Got to love the crap Palestinians come up with. This comes from a Berkeley protest.

Palestinian protesters: One, three, five, seven, all our martyrs go to heaven! Two, four, six, eight, we are martyrs, we can't wait! One, three, five, seven, all our martyrs go to heaven! One, three, five, seven, all our martyrs go to heaven! Two, four, six, eight, we are martyrs, we can't wait! Two, four, six, eight, we are martyrs, we can't wait! One, three, five, seven, all our martyrs go to heaven! One...

I can't express the sadness I feel for Palestinian people who support this type of ugly hate. It upsets me that I in turn hate them for it.

This is a picture of Bus 19. On January 29, 2004, a Palestinian suicide bomber climbed aboard Bus 19 in Jerusalem and detonated his explosives. The explosion killed 11 people, injured 50, and destroyed the interior of the bus. The mangled shell of the bus was subsequently sent to The Hague, in the Netherlands, where it was displayed outside the International Court of Justice to protest the court's ruling against Israel's separation barrier -- which is intended to prevent attacks exactly like the one that destroyed Bus 19.

A Christian humanitarian group now called The Jerusalem Connection subsequently bought the bus and had it shipped to the United States, where, loaded on the back of a flatbed trailer, it has since made stops at anti-terror rallies across the country. At none of its previous appearances did the bus stir much controversy. Everything was going smoothly until a group called Israel Action Committee of the East Bay decided to bring the bus for a three-hour exhibit in Berkeley, California on January 16, 2005.

Word of the upcoming anti-terror rally quickly spread to pro-Palestinian activist groups in the Bay Area, and a counter-demonstration was planned -- based on the complaint that the bus exhibit was "out of context" and failed to illuminate the real "complexities" of the sources of terrorism.

Here is what one Palestinian spokesman had to say: "No matter what kind of lies that you say, we know the Jews own the media, the Jews own Hollywood, the Jews own everything! The CEOs of all the major companies. Look at the House of Representatives! Look at the Congress! They're all Jews; their Zionism have agendas, and their agendas are to take over the world. They have America fighting their army. They instigate all this BULLSHIT that has millions and millions of Muslims and Arabs killed. That's all it is. And they sit there and they lie -- talk about they are victims of terrorism? They are not terrorism. If you look up terrorism, it should be Israel. They are the biggest terrorists. On the one hand you cry every day about your Holocaust, you cry about Hitler, and you do the same things if not worse to what Hitler did. You guys are modern-day Nazis. You are modern-day Hitler-followers. That's all you are! You cry about Hitler. You get millions and millions of dollars from the German companies, from countries, you guys still receive compensation. What about Palestinians? What about all the land that you confiscated? You think that you're going to get it without a cost? There's a price to occupation. That bus is a price to occupation. Every time that a martyr goes out and does a mission, it's a price of occupation. And you will pay, and you have just seen the beginning of it. "

I can't believe I still remember this ... 80s were great.

Not all politicans are brilliant ... in fact most probably aren't

So I was watching TV and saw some liberal talking about President Bush and saying how stupid the guy is ... blah, blah, blah. Its the same crap I have heared since 1998. George W. Bush is dumb. Jeb Bush is the smart one. Its like talking about the Beatles. Ugggghhh!!! What gets me with this train of thought is the amount of evidence liberals could use to bash Bush without resorting to calling him dumb. I mean why not just use Katrina, Iraq, Delay, oil prices, Iran, or a ton of other issues to prove your point that Bush isn't doing a good job?

I hear all the time about President Bush's bad grades at Yale (weren't they higher then Kerry's?) but nothing about how well Democratic politicans have done in school. So, since noone else is going to look into the record I guess I'll do it. Lets take Senator Edward Kennedy for who many liberals would say is a smart politican. Well, lets see. Senator Kennedy graduated from prep school with the oh so high C average. This is when Jack Kennedy (Ted's brother) called him a "the gay [meaning happy, not homosexual] illiterate." Despite his low average, Senator Kennedy was admitted to Harvard because he was a legacy (isn't this something liberals bash President Bush on for attending Yale?). At Harvard, Senator Kennedy struggled. During his sophomore year Kennedy paid a friend to take a test for him because he feared a failing grade would keep him off the football team (glad to see that LEARNING was important). The cheating sceme didn't work ... Kennedy's friend was caught. Both were kicked out of school, but told they could apply for readmission.

I bring this to your attention not to bash Kennedy. I do it to point out that the measure of a man is more than just a grade on a report card or a stupid decision as a youth. President Bush and Senator Kennedy are not scholars, nor are they stupid men. Take the entire life of a person into context before saying a person is dumb. Just don't do it because you don't agree with him.

Whole Foods Blog

This guy (Alex Blagg) has wrote a few blogs on Whole Foods or as he puts it "those fruity California grocery stores where everything is overpriced because it is 'organic, free range, super-health-charged, protien-enhanced, etc'. The rich, self-obsessed and insecure soccer moms out here love that sort of shit. "

If that description doesn't do it for you then he writes "Whole Foods is this not very supermarket where Guilty Rich White Liberals pay exorbitant prices for groceries in order to still have one thing in their worthless lives that doesn't stand in direct contradiction to the Hippie Ideals they sold out about four SUV's ago." I could not agree more.

The best part of his blog is the "Customer Suggestion Bulletin Board" posts which he says are meant for the"hippies that not only shop at Whole Foods, but take the time to write out stupid requests about whatever obscure holistic product their religion-of-the-month recommended they use". He has taken the time to highlight some of the more crazy suggesions. I, in turn, post them on my blog for all of you to enjoy:


Suggestion #1 -- Before showing up at your store, I called and asked an employee if there was any Chicken-Shitakke (sic) Mushroom soup left, and he said there was. When I got here, it was gone. This is ridicuoless (sic).

Whole Foods' Response -- We are sorry you were unable to enjoy our delicious soup after you'd been told we were still in stock. This is one of our more popular items and, as a result, it often sells out quicker than we can make it! Be sure to keep checking back.

What I Would Have Said -- Hey, dickwad, did not getting your stupid soup really bother you enough to take the time to write out this retarded comment? Do you know what's REALLY ridiculous? That there are people in the world who eat fucking worms out of the dirt because they are starving and can't afford plain rice, much less the $6.75 for a cup of Whole Foods' delicious Chicken-Shittake soup. If you couldn't get to the store fast enough to get the soup before it was gone, its your own fucking fault. Maybe if you weren't driving that idiotic SUV, you'd be able to navigate through traffic a little faster and you'd get your fucking soup. Also, how do you know the "employee" you talked to had anything to do with the soup? You were probably speaking with Jorge, the underpaid immigrant custodian who has to mop up the puddles of soup you spill/waste because you're a retard.

Suggestion #2 -- Could you please start carrying more soy-based milk alternatives for your hot chocolate selection?

Whole Foods' Response -- While we appreciate this helpful suggestion, we have currently been unable to find what we would consider to be a quality soy-based hot chocolate product. However, we will continue looking, so keep checking back.

What I Would Have Said -- Shut up, hippie. If you can't "handle" regular milk in your hot chocolate, you don't get to drink hot chocolate. I know this sucks, but get some fucking perspective. At least you don't have cancer.

Suggestion #3 -- I wish you had tastier Vegan energy bars to choose from. The Vegan products you do have aren't my favorite, and the majority of the tasty bars are non-Vegan. Please check into this.

Whole Foods' Response -- We are sorry you are not satisfied with our selection of Vegan energy bars. We try to offer our customers the very best products from the most popular vendors, but sometimes people's tastes are different from our own. We will explore other options, but hope you can find helpful selections among our many other Vegan-friendly products.

What I Would Have Said -- You goddamned hippies. It's never enough for you people, is it? You can't eat a PowerBar because it contains .05 ounces of milk from some "poor cow", so we do you a favor and go find some ridiculous Vegan product to offer as a substitute, even though we know that the market for these products is small, and we'll probably not profit from them -- but we want to keep you hippies happy, so we offer the item anyway. And now you don't like how it TASTES? Are you fucking serious, hippie? Since when did you become Zagats Guide to what tastes good? You smell like hot garbage, Sierra Nevada and patchouli. Also, NEWSFLASH: All Vegan products pretty much taste the same -- like 3 year-old compost mixed with lawn clippings. Maybe if I hold you down and shove raw beef into your mouth, you'll learn to shut the hell up and go back to your drum circle.

Suggestion #4 -- I am a customer of your herbal supplements and wish you would stock Mugwort. It is good for illness and also helps psychic abilities.

Whole Foods' Response -- Thank you for your suggestion. Though I am not familiar with this item, I will have our herbal specialist research it, and if it is something we think our customers would find of value, we will begin carrying it.

What I Would Have Said -- Look, moron. I know that your power crystals told you to go see the mystic healer down by the Walgreens, and the healer sent you over to the shaman by the Burger King, and the shaman advised you to set forth on a spiritual journey to the psychic over by the Target, but I think you're a weak-minded sheep who would drink a warm cup of my piss if New Age monthly told you it might make you less confused about your miserable life. I'm not carrying your stupid herbs because it won't make you or anyone else psychic. In fact, there's no such thing as psychic. In this world, there's just idiots and the people smart enough to make a few bucks off of them. You fall into the former category, but I'll still sell you my magical secrets to unlocking your true inner potential for $100.

Not Tony!!!

Ladies please don't forget

You guys think this makes me easy if I wear it out with a girl?

This is another reason to make fun of Europeans

So tell me again why would we pay people (even the disabled) to have sex with prostitutes? Is this going to be a new entitlement? Will I have to go out and pick up a hooker for the poor to screw? I hope this program stays in Europe.

Which Simpsons Character are you?

Ok, I did this and they told me I was Barney Cumble the town alcoholic. Don't know where that came from?

My Saturday Night

Ok. This is a quick entry so sorry about the lack of editing or flow of thought. I don't have time to reread but I want to get this onto my blog before it gets too old. I'll come back and try to edit and give more detail but here goes for now.

So, my girlfriend and I went to dinner in Chinatown. First off, we waited 10 mins before we got served so that should have been a clue of how the night would go. I ordered some drinks and wings so we could watch the end to the ND/Mich. game.

Well, after the horrible loss I decided to order a burger. The waiter (as was the case the entire night) took a long time coming over to get our order, but finally did. After a while I wanted another drink, but the waiter was nowhere to be found (surprise). About 5 mins. I waited and then asked another server to get me a drink but he couldn't because he was unable to order it on the computer. He looked around to find my waiter and then told be he would tell him to get my drink order.

Well, during this time I started watching the food coming and going because I knew the burger should be up . Well, there was one burger at the food server station just sitting there on the side. From the time I started watching it till the time my waiter reappeared it was 10 mins.
My waiter finally came back and gave me the burger I had been watching. I told the guy after waiting a long time (I would guess 10 mins) that I didn't want it.

He took it away sort of pissed and then came back and saying the burger had just came up. I told him it didn't and that I had been watching it the entire time. The waiter proceeded to tell me tons of burgers come up. At that point he started getting really mad and into my face from across the table. I told him, "why was he acting like a dick." At this point he pushed me.

I stood up in disbelief and stepped back three or four paces. He then started saying don't call me a dick and looked like he wanted to kill me. Well, I thought about going after him but decided it was stupid to fight over a damn burger. So, I said, "push me again" pretty load in order to get someone to do something about this crazy guy.

To my shock no one came to help. It took probably a good 15 to 20 secs (his isn't' a huge place and it had tons of male waiters and staff to help in this situation) went by before the employees got between us. They just told me to leave but didn't doing anything to restraint the waiter. My girlfriend and I walked to the door all the while explaining what happened. And guess what? The waiter was still walking freely around looking all the more pissed and actually coming up to us again. At that point my girlfriend was getting even more upset so I decided to just leave.

Walking home, we called the place and talked to the manager (who at first didn't want to talk to me until I told some guy "do we need to call the cops?"). The guy was very nervous because he knew the place was in the wrong having a waiter push a customer. Anyhow, all I wanted was for the guy to be fired which had happened (well, that's what the manager said so I guess it didn't happen). Then the manager told me to come in and he'd buy some drinks for me. Yeah, I'm really going back there anytime soon.

Top Ten things I don't like

10) Wrist bands or ribbons that symbolize anything. What the hell is wearing a wrist band going to do for someone with cancer? Let them know you're thinking about them? They'd rather you just quit fucking around and find a cure.

9) People who pass you on the highway and then go slower than you were originally going. There should be Drivers License Police. When assholes do crap like that, they should be immediately pulled over, no questions asked, and have their license snatched on spot.

8) Capri pants. Hey, where's the flood? Pick, pants or shorts, you can't have both, and these are a poor excuse for a shot at making a compromise. Plus they're just flat out ugly.

7) Naturalized American citizens that can't speak English. Shouldn't that be the number one requirement?

6) Thirteen year old girls that dress like street skanks... and their parents.

5) Waiting in lines. I am better than everyone, I should get special privileges. No one should make me wait for anything. Ever. People need to realize this, and get the fuck out of my way.

4) When you are with a fat girl and she says “I’m not really hungry” or "I’ll just get a salad"… girl you know you’re hungry, just keep it real.

3) Royalty. Worthless. What’s the big deal? So you’re a Queen? And? It’s not like you’re in charge of anything. The only perks would be that you get to meet people when ever you want to, and they kiss your hand. Whoopty-friggin-do.

2) People who live in the ghetto but drive nice cars. Instead of dropping $50,000 on a sweet ride, why not invest a little bit of money into a house, an apartment even. Are these people trying to impress dates? What are you going to do when you want to take them back to the place for some nooky? Oh darn blew your cover. Idiots.

1) Stuart Scott. Am I the only one who realizes how annoying this man is?

Sports and Big Brother: How much does your team know about you?

From what I have been able to gather alot! Your ticket is used as a data collection point where your team collects electronically information about you when you go through the turnstiles. For instance, your ticket not only tells the team that you showed up to a game, but also the time and entrance used. And if you don't show up the team calls you and notifies you of reselling your ticket or giving it away if you are a season ticket holder.

Is this too much? I for one say yes it is.

Random thoughts on relief efforts and who pays

Why do I have to pay for someone else to live in a dangerous paradise? I am not just talking about the Gulf Coast region, but California as well. With Earthquakes, wildfires, floods, and mudslides: by almost any criterion California, the nation's most populous state, is also its most vulnerable to natural disaster. Think of this Southern California Earthquake Centre reckons that there is an 80% or 90% chance of a tremor of seven or higher on the Richter scale hitting Los Angeles within the next 20 years.

What does this mean? That the entire country will pay for the recovery from such an earthquake. And if you think 100 or so billion that the projected cost of Katrina clean and recovery is high, then just imagine what a major earthquake will do to one of America's most populated cities!

I hope Germany does the right thing, but in the end its their country

On September 18th Germans will vote in the general elections for a new government. The two main candidates are Angela Merkel and Gerhard Schroder. I for one would think anyone but Schroder would be great for Germany.

Just look at the facts. Since he came into power in 1998 growth has been slower in Germany than in any other EU country. Despite his promise to reform Germany's economy after the economic slump resulting from reunification. Unemployment is currently at 5 million, well above Schroder's starting point at 3.5 million.

Schroder's foreign policy hasn't been much better. In Kosovo, he did lift the longstanding taboo by sending German troops into combat for the first time since 1945. But by campaigning hard in 2002 against war in Iraq, he poisoned Germany's relationship with the United States. He has been too forgiving of Vladimir Putin's shift to autocracy in Russia. As for EU reforms, he started with much promise but then allied himself too tightly with France's Jacques Chirac, who opposes economic and budgetary reforms.

From the above record, I would say Schroder is not the man for the job. But again I was pissed when Europeans tired to tell us how to vote in 2004 so I will not go so far as to tell them what to do. In the end, it is their country.

No Religious Tribunals for Christians, Jews, and Muslims in Ontario

In Canada, Ontario's government said that it would not allow Muslims to use sharia law to settle family disputes. In addition, it will move to also outlaw religious tribunals used by Christians and Jews.

Beware Europe!

The European Court of Justice ruled that the European Commission could, in some cirumstances, impose criminal penalties on those who violate European Union laws. The ruling was, rightly I might add, opposed by many national governments, which argue that the criminal law should never fall within EU powers.

Look at the source before you decide

Belarus President Alexander Lukasheno criticized the United States for the war in Iraq. Going so far as to defend Saddam Hussein, saying he "was abandoned to the winners' mercy, like in barbarian times." Carrying on, President Lukashenko said, "There is nobody to defend their rights except the U.N."

This coming from a man who made three opposition leaders "disappear" in 1999 and 2000. In addition, the disappearances came at the same time Lukashenko publicly ordered his security services to crack down on what he called "opposition scum". Evidence subsequently emerged that implicated the Interior Ministry in the disappearances, which led to allegations that a government "death squad" had been responsible. A number of junior officials were arrested and convicted, but the government intervened to block investigations into the possible involvement of senior ministers.

Recently the human rights situation in Belarus has come under increasing international scrutiny. The most recent reports of Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International on Belarus accuse Lukashenko of widespread violations of human rights. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) issued a resolution on Belarus in April 2003, in which it expressed "deep concern" about human rights in Belarus, and urged the government to release journalists and other individuals detained for politically motivated reasons and to cease harassment of non-governmental organizations and political parties.

So, remember to look at who is saying what about the United States before using their statement as proof of your argument. This being the number 1 reason why I can't stand liberals--using wacked out statements by crazy idiots as the central core for attacking others (Michael Moore comes to mind for some reason). Even if there is something in the message (i.e., the war in Iraq), using Alexander Lukasheno or any other third world dictators is not the way to go. Doing so makes one look like they do not know what they are talking about.

France warns Iran

Ok, this is getting out of control. Iran is now willing to share its Nuclear technology with other Islamic nations. And who is standing up to them? Not the United States, but France!

Yet, only in the weak willed way that the French do the warning given to Iran left alot to be desired. What France did was to threaten to REFER Iran's nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council. I imagine that Iran is really worried now. Wake up!!! They aren't just making nuclear grade material, but willing to give at least the technology away to others. This is just stupid and another reason why the United Nations is a waste of time and energy.

Lets review the facts according to me! France said it could get Iran to back off (through a group discussion), but what happened? Nothing, but to give Iran more time to harden it's position. Good call to leave it to a weak country that was conquered by Italy in WWII to handle such an important matter. Its a mistake to even ask France to clean my house let alone give them a great task like preventing WWIII. Heck, they might even change sides and help Iran for all we know. Again, the lesson is to never trust France to do anything that might be usefull for the United States. Enough said.

Congressman allegedly used National Guard resources to gather personal belongings from his New Orleans home amid the Hurricane Katrina rescue

Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.), under investigation by the FBI, went on the defensive Wednesday in the wake of a damaging ABC News report that the Congressman allegedly used National Guard resources to gather personal belongings from his New Orleans home amid the Hurricane Katrina rescue operation.
Jefferson is apparently gearing up for a tough legal fight. He recently retained defense attorney Robert Trout of the Washington, D.C., law firm Trout Cacheris, in addition to his New Orleans-based attorney, Michael Fawer. Trout is a former federal prosecutor. Jefferson also recently set up a legal defense fund.
Jefferson, according to sources, spoke to his colleagues at the Congressional Black Caucus meeting Wednesday. During the session, the Louisiana Democrat defended his tour of his damaged district on Sept. 2 and insisted that the ABC story that aired Tuesday night distorted the facts and misrepresented his actions.
In an interview, Melanie Roussell, a Jefferson spokeswoman, reiterated her boss’s belief that the story was unfair, noting that National Guard officials refused to let the Congressman tour the devastated area without the presence of armed guards.
She said that Jefferson was only doing his job by trying to assess the damage in his district and that he was concerned about his neighbors, whom he knew had not evacuated their homes.
“There is no story,” Roussell said. “There’s no misuse of anything. If he had been able to tour the city on his own, he would have done so. And he would have preferred to.”
But even as some of Jefferson’s colleagues defended their friend, some Democrats wonder about the broader implications that the FBI investigation could have for their party. The Congressman had his homes in New Orleans and Washington, D.C., searched last month as part of an ongoing FBI investigation.
Authorities are investigating whether Jefferson illegally pocketed hundreds of thousands of dollars from a start-up technology firm during an FBI-authorized sting, according to published reports.
“People appreciate the seriousness of the allegations,” said one CBC member, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “I don’t think anyone has drawn any conclusions or is attempting to prejudge the matter.”
Others, however, made it clear that they were prepared to stick by Jefferson.
“I’m going to be fully supportive of him all the way through to the ultimate disposition and beyond,” said Rep. Mel Watt (D-N.C.), chairman of the CBC.
Watt praised his colleague’s character and called him “an outstanding legislator and a wonderful friend.”
But the CBC chairman acknowledged that in the end, the disposition of the Caucus is not politically important.
“Mr. Jefferson doesn’t need my support,” he said. “He is an elected representative answerable to his constituents. He’s not answerable to the Congressional Black Caucus.”
According to the ABC News report, Jefferson emerged from his house after about an hour with three suitcases, a laptop and a box about the size of a refrigerator.
Roussell said that information was inaccurate and that Jefferson took two suitcases, his daughter’s laptop and a box that contained another suitcase, which was to be shipped to his daughter.
“The story gives the impression that he asked the National Guard to go with him to retrieve his personal items,” she said. “That was not the purpose of it.”
The ABC News report and the ongoing investigation of Jefferson may have broader implications for Democrats, as they seek to capitalize on ethical improprieties by Congressional Republicans.
Democrats have sought to highlight the ethical troubles of Republicans such as House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (Texas) and House Administration Chairman Bob Ney (Ohio) as proof of a broader culture of corruption within the GOP-run Congress.
House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said he “doesn’t know much about” the August searches of Jefferson’s home, office and vehicle, aside from the fact that an investigation is ongoing.
But the Maryland Democrat said that “if somebody has acted unethically or committed criminal offenses, we need to hold them accountable.”
“Let’s see what the facts are,” Hoyer said later. “But if the facts are such that there is an ethical violation or there is a criminal violation, then I think it is appropriate for the ethics committee and for perhaps the Congress to act, period, whether it is a Democrat or a Republican.”
Hoyer added that the Jefferson case “raises the public’s concern about the ethics and legality with which the Congress is operating, and we ought to look into that.”
The National Republican Congressional Committee circulated the ABC News story to reporters Wednesday morning under the headline “In Case You Missed It.”

Quote of the Day

“He brought me breakfast. He brought me some Krispy Kreme doughnuts and he mowed my lawn. He fertilized it, too.” -- Donovan McNabb on what Terrell Owens did to mend things with him.

If no one watches the WNBA does it exist?

Remember when ESPN use to put those stupid WNBA commercials on the air? Those were the days when supporters of the league told me that the WNBA would actually make money and be a profitable enterprise. Well, that was nearly 10 years ago. Today, I live in a WNBA city where no one goes to the games and they give tickets away just to get some attention. Its a sad state of affairs when certain people wanted the labor dispute to cause a lockout so the MCI Center businesses (I am talking about the Chinatown area) could actually make money with events that fill the arena!

With all of that said, I think if the MCI Center signs a contract with the NBA (that is the organization paying the WNBA's bills) and then complains about having a horrible product they have no leg to stand on. Next time the Washington [insert team name cause I don't know what the WNBA team is called here and I am not looking it up]'s contract comes up don't renew it! I believe the MCI Center could do better with the Georgetown basketball teams. At present, the Hoyas play in a horrible arena where the team would be better served playing in a modern arena. One already exists. The MCI Center is a natural fit being within DC and having to go only 15 mins. from the Georgetown campus. In my view, both need each other both in terms of financal want BUT also for creating a great fan product -- either in basketball or in business. I think its something to consider, but will probably never happen.

An Important Message

Identity Theft - States with the Highest Rates of ID Theft

1) Arizona
2) Nevada
3) California
4) Texas
5) Colorado

And I thought we might be able to cut our budget?

Don't think I haven't forgotten about you Kolb!!!

Your a waste of a much needed roster spot. Please, take your millions and leave. I don't even care if you think you can still pitch ... just go.

A new protest movement begins!

And you think Hillary is the one to worry about?

One pissed off squirrel commenting about Hurricane Katrina. Damn funny!

Give me more COWBELLS!!!!

Liberals doing what they do best.

So caring aren't they? So respectfull and tolerant. I must say I can't even understand the racist/Jews poster, but I am guessing its not good for Jews.

If you want my advice ...

Dear Democratic Party:

I sometimes wonder how one party can control the presidency, Senate, and House ... but then I'm reminded of Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson and how the Democrats always manage to find a place for his hateful racebaiting. It's not hard to see how someone who finds Bush somewhat contemptible might nonetheless vote for him rather than be associated with the usual cast of anti-Semites and other malevolent crackpots.

Put Principle Rooney in charge of FEMA! (J/K)

Kerry and Edwards have new jobs.

Just off the top of my head:

... but, if it weren't for President Bush and the FEMA director, Mike Brown, telling local officials to call for an evacutation wouldn't there have been more deaths? In addition, if only the local officials had actually lent a hand to help the people evacuate then maybe nobody would have died.

Just so you know: The fat guy gets the hot lady

Proof you say? Well, here you go:

This is what someone from Berkeley, CA thought about 9/11.

"ZZZZZZZ! Yesterday's news! Boooooring!"

President Bush doing all he can to help in New Orleans

This is a great program parents!

Hey Kids!!! Special Message of the Day!

Pic of me as a kid

Since football session is upon us I wanted to give you a picture of my early years watching my favorite sport.

McHoldup

The Black Question in the Democratic and Republican parties

I find the argument that the Republican party has for most of its history failed to address black people's needs a largely empty argument.

We forget that the Republican party was born as a protest movement against a very specific outrage perpetrated by the Democratic party. That was the 1854 Compromise Act, which allowed slavery to expand into the territories. Opponents of slavery united with a single purpose and declared: "Enough, there shall be no concessions to the slavery element. We draw the line right here. No slavery in the territories.''

Until the “New Deal” era of Franklin Delano Roosevelt beginning in 1932, most Blacks identified with and voted for the Republican party. The Depression of 1929 negatively affected both whites and blacks economically, and by the time FDR’s government programs promised hope for reversal, many blacks, and whites, switched their allegiance to the Democratic party led by FDR (funny thing is that the Democratic party had to be sued in the 1930’s in order for blacks to be in that party). And even though the New Deal programs offered only short term advantages to some, the ensuing claims of the Democratic party as the party of the “little man” stuck.

Taking a look at FDR’s “New Deal” programs they did sound good but had an opposite effect for what is widely preceived to be what "got us out of the Depression and saved black people." For example, the “Agricultural Adjustment Act” resulted in a huge reduction in the growing crops and farming which ended many jobs for blacks. The National Labor Relations/Wagner Act allowed the establishment of labor unions, to which blacks were excluded. Also, the concept of a “minimum wage” was established to guarantee workers better pay, but instead of paying workers the minimum employers simply fired them or failed to hire them. Not surprisely, the “minimum wage” caused an upsurge in the unemployment rate among blacks, especially teens.

Another irony involving blacks swelling the Democratic party ranks is the issue of more recent civil rights. In 1948, a splinter group called "Dixiecrats" strongly opposed desegregation in the South and wanted to retain the old Jim Crow laws. The issue of civil rights and integration became a political hot potato for the next five decades. Republican President Dwight Eisenhower signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1957, which was little more than a token symbol having been watered down in the Senate by Lyndon Baines Johnson, a Democrat.

By 1964 a new Civil Right bill was debated in the Senate. Democratic Senators Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Al Gore, Sr., led a filibuster that nearly derailed the bill’s chance of passage, until Republican Minority Leader, Senator Everett Dirksen of Illinois, broke the filibuster. In the House of Representatives, 40% of the Democrats voted against the bill, while only 20% of the Republicans opposed; in the Senate 21 Democrats voted against it, while only 6 Republicans voted no.

Looking at the facts, Republicans were the ones who passed both civil rights and voting rights for blacks. Democrats get the credit. Yet 40 years later, the image of the Republican party as unsympathetic to equal rights for blacks seems to persist. Black voters seem still focused on a moment in history 40 years ago.

My point is that the battle for black civil rights is done, and now the battle is for social power. Understand blacks and the GOP are traveling on a ''two-way street.'' Democrats can get away with making borderline racist statements because it is easier for them to find black spokespersons such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to vouch for their integrity (i.e. Howard Dean).

In looking at the highlight of liberal and black anger -- namely Trent Lott's statements concerning Strom Thurmond's presidential run -- I come aross this arguement, that "those comments reflect a problem that has long plagued the Republican party: its consistent failure to court Black votes and to attract Black candidates."

That's just crap!

They have sold their freedom to the Democrats, for a handful of foodstamps, a welfare check, and a few gallons of free home heating oil.

The baseline assumption about Republicans is that they are all racist until proven otherwise. I wish I were merely mouthing off, exaggerating, whatever; but believe me, I've spent too much time watching before my very eyes comments that point to such an assumption to indulge in delusions. Republicans do not have issues in black America: Republicans ARE the issue. And until the Republican party goes onto black turf, and say who they are with persistence and passion, the party will remain what the Democrats want it to be: the Bogeymen, the backdrop for scaring black non-politicals to the polls. Fighting back is the only way.

What do Republicans offer blacks? A far fairer chance than the current liberal power base--viz. Clinton advisor Paul Begala hanging onto Al Sharpton's cuffs but failing to make the tackle. Democrats are everywhere claiming to be the party with blacks' interests at heart--while demonstrating it's a damnable lie--and they incidentally have no heart. It was Al Gore who had the quota for blacks on his Secret Service detail--but it was an upper-level limit, not a baseline requirement. Democrats are pulling off the biggest of the Goebbelsian Big Lies--that they care for blacks. We now have a president who evinces the King dream where a man is judged by the content of his character, not the color of his skin. To counter that, there is only the demagoguery of Maxine Waters and Jesse Jackson.

In April 2004, Senate Democrats, while taking the black vote for granted, blocked extension of welfare reform, demonstrating their soft bigotry of low expectations and social promotion policies that keep blacks in poverty. Recently, supported by the racial slurring of Dr. Condoleezza Rice by liberals in the media, Democrats joined former Klansman Senator Robert Byrd in the shameful filibuster of the confirmation of Dr. Rice to be the first black woman Secretary of State.

The Democratic party’s current policies on taxes and national security put our nation in danger and are contrary to Democratic President John F. Kennedy’s beliefs on those issues. Although Kennedy was on the wrong side of civil rights, since he voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act and opposed Dr. King’s 1963 march on Washington, he cut taxes to grow our economy and spent money to strengthen national defense. Democrats today are pro tax increases and soft on national defense.

This is a key point. People create a "world view" based on their perceptions and conceptions. Their conceptions are based on their perceptions. So if people hear on a daily basis lies about the Republicans, from radio and from slanted "news" coverage from liberal papers, this is what they are exposed to. They will tend to believe that all media, not just the media they listen to and read, has the same viewpoint. Or that what they listen to and read is normal (since after all, they're normal), and so any other views are "right-wing", or cracker, or whatever.

Who pays for Katrina?

The billions of dollars in relief coming into the hard hit southern states has a price for all Americans. Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle wants President Bush to extend the state of emergency from southern states to northern ones, so that they too can receive federal aid for taking in thousands of people. That probably is too much to hope and ask for.

Congress has already agreed to provide $10.5 billion. Since FEMA is currently spending $500 million a day on relief and recovery, that will not last long. The White House has already asked Congress for an additional $52 billion. Together, Florida's four hurricans in 2004 cost the federal government $14 billion, while insurers paid out much more. This time, the ration will be reversed by a large margin.

The insurance industry is in shock. Loss-adjusters still cannot get close enough to assess much of the damage. Lastest estimates suggest that the damage to homes, bussinesses and infrastructure is around $100 billion, with private insurance claims as high as $35 billion. Some property owners without flood insurance (which mortgage lenders REQUIRE of most people living in flood-plains) will get relief from a federal disaster-loan programme (I stupid so I derserve others to pay for it). Only about half of property owners in New Orleans hold flood coverage, and even fewer in hard-hit patches of Mississippi and Alabama. Renters and those who own homes outright are most likely to be uncovered (albeit renters insurance is avaible cheaply).

The broader economic fall-out of Katrina remains uncertain. Traditionally, big hurricans--for all their devastation--had only a small effect on the economy. Katrina will be different. Forecasters have cut their expectations for GDP for the rest of the year--the Treasury by half a percentage point, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) by slightly more. But some have raised them for 2006 as reconstruction efforst boost output. The CBO fears that, from now to the end of the year, 400,000 jobs may be lost. Though employment is "likely to rebound" later. The big unknown remains fuel costs (already lowering) and the risk that soaring prices for petrol, let alone physical supply shortages, will hit consumer spending hard.

The fiscal impact probably will end up being sizeable. Some politicians talked of spending more then $150 billion on recovery and relief. Capitol Hill budget boffins worry that all kinds of other requests will be attached to money for Katrina (Senator John McCain asking everyone to PROMISE not to do this), such as (paradoxically) drought relief for farmers in the mid-west. Moreover, the political aftermath of the hurricand may dampen lawmakers' already tepid enthusiasm for budget-cutting. The 2006 budget--agreed in princeple but not in detail--is supposed to include $35 billion in budget cuts over the next five years, including in Medicaid. I have no doubt that Katrina has profoundly changed not only the economic outlook, but the federal budget as well. Look for a 10% jump in the deficit or higher federal taxes in the years to come.

What up with Turkey?

The European Union (EU) failed to agree on a common stance toward Turkey. The lack of agreement means that Turkey's membership talks (set to began in October) are up in the air largely because of the country's refusal to recognise the independence of Cyprus.

Crazy comment that gets me in trouble with girlfriend

"I like my women hot and my beer cold! And if possible both should be served with pizza." -- Me

I hate PETA, but I would agree with them that the French must pay for this crap

Not my doctor, thank G-D

Ok, so I found this funny. Not like I didn't know I was going to h-ll.

This is awesome!!!

Ad for a beer company. Very funny.

Boycott Belmar, NJ

A New Jersey town has prohibited outdoor drinking games, ending a popular summer activity.
Twenty-eight-old-year Rob Failla says the Labor Day holiday would not be the same without his usual beer-pong tournament that drew dozens, the New York Times reported Sunday.
It was a social activity; something to do, Failla said. We were loud, sure, but it's summer -- a time to have fun.
Year-round Belmar, N.J., residents found the late-night noise and the litter associated with the game annoying and a nuisance.
In beer-pong teams on opposite sides of a table try to toss Ping-Pong balls into their opponents' cups of beer -- a successful toss means that the team holding the cup must drink the beer. The team whose cups are drunk first loses.
We want to change the frat image this town has, said Belmar Mayor Kenneth E. Pringle. We are more interested in people who want to come here and raise a family than we are people who want to come and raise hell for a week.(UPI)

Reid, Pelosi Oppose Bicameral Katrina Committee

By Erin P. Billings and Mark Preston, Sep. 8, 2005, Roll Call

The top Congressional Democrats announced their opposition Thursday to the creation of a GOP-led bicameral committee to examine federal, state and local relief efforts in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
Calling it a sham and a charade, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she will not appoint anyone from her Caucus to the joint committee. And Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will urge his Democratic colleagues not to serve on the panel, a senior aide said Thursday morning.
Democrats said they are frustrated that Republican leaders announced the formation of the committee Wednesday afternoon without first consulting them on the matter.
“Based on what he has seen so far, Sen. Reid is going to oppose this proposal and urge his Caucus to do so as well,” said Jim Manley, Reid’s spokesman.
Pelosi said House Democrats will boycott the special panel because it is not bipartisan in its makeup, nor was her party consulted prior to its formation. Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) announced the creation of the bicameral, bipartisan committee yesterday.
Pelosi said she is “very disappointed” and “very offended” by the Republican leaders’ actions. She added that in order to be truly bipartisan, Democrats had to have been brought to the table at the outset, the committee membership must be evenly divided between the two parties, and the new panel must have “true subpoena power” and the authority to act.
Republican aides have said the committee would be bipartisan and have subpoena power. But they noted that the GOP would maintain a majority and have not yet laid out the party ratio.
“It is unfortunate,” said Amy Call, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist’s (R-Tenn.) spokeswoman.” We would like to work together in a bipartisan way to look into this issue. It is what the American people deserve.”
But Pelosi told reporters Thursday morning: “Democrats will not be party to a committee that is not bipartisan.”
Pelosi said she called Hastert shortly after hearing about the announcement of the panel to get answers about why she — as the Democratic leader — was not consulted beforehand. She said it was obvious then that the Republicans had made up their minds about how to proceed and negotiating at this point is a non-starter because the GOP leaders “have made their position clear” that they don’t want to work with the minority.
“They have burned a bridge,” she said.
Advising reporters on how to characterize her statements, Pelosi said: “The Democratic leader will not participate in this charade because the Democratic leader wanted to get the truth for the American people.”
“They put forth a sham of a committee,” she later added.
Pelosi then reiterated her call — and that of other Democratic Members — to form an independent commission to oversee the catastrophe. Last week, the Minority Leader called on Hastert to assign a bipartisan task force on the matter.
Republicans have given the committee six months to conduct an investigation and report its findings to Congress.

Tancredo Slams Louisiana Leaders

By Emily Pierce, September 8, 2005 -- Roll Call

Citing what he said was a “history” of public corruption in Louisiana and the “abysmal failure” of current state officials to respond to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) on Wednesday urged Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) to prevent local politicians from controlling any part of the billions of federal disaster relief dollars slated for the state.
“The question is not whether Congress should provide for those in need, but whether state and local officials who have been derelict in their duty should be trusted with that money. Their record during Hurricane Katrina and the long history of public corruption in Louisiana convinces me that they should not,” Tancredo wrote in a letter to Hastert, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and House and Senate appropriators.
Instead, Tancredo suggested giving whatever money that might go to the state and local officials to another entity, such as a private organization or select government committee, to administer. As a practical matter, the vast majority of the more than $60 billion — including nearly $52 billion approved Wednesday — that Congress has appropriated so far for disaster relief along the Gulf Coast has been given to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Department of Defense and the Army Corps of Engineers. However, future funding for disaster victims may indeed be funneled through the affected state governments.
Tancredo singled out Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, both Democrats, as having bungled the response to massive flooding in New Orleans and surrounding areas following Katrina.
“Clearly, the federal response from FEMA in the aftermath of the hurricane was hampered by bureaucratic ineptitude. Making matters worse, the Mayor of New Orleans and the Governor of Louisiana have demonstrated mind-boggling incompetence in their lack of planning for and response to this disaster,” Tancredo wrote.
In Louisiana and Washington, D.C., Tancredo’s letter was met with a mixture of outrage and disbelief.
“It’s hard to imagine more reckless and irresponsible remarks coming from a public official, particularly from one sitting in an air-conditioned office thousands of miles from a scene of devastation and tragedy,” said Blanco spokeswoman Denise Bottcher, who also bemoaned the fact that she had to take her attention away from relief efforts in her state even to comment on the letter.
“It’s a sad day when a United States Congressman is too busy making wild accusations and pushing stereotypes that he can’t offer concrete advice and support for our country,” echoed Brian Richardson, spokesman for Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.). “The spirit of Louisiana is strong, and we can rebuild with or without Mr. Tancredo’s help.” A spokeswoman for Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) declined to comment, saying the office’s efforts were focused on helping victims of the hurricane and that the Senator was in the state and unreachable.
One House GOP leadership aide dismissed Tancredo’s request saying, “Congressman Tancredo speaks for himself right now. We are in a crisis and doing everything possible to help the victims.”
In making his case, Tancredo cited a Sept. 7 Wall Street Journal opinion piece in which writer Bob Williams noted, “A year ago, as Hurricane Ivan approached, New Orleans ordered an evacuation but did not use city or school buses to help people evacuate. As a result, many of the poorest citizens were unable to evacuate. Fortunately, the hurricane changed course and did not hit New Orleans, but both Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin acknowledged the need for a better evacuation plan. Again, they did not take corrective actions.”
While he did not directly call Blanco, Nagin or any other current Louisiana elected official corrupt, Tancredo wrote that last year the director of the FBI in New Orleans called public corruption in the state “epidemic, endemic and entrenched” and that over the past 30 years a slew of officials, from governors to local sheriffs, have been convicted of crimes.
“Given the documented public corruption in the state, I am not confident that Louisiana officials can be trusted to administer federal relief aid,” he wrote.
Tancredo spokesman Will Adams explained that the Congressman’s chief complaint is that he believes Blanco and Nagin have been incompetent. “The corruption part of [the letter] was a throw-in on the side. ... It just means we need to be more vigilant” with the Louisiana portion of the relief funding, Adams said.

Did you know?

Arnold Schwarzenegger is one of two governors who have appeared as contestants on the Dating Game. The other is Jennifer Granholm of Michigan.

Medicaid

Did you know that in 1966 total Medicaid spending in state and federal dollars was $1.3 billion. Today that figure has grown to $329.0 billion.

Quote of the day

This quote fits some of the comments I have been getting about my blog.

"You're always going to have nut cakes out there, no matter what you do." -- Senator Orrin Hatch (Utah-R).

Sending more troops in Iraq and other thoughts

The Iraq war is not what the doves on the left would have one believe. Obviously, Iraq remains dangerously unstable. But even if, for the sake of argument, one concedes that the war is an abject disaster, it doesn't necessarily follow that the hawk's prescription was wrong. Complaints about mismangement of the war center on the lack of troops in Iraq. Nearly every expert thought more would be necessary to cary out an orderly occupation. Could more troops have made a difference? Yes, because all wars are governed by "tipping points" rather than any type of proportional returns. A sufficient number of troops would likely have provided enough security to carry out reconstruction projects, which would have reduced supply of unemployed, desperate males, which in turn would have created more political stability. Instead, Iraq has endured a vicious cycle of insecurity, failed reconstruction, economic stagnation, and political instability.

Many have dismissed this alternative as wishful thinking. Obviously, we cannot know for sure how a competently executed occupation would have fared. Yet, history is filled with examples of occupations -- Roman's conquest of Brition, East Timor, postwar Germany, and Japan -- that had sufficient troops and did not lead to the sort of chaos in Iraq.

I wish to end with this point -- where does the true base of the dove view come from? There are a small core group of far left who want nothing to do with any war. They include left-wingers like George Lakoff and Michael Moore, who, unlike virtually the entire Democratic party, opposed the war in Afghanistan as well as Iraq. They see the Iraq war not as a departure from the broader struggle against terrorism but as its apotheosis. (The Nation would fall into this category, including one writer, Ari Berman). In Iraq they can probably justly crow. Yet, their general record of foreign policy predictions is not exactly stellar. Simply take The Nation as an example. It overplayed the Afghanistan invasion: "airstrikes and other military actions may not accomplish the ends we endorse and may exacerbate the situation." In addition, it fiercly denunced the war in Kosovo: "Naton's war on Yugoslavia has failed catastrophically" has not stood the test of anyone's thinking. Finally, its take on the 91 Gulf War: "Sanctions have a much better chance of forcing Iraqi concessions in a shorter time and with much less misery than war.... The death toll [from fighting] could rise to Korean War levels, or higher" really did miss the mark. Maybe people who do oppose war should rethink basing their foreign policy views on those who have a somewhat better prediction accuracy.

Ray Nagin Is NOT America's Mayor

By Michael J. GaynorMichNews.comSep 6, 2005

Rudy Giuliani became America's Mayor as a result of the calm and positive way he responded to the September 11 terrorist attack.

Ray Nagin, the Mayor of New Orleans, will not be known as America's Mayor.

He will be remembered as the man who waited too long to order and implement a mandatory evaluation. And then blamed others, including the federal government, even though President Bush had urged him to order mandatory evacuation and he had dawdled.

Mayor Nagin is a black mayor of an overwhelmingly black city.

And a political opportunist.

He switched from Republican to Democrat in 2002 and then successfully ran for Mayor of New Orleans on an anti-corruption platform.

The following year, he endorsed the Republicans' unsuccessful gubernatorial candidate, Bobby Jindal, over the current Democrat governor, Kathleen Blanco.

And in 2004 he supported John Kerry over George Bush, to whom he previously had donated.

Those blaming racism and the federal government and absolving local and state government for the Hurricane Katrina disaster should take a minute to read the following pro-Nagin article on Mayor Nagin from Volume 42 of Contemporary Black Biography, published in 2004, before Hurricane Katrina:

"Politics in New Orleans have long been as murky as the bayou waters that circle the Southern city. Backroom deals, bribery, and corruption have caused many political commentators to change the city's nickname from the Big Easy to the Big Sleazy. Whether the accusations were true or not, the rumors were enough to stifle the city and by 2002 New Orleans was sinking under massive debt and rampant crime. Businesses were reluctant to build in the city and young people were making mass exoduses in search of better places to work and raise families. Into this grim picture entered Ray Nagin, a New Orleans cable executive and visionary. With no political experience and little campaign money, Nagin came out of nowhere to win the 2002 mayoral election on a platform of anti-corruption and economic development. Leaving behind a well-paid executive position to take on the challenges of revitalizing the city that care truly had forgotten, Nagin said during his inaugural speech, 'The winds of change are blowing, and they are fanning the flames of a renaissance in our great city,' according to Jet. New Orleanians hoped he was right."The New Orleans Nagin inherited was indeed in bad shape. Analysts predicted a possible $50 million shortfall in the budget. Businesses were closing up or moving out of the city. Murder and violent crime were at vicious highs with at least one homicide occurring every night. Above all of it was the hulking ghost of corruption--New Orleans's reputation for bribery and nepotism. 'Corruption had gone on in the open for so long that there was really a feeling of hopelessness,' the president of New Orleans crime commission told the Los Angeles Times. 'There was a sense that it was so embedded in the culture of the community, there was no way to change it.' Nagin made fighting corruption one of his priorities. 'Before we can grow the economy, we need to make sure that everybody understands what the rules of engagement are,' Nagin told the Tulanian. 'You need to have a level playing field where people can compete. Then you can create an environment for business growth and job creation.'"Nagin began his term in office by peopling his staff with business leaders, not political insiders. 'I surrounded myself with people who think outside the normal box of government, with a few governmental people sprinkled in to kind of make sure we have the experience levels we need. That's basically how we've approached it--as new thinkers, as change agents, as a group trying to make the city better,' he told the Tulanian. With his administration set, Nagin quickly turned to corruption. On a steamy July morning in 2002 police fanned out across the city and arrested dozens of people straight from their beds. Arrestees included low-level city bureaucrats, brake-tag inspectors, and illegally licensed cab drivers. The sweep also resulted in the arrests of the city's utilities director and head of the taxicab bureau. Though some dismissed the sting operation as an attack on petty officials--one Louisiana political commentator told the Los Angeles Times, 'There was a sense that, God, all we're doing is catching little fish'--most New Orleanians welcomed the raid and showered Nagin with gratitude."Nagin also made other, less dramatic moves soon after taking office. He put tax information and permits and other application processes on-line. He also led the repeal of a 2% entertainment tax that was hurting local and visiting performers. His first operating budget worth $557.2 million won praise from the city council and included a much-needed pay increase for rookie cops. Nagin also brought his business acumen to the city's operations and renegotiated several banking, audit, and collection contracts that were slated to save the city millions of dollars per year."Despite his many successes, Nagin still faced an uphill battle by the first anniversary of his election. The very environment he created, threatened to hurt his popularity. Gambit Weekly noted, 'voters are more optimistic than ever about the future of New Orleans, but that optimism has produced expectations that may outstrip anyone's ability to deliver.' In the same article Nagin acknowledged, 'The burden is huge. I will not discount that at all. There are lots of expectations in this city.... We have unleashed this tremendous optimism in this city that people have been thirsting for a long time. I don't know what to do about that other than to stay consistent and to stay focused on the key issues.' Only time will tell if Nagin is able to do that.

Time has told us that Nagin failed.

Let's review the facts.

On Friday, August 26, 2005, the National Hurricane Center first predicted that Hurricane Katrina would become a Category 4 storm, and therefore beyond the design limits of the levees protecting mostly below sea level New Orleans.

And Governor Blanco declared a state of emergency.

The next day, Saturday, August 27, 2005, President Bush declared an emergency in Louisiana and ordered federal aid to "supplement state and local responses in the parishes located in the path of Hurricane Katrina beginning on August 26, 2005, and continuing."

Hurricane Katrina was on course to strike New Orleans and President Bush was anticipating a natural disaster.

But Mayor Nagin did not issue even a voluntary evacuation until late on August 27, 2005. Hereportedly was reluctant to order a mandatory evacuation because he was concerned about possible lawsuits against the City of New Orleans for closing hotels and other businesses.

On Sunday, August 28, 2005, Hurricane Katrina actually became a category 4 hurricane. And Nagin finally heeded President Bush's appeal and ordered mandatory evacuation and opened the Superdome to those who did not leave.

National Guard forces under Governor Blanco were posted at the Superdome, but even combined State and City efforts were woefully inadequate, as evidenced by rapes and murders at the Superdome.

Governor Blanco wrote to President Bush, requesting he declare "an expedited major disaster for the State of Louisiana" and provide federal assistance.

Hurricane Katrina's actual landfall point on August 29, 2005 was 15 miles east of the anticipated one, sparing New Orleans a direct hit and minimizing wind damage there while maximizing it elsewhere.

And the initial report was that New Orleans had dodged a bullet.

But the next day levees broke and most of the City was flooded and thousands who had not evacuated were stranded.

On September 1, 2005, Nagin was flailing wildly, blaming everyone else:"You know what really upsets me? We told the governor, Homeland Security, FEMA...the importance of the 17th Street Canal (breach) issue....And they allowed that pumping station to go under water. And what happened when that pumping station went down, the water started flowing again in the city, and it started getting to levels that probably killed more people...I flew over that thing yesterday, and it's in the same shape that it was after the storm hit. There is nothing happening. And they're feeding the public a line of bull and they're spinning, and people are dying down here."We know who's spinning and scapegoating, Mayor Nagin.

You and your team failed utterly to evacuate, despite ample opportunity.

Mayor Nagin, there WAS a young man in New Orleans with the gumption to act. A student apparently without a license, he nevertheless commandeered a school bus and drove about eighty people from New Orleans to Houston, a very hospitable place.

Why didn't YOU order the rest of the school buses and the municipal buses to be used to evacuate?Instead, you had people collecting releases from those who didn't want to leave. To protect against lawsuits.

Instead, Mayor Nagin bungled. And tried to make up for it with vulgar tantrums like this one:"I don't want to see anybody do anymore goddamn press conferences. Put a moratorium on press conferences. Don't do another press conference until the resources are in this city. And then come down to this city and stand with us when there are military trucks and troops that we can't even count.

"Don't tell me 40,000 people are coming here. They're not here. It's too doggone late. Now get off your asses and do something, and let's fix the biggest goddam crisis in the history of this country."It WILL be fixed, in spite of you, by the American people, under the leadership of President Bush and the Congress.

YOU, who made it much, much worse, failed to prepare and should be quiet if all you can do is rant and curse.

Blame Amid the Tragedy: Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin failed their constituents.

BY BOB WILLIAMS Wednesday, September 7, 2005 -- Wall Street Journal

As the devastation of Hurricane Katrina continues to shock and sadden the nation, the question on many lips is, Who is to blame for the inadequate response?

As a former state legislator who represented the legislative district most impacted by the eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1980, I can fully understand and empathize with the people and public officials over the loss of life and property.

Many in the media are turning their eyes toward the federal government, rather than considering the culpability of city and state officials. I am fully aware of the challenges of having a quick and responsive emergency response to a major disaster. And there is definitely a time for accountability; but what isn't fair is to dump on the federal officials and avoid those most responsible--local and state officials who failed to do their job as the first responders. The plain fact is, lives were needlessly lost in New Orleans due to the failure of Louisiana's governor, Kathleen Blanco, and the city's mayor, Ray Nagin.

The primary responsibility for dealing with emergencies does not belong to the federal government. It belongs to local and state officials who are charged by law with the management of the crucial first response to disasters. First response should be carried out by local and state emergency personnel under the supervision of the state governor and his emergency operations center.

The actions and inactions of Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin are a national disgrace due to their failure to implement the previously established evacuation plans of the state and city. Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin cannot claim that they were surprised by the extent of the damage and the need to evacuate so many people. Detailed written plans were already in place to evacuate more than a million people. The plans projected that 300,000 people would need transportation in the event of a hurricane like Katrina. If the plans had been implemented, thousands of lives would likely have been saved.

In addition to the plans, local, state and federal officials held a simulated hurricane drill 13 months ago, in which widespread flooding supposedly trapped 300,000 people inside New Orleans. The exercise simulated the evacuation of more than a million residents. The problems identified in the simulation apparently were not solved.

A year ago, as Hurricane Ivan approached, New Orleans ordered an evacuation but did not use city or school buses to help people evacuate. As a result many of the poorest citizens were unable to evacuate. Fortunately, the hurricane changed course and did not hit New Orleans, but both Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin acknowledged the need for a better evacuation plan. Again, they did not take corrective actions. In 1998, during a threat by Hurricane George, 14,000 people were sent to the Superdome and theft and vandalism were rampant due to inadequate security. Again, these problems were not corrected.

The New Orleans contingency plan is still, as of this writing, on the city's Web site, and states: "The safe evacuation of threatened populations is one of the principle [sic] reasons for developing a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan." But the plan was apparently ignored.

Mayor Nagin was responsible for giving the order for mandatory evacuation and supervising the actual evacuation: His Office of Emergency Preparedness (not the federal government) must coordinate with the state on elements of evacuation and assist in directing the transportation of evacuees to staging areas. Mayor Nagin had to be encouraged by the governor to contact the National Hurricane Center before he finally, belatedly, issued the order for mandatory evacuation. And sadly, it apparently took a personal call from the president to urge the governor to order the mandatory evacuation.

The city's evacuation plan states: "The city of New Orleans will utilize all available resources to quickly and safely evacuate threatened areas." But even though the city has enough school and transit buses to evacuate 12,000 citizens per fleet run, the mayor did not use them. To compound the problem, the buses were not moved to high ground and were flooded. The plan also states that "special arrangements will be made to evacuate persons unable to transport themselves or who require specific lifesaving assistance. Additional personnel will be recruited to assist in evacuation procedures as needed." This was not done.

The evacuation plan warned that "if an evacuation order is issued without the mechanisms needed to disseminate the information to the affected persons, then we face the possibility of having large numbers of people either stranded and left to the mercy of a storm, or left in an area impacted by toxic materials." That is precisely what happened because of the mayor's failure.

Instead of evacuating the people, the mayor ordered the refugees to the Superdome and Convention Center without adequate security and no provisions for food, water and sanitary conditions. As a result people died, and there was even rape committed, in these facilities. Mayor Nagin failed in his responsibility to provide public safety and to manage the orderly evacuation of the citizens of New Orleans. Now he wants to blame Gov. Blanco and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. In an emergency the first requirement is for the city's emergency center to be linked to the state emergency operations center. This was not done.

The federal government does not have the authority to intervene in a state emergency without the request of a governor. President Bush declared an emergency prior to Katrina hitting New Orleans, so the only action needed for federal assistance was for Gov. Blanco to request the specific type of assistance she needed. She failed to send a timely request for specific aid.
In addition, unlike the governors of New York, Oklahoma and California in past disasters, Gov. Blanco failed to take charge of the situation and ensure that the state emergency operation facility was in constant contact with Mayor Nagin and FEMA. It is likely that thousands of people died because of the failure of Gov. Blanco to implement the state plan, which mentions the possible need to evacuate up to one million people. The plan clearly gives the governor the authority for declaring an emergency, sending in state resources to the disaster area and requesting necessary federal assistance.

State legislators and governors nationwide need to update their contingency plans and the operation procedures for state emergency centers. Hurricane Katrina had been forecast for days, but that will not always be the case with a disaster (think of terrorist attacks). It must be made clear that the governor and locally elected officials are in charge of the "first response."
I am not attempting to excuse some of the delays in FEMA's response. Congress and the president need to take corrective action there, also. However, if citizens expect FEMA to be a first responder to terrorist attacks or other local emergencies (earthquakes, forest fires, volcanoes), they will be disappointed. The federal government's role is to offer aid upon request.
The Louisiana Legislature should conduct an immediate investigation into the failures of state and local officials to implement the written emergency plans. The tragedy is not over, and real leadership in the state and local government are essential in the months to come. More importantly, the hurricane season is still upon us, and local and state officials must stay focused on the jobs for which they were elected--and not on the deadly game of passing the emergency buck.

Mr. Williams is president of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a free market public policy research organization in Olympia, Wash.

This is just crazy

President Bush is asking for $51.8 billion dollars for people who knew that their city may get wipped out? Lets just screw our grand kids and the future state of our economy because we were idoits and built a city below sea level and then didn't get people out when a hurricane came. I have little care in me for those who didn't get out. What is up with Brett Favre's family staying there? Or any of the countless families who thought staying was a good idea. Mr. Favre is rich enough to get his family out and many more had the means as well to get out.

And if the poor didn't have the means to get out where was the mayor? The guy has alot to answer for, not President Bush. Now we have a stupid Senator asking if Bush's vacation impeded relief efforts. You know what impeded relief efforts ... the damn mayor and governor. People didn't get out of the damn city. The mayor is responsible for countless lives because he didn't order the forced removal of people from the city.

Why have a mayor or governor if the President of the United States is suppose to micro-manage the entire country. Screw states, cities, and local communities and lets just have a dictatorship. I for one would LOVE armed soldiers standing at ends of streets all the time. Do you people think that the federal government is responsible for your safety. Read the damn Constitution and get some common sense!

Sean Penn: A waste of space

This is all you need to know of Sean Peen and his stupid stunt to get his face in the spot light:

With the boat loaded with members of Penn's entourage, including a personal photographer, one bystander taunted the actor: "How are you going to get any people in that thing?"

Who knew that Bin Laden was getting advice from Sesame Street?

We may never know.

For those of you who use that stupid saying:

Thanks for doing all the manual labor for us. Mensa

Tiger lost another major. This time to a Hamster.

So true!

Remember this Baby Boomers

Stupid is as stupid does!!!

Its not that hard ladies

FYI

Although the word's root origin did not derive from the "N" word, white people still have trouble saying it.

The war to end all wars

Better parenting through modern science

Those bastards killed Humpty Dumpty!!!

The Bobbyguard

Who's your daddy?

Anyone else want to do this?