2
I'd recommend turning off the natural gas and also having a fire extinguisher handy. But as for your bug-out bag, do you really expect someone to be able to carry all that? That list is for a tornado shelter-style environment. It's good stuff, but way too much for someone who's going to be on the move.
Posted by: Granddaddy Long Legs at May 09, 2007 11:17 AM (klw4o)
3
You might also move someplace with better weather.... I am so glad I'm an Oregonian (despite our venal politicians).
Posted by: Jeff at May 09, 2007 11:23 AM (yiMNP)
4
If they have a Democrat controlled government hostile to President Bush, shouldn't they just leave now?
Posted by: SouthernRoots at May 09, 2007 11:31 AM (EsOdX)
5
Its funny their giving Bush crap about his 17-1976 gaffe. At least he realized it in the middle of saying it and turned it into a joke. Im sure O-holier-than-thou-bama's huge mistake will just prove that he is an even smarter than they think.
BTW complaining there is no Nat. Guard for the cleanup is ridiculous. The NG is a Military organization. There job to fight bad guys not clean up natural disasters. We are at war people, get a grip!
Posted by: Justin at May 09, 2007 01:52 PM (NiTuu)
6
Very nice work, add prescription drug info, and have a plan for your pets, don't just watch out for abandoned pets.
Have a pet carrier that you can move your pet safely.
Posted by: NortonPete at May 09, 2007 04:17 PM (fVuwW)
7
A quick way to safeguard pool furniture is to throw it all into the pool. I'm serious. We did it all the time when we lived there.
Posted by: Bill Smith at May 09, 2007 05:28 PM (kWfb4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 07, 2007
Kathleen Sebelius' Political Disaster
Our hearts go out to those in Greensburg, Kansas who have lost family members and friends as a result of this natural disaster. If you know of displaced survivors who have yet to contact their loved ones, or wish to contribute to disaster relief, please contact the American Red Cross.
* * *
I wonder just how accurate this headline is: Iraq War Hampers Kansas Cleanup.
The rebuilding effort in tornado-ravaged Greensburg, Kansas, likely will be hampered because some much-needed equipment is in Iraq, said that stateÂ’s governor.
Governor Kathleen Sebelius said much of the National Guard equipment usually positioned around the state to respond to emergencies is gone. She said not having immediate access to things like tents, trucks and semitrailers will really handicap the rebuilding effort.
The Greensburg administrator estimated that 95 percent of the town of 1500 was destroyed by Friday's tornado.
The Kansas National Guard has about 40 percent of the equipment it is allotted because much of it has been sent to Iraq.
It is true, as Marc Danziger notes, that Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said just weeks ago that:
...she fears deployments of Kansas National Guard troops and equipment could hurt the stateÂ’s ability to react to disasters on the homefront.
In the same KCBS article cited above, Kansas Rep. Lee Tafanelli (R), a member of the Kansas National Guard, notes that that Kansas Army National Guard still retained 70-80 percent of its manpower.
If the figures provided by the Democratic governor and the Republican State rep and Guardsman are correct, the Army National Guard in Kansas still retains 40%-50% of their heavy equipment and 70%-80% of their manpower, which should be more than adequate to handle geographically narrow and isolated events such as the Greensburg tornado and others that hit Kansas this past Friday.
But please, don't take my word for it. Listen to what the state adjutant general had to say:
"We've been over the town twice now — all of our partners around the state, the experts from cities with technical search-and-rescue," Maj. Gen. Todd Bunting, the state's adjutant general, told CNN Monday morning. "We've done everything we can.
"Some of this rubble is 20, 30 feet deep. That's where we've spent all our efforts, and we'll do it again today."
As Maj. Gen. Bunting notes, they've already been over Greensburg twice, and they are going through the destroyed town of 1,500 again.
While it was no doubt comforting to have the additional manpower and equipment from the National Guard available, it is the state and local emergency personnel with trained search-and-rescue experts that are our best resources for this and similar situations.
Despite an inaccurate claim made by Sebelius on CNN, National Guard soldiers are not first responders, and they never have been. National Guardsmen can only be called to duty in governor-declared states of emergency, or federally, by presidential order.
Our first responders were, and remain, our local and state police, fire, and rescue units. The National Guard is now, and has always been, a reserve force.
Despite the reduction of certain kinds of National Guard equipment in state armories, I suspect that the personnel and equipment that remain at Gov. Sebelius' disposal is more than sufficient to handle the effort at hand. On some level, she seems to agree. Of thousands of National Guardsmen available, she has apparently deployed just 110.
It seems apparent that her anti-war pronouncements and appointments have as much to do with her claims as does any actually shortfall of equipment, and I suspect her words have as much to do with Sebelius' political hopes as it does the reality of Greenburg's battered ground.
Update: Reality bites... for Sebelius, that is:
Pentagon officials are disputing claims that the Iraq war has spread National Guardsmen too thin to respond to a Kansas tornado after the governor and some Democratic lawmakers complained that the Guard are not equipped to help displaced residents.
Kansas has 88 percent of its state Guard forces available, and 83,000 Guardsmen from neighboring states are also on the ready should the state request their assistance, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said Tuesday, citing National Guard Bureau statistics.
According to Whitman, the Kansas Guard have available 352 Humvees, 94 cargo trucks, 72 dump trucks, 62 five-ton trucks, 13 medium-haul trucks and trailers and 152 2 1/2-ton trucks, a surplus, he noted.
How many of the Kansas National Guard's available 83,000+ men, 393 trucks and 352 Humvees would be required in a town of 1,500?
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
03:30 PM
| Comments (23)
| Add Comment
Post contains 757 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Prayers and best wishes for Greensburg and surrounding areas hit by the recent wicked weather.
I DO wish elected officials would resist the temptation to turn something like this into a chance to take a political jab.
Florida and the Gulf coast have lots of volunteers and donated equipment and material after hurricanes. No doubt Kansas will see similar help over the next couple of weeks. Why doesn't that get a mention from the pols?
Posted by: Retread at May 07, 2007 03:45 PM (mtsTe)
2
give Sebelius her due she has don a lot for the state of kansas but she has always been a lib hack and will always toe the party line no mater what
Posted by: Rich at May 07, 2007 03:48 PM (EblDJ)
3
Many prayers and well wishes go out to those poor folks devasted by this disaster. Go here to help:
http://www.salvationarmyusa.org/usn/www_usn.nsf
A ray of hope: Survivor found in ruble.
http://kmbz-am.fimc.net/listingsEntry.asp?ID=497588&PT=Top+Story
This guy (a storm chaser) was one of the first on the scene to offer help. His passenger took some heart wrenching pictures.
http://www.blownawaytours.us/
As for Kathy (Oz) Sebelius, she's riding her broom on this tragic wind to her 15 minutes of political infamy. Notice how quick CNN picked up on the bush bashing from this witch and her distortions?
Posted by: locomotivebreath1901 at May 07, 2007 05:00 PM (Cy7OH)
4
On the ABC Radio news today, someone used the analogy of a burning house. "If your house was burning down, would you want to hear that half the fire department was unavailable?"
Unfortunately, this is not an apt analogy. The primary mission of the fire department is to fight fires in its jurisdiction. The primary mission of the National Guard is as a reserve force for the US Armed Forces.
Just because the Governor occasionally gets to use the NG for some rescue or cleanup detail doesn't mean that that is why it exists.
A better analogy would be if the fire department was also used to clean up the local parks. One day, someone notices the trash cans in the park hadn't been emptied. Upon questioning, it turns out the fire department was too busy fighting fires to empty those cans. "If your house was burning down, would you want to hear that the fire department was too busy emptying trash cans to respond?" "If you were at war, would you want to here that the NG was too busy cleaning up after a tornado to man the lines?"
Posted by: DrTony at May 07, 2007 09:14 PM (QEqo2)
5
Even IF there were less equipment than was needed, the worst that can be said is that civilians, somewhere, at some point, may have to sacrifice something for the war. That's not a new concept, nor is it something that should be used to undermine the war.
What happened to our country?
Posted by: DoorHold at May 07, 2007 09:34 PM (PDBzF)
6
The Florida guard did little other than supply security after Andrew. Cleanup/rebuilding isn't their mission, nor should it be.
This woman is whacked in the head.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at May 08, 2007 12:20 AM (0mhB9)
7
Gee whiz, Bob. Can't an honest Dhimmicrat ever get a fair shake around here? I mean, like, if Chimpy McHitlerburton hadn't repealed that Kyoto thingy there wouldn't have been a tornado to begin with. Ain't that right, Kathleen?
I added an excerpt and link to my 2007.05.08 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup.
Posted by: Bill Faith at May 08, 2007 12:34 AM (n7SaI)
8
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for her.
Prayers for Greensburg.
Posted by: lurking in kansas at May 08, 2007 09:30 AM (6yHgW)
9
it sounds like every single governor is worried about lack of equipment.
http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.cb6e7818b34088d18a278110501010a0/?vgnextoid=0efa555e19139010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
Posted by: mark c at May 08, 2007 12:12 PM (qQvqI)
10
here is a shorter link:
http://tinyurl.com/2kun6b
also, i didn't think you linked to wikipedia
Posted by: mark c at May 08, 2007 12:15 PM (qQvqI)
11
15 out of 19 Kansas National Guard Helicopters are in Iraq (that's 85%). In many states with rural populations, the National Guard is relied upon to evacuate injured persons to hospitals via chopper. What is the response time for an ambulance to that area in Kansas, an hour? two? more?
Although the NG may have 40-60% of it's total equipment it is lacking much higher percentages of specific vital equipment-- such as helicopters, troop transport vehicles, and heavy tractor trailers.
What if we are attacked on our home soil now? Are we prepared? Are you ready to hear, sorry we can't defend the homeland because we are busy in the middle east? This really scares me and it should you but you're too busy thinking politics to think practicality.
My friends in the NG say "god forbid we get attacked on our own soil because we're gonna look like 100 clowns trying to climb out of a VW bug, rolling up to face the enemy". Where they are stationed, they usually have some 30 troop transport vehicles, currently they have 2-- they pray every day that nothing happens because they know they can't respond.
FYI: The National Guard seems to think that disaster preparedness, response, and recovery are all part of their mission-- http://www.ngb.army.mil/features/disasterprep/default.aspx
Their own recruiting website states "Most likely, your assignments will be somewhere within your home state, because the Guard's main focus is assisting in civil disturbances and natural disasters like blizzards, wildfires and hurricanes. Your tasks will include getting people to safety, delivering supplies, restoring order and other jobs as directed."
Or, "When our nation is in peril due to natural disasters, civil disturbances or enemy threats, the Army National GuardÂ’s Citizen-Soldiers stand proud, trained and ready to protect Americans border to border, coast to coast and around the world.
Also, as of yesterday, according to the National Guard, over 300 Kansas National Guardsmen were called to respond.
Although I may support your cause, it seems to me with your selective quoting and misinformation, you are doing exactly what it is you accuse the gov'ner of-- making political hay out of what should be a very serious issue.
Posted by: jenn at May 08, 2007 01:18 PM (1aad4)
Posted by: Robert at May 08, 2007 01:42 PM (EUwSo)
13
Other state NG units can be requested, (and for big stuff they are) and surrounding communities usually have Mutual Aid agreements and will be there.
And one quibble - there is a Federal first-response agency: the US Coast Guard (but I doubt they have much of a SAR presence in Kansas).
Posted by: Mikey NTH at May 08, 2007 04:37 PM (B26Fg)
14
In many states with rural populations, the National Guard is relied upon to evacuate injured persons to hospitals via chopper.
Actually, no, they don't.
National Guard units don't keep scramble teams on hand to fly out and rescue people. Even the most "rural" states have many helicopters, run by private ambulance services, to do helicopter evacs. Kansas has at least three different companies that do helicopter air evac 24/7, and a couple of them also do fixed-wing evacs (small airfields are scattered all over the country, if you know where to look).
When the patient is anywhere near a good highway, it's usually better to get them into a good fast ambulance with a full load of gear, anyway. Air evac is seldom a first choice. In a case like Greensburg, they tend to send the Red Cross doctors out to the site, rather than rely on evacsuation (in stormy weather, helicopters aren't good for damaged people).
Posted by: cirby at May 08, 2007 08:38 PM (ZMgaW)
15
Dr. Tony,
Stop giving half information
From the National Guard's Home Page
The National Guard has a unique dual mission that consists of both Federal and State roles. For state missions, the governor, through the state Adjutant General, commands Guard forces. The governor can call the National Guard into action during local or statewide emergencies, such as storms, fires, earthquakes or civil disturbances.
The Army National Guard's state mission is perhaps the most visible and well known. Nearly everyone has seen or heard of Guard units responding to battle fires or helping communities deal with floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, snowstorms or other emergency situations. In times of civil unrest, the citizens of a state can rest assured that the Guard will be ready to respond, if needed.
Posted by: DrTony's Concious at May 08, 2007 09:36 PM (tEvVi)
16
After spending a time in the National Guard, I came to understand that we were primarily a standby force to aid the full time military. WWII and Korea were prime examples. But of course that was a time of 'Common Sense' in the USA. The State was the second mission and we did provide security as mentioned in a previous post. We were also the first to be blamed when something did not go as the Liberal Media desired.
The latest trend by the Liberal factions are to ban the recruitment of any military in schools across the nation. To their credit, 'The Fly Over', as the elite west and East coast call middle America, is bucking that unreal trend. Please tell me where that leaves the State in a case of true emergency if, as the politically motivated declare, the National Guards main pupose is?
The 'Liberal' factions aways plentiful Lawyers, would like to legally neuter all police, have the National Guard only for cleanup details, and lastly kick back and have another 'Utopia Latte'.
http://daflikkers.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Blogengeezer at May 08, 2007 10:38 PM (PIJWX)
17
"15 out of 19 Kansas National Guard Helicopters are in Iraq (that's 85%). In many states with rural populations, the National Guard is relied upon to evacuate injured persons to hospitals via chopper. What is the response time for an ambulance to that area in Kansas, an hour? two? more?"
LOL. We poor folk in rural Kansas ain't heard of no motorized ambulances have we?
Lordy...please know what you are talking about before you talk about 'that area in Kansas'. You sound like an idiot.
Posted by: Paul at May 09, 2007 03:52 AM (HpmwJ)
18
Kathleen Sebelius is an embarassment to our state. She needs to get her own office in order and follow protocol in a disaster situation instead of criticizing our President and our troops.
Posted by: BETTY at May 09, 2007 08:03 AM (ZQxiI)
19
I expect no better from a Democrat governor these days, but it really steamed me to have her pathetic assertion repeated as the factual headline of the story: not in quotations, not prefaced by 'Gov. claims' or 'Gov. charges'.
I'm surprised the tornado wasn't hailed as another proof of global warming, while they were at it. Coulda tied up two hissyfits in one tantrum.
Posted by: R. Minor at May 09, 2007 08:03 AM (XKyoF)
20
Over at "In From the Cold," we've been on this story from Day One; fact is, Governor Sebelius has been using this as a political issue from the start.
Consider yesterday's op-ed in the Wichita Eagle, by Kansas Senator Pat Roberts. When Senator Roberts spoke with President Bush on Saturday afternoon--almost 24 hours after the storm--Mr. Bush said the only thing he needed for a disaster declaration was a request from the Kansas governor. So, after getting off the phone with the President, Senator Roberts called Sebelius and told her to submit the request. Why did the governor have to wait until Roberts made a phone call? Did she lose the number for the White House, or perhaps her cell service doesn't cover Washington D.C. I find it appalling that Sebelius was already criticizing the federal response when she hadn't bothered to request a disaster declaration.
Additionally, her claims about equipment shortages are misleading. As both DoD and the Guard Bureau stated yesterday, the Kansas Guard has its full allotment of heavy equipment--the stuff you need to clear rubble and haul it away. They also noted that Kansas officials have yet to request outside assistance under the compact that allows them to "borrow" equipment and resources from neighboring states. If the situation was a dire as the governor described, why wasn't her Adjutant General on the horn to the Guard Bureau and his counterparts in Oklahoma, Missouri and Nebraska, requesting additional equipment and manpower?
And, there's the issue of DoD resources within Kansas that could be (potentially) tapped through the Pentagon and the White House. McConnell AFB in Wichita has its own civil engineering squadron, complete with heavy construction equipment, trucks, generators, and hundreds of trained personnel. To my knowledge, all of those resources are still sitting at McConnell. Ditto for the Army assets at Fort Riley and Fort Leavenworth.
From my perspective, Sebelius is a feckless political hack--even worse that Louisiana's Kathleen Blanco. Even before Katrina slammed ashore, it was obvious that Blanco was in over her head; she faced a catastrophe of enormous proportions, something that she was totally unprepared for. Of course, Blanco played the "blame Washington" card, but the citizens of Louisiana saw through that--a big reason her poll numbers plummeted, and she decided not to run for re-election.
By comparison, Governor Sebelius faced a crisis of managable proportions, but she decided to play politics instead of requesting a disaster declaration in the early hours of the Greensburg disaster. But, she did succeed in reviving the "Katrina" template for the Democratic Party, and that appears to have been her top priority. And I have nothing but contempt for a governor who puts party talking points and coverage themes above the welfare of her own citizens. Sebelius should be thankful that she's not facing re-election in 2008.
More posts on this topic:
http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2007/05/politics-of-natural-destruction.html
http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2007/05/blanco-school-of-crisis-management.html
Posted by: Spook86 at May 09, 2007 08:09 AM (8Pv/P)
21
How predictable, to watch your LIB Gov roll out her " New Orleans whine" routine---"that ol DUBYA did it again"
Want some cheese with that ,darlin ?
Posted by: Don at May 09, 2007 08:11 AM (69ZMR)
22
A minor point, but 15 of 19 is just under 79 percent, not 85 percent as jenn claimed.
Posted by: Peg3n8 at May 09, 2007 08:43 AM (htMMr)
23
She would be well advised to keep her mouth shut. Gov Kathleen Blanco can't get elected to dog catcher here in La.
FWIW-The Katrina debacle was Louisiana's fault with Kathleen Blanco not leading the way.
Posted by: roux at May 09, 2007 11:15 AM (c/0dB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
266kb generated in CPU 0.0513, elapsed 0.1418 seconds.
69 queries taking 0.1018 seconds, 422 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.