Posted on 08/29/2005 12:39:10 PM PDT by Smogger
Mayor Ray Nagin said that 200 people were stranded on rooftops in the Lower Ninth Ward and several “bodies are floating in the water” in the Bywater neighborhood and in Eastover.
Nagin made the announcement in his first press briefing after Hurricane Katrina slammed just east of the city, but did plenty of devastation to New Orleans.
Nagin said that the 200 stranded people included 20 police officers who were riding out the storm at their homes in preparation to take over shifts from other officers. He said that boats would be dispatched on rescue missions later in the afternoon.
Mayor Nagin issued a "boil water" recommendation for water in the city - except for Algiers and the CBD due to a water main line break that may have compromised the water.
Nagin said at least 20 buildings in the city had collapsed and that it might be 48 hours before residents would be allowed back to their homes to assess the damage.
(Excerpt) Read more at wwltv.com ...
That started before the hurricane made landfall.
Well, I only caught pieces of the woman who was speaking to the host via a phone. She said something like rescue crews who were assessing the damage/looking for stranded people witnessed an animal entangled and being electrocuted in some downed power lines. A woman on a roof with a severe leg injury. Some very unsafe conditions for rescuers to be out in to get to these people and this animal.
This lady choked back many minutes of tears. I wish I'd caught her name, but I didn't.
ditto
Well I guess the thread proved you right.
As for the rest of you blind socialists, America has always been a nation that helps not only its own, but others around the world. We just did it a whole lot more efficently and personaly before the Goverment made an industry out of it by mandatory taxation. Personal giving and helping would be way up if you all were not paying out over 70% of your earnings in taxes, hidden or otherwise.
Just think, we are paying out at a rate of 1 person helping 3 constantly, disaster or not. Seems that there is a whole lot of skimming going on eh?
"The pumps in N.O. have never been capable of preventing the city from flooding. The pumps get overwhelmed by severe rainstorms routinely, and areas of the city flood. The pumping stations then remedy the flooding, but they cannot prevent it."
I read on another thread this a.m. that Sen Landrieu was blaming the Federal gov't for the pumps and levies not being able to handle the water---they hadn't been updated in a long time, yada yada yada (as I recall, something to the effect that money wasn't provided, etc., etc.)
I'd like to remind Ms Landrieu that she and Sen Breaux (both Dims) have *supposed* to be representing the fine people of LA for a number of years and therefore, they are both part of that Fed Gov't (not just the Bush admin). In addition, with all the pork and crapola that goes in the appropriations bills each year, don't you think that at least 1 of them would have included funds for the pumps and levies if they felt they were needed????? It is not up to the Pres to be a mind-reader and determine what is needed in every state - if they didn't ask him and/or add the $s in via an amendment to the budget, she has no one to blame, except herself (and possibly Breaux - though, from all appearances, he seems to be a fairly decent guy for a Dim).
Yep, I wouldn't be surprised if the Revvvvvvvvvrannnnnd Jackson flies right from Chavez in Venezuela to NO to administer to them and *help* them.
Well, I think the government could argue that giving away all of our hard earned and easily confiscated tax dollars is outlined in the Constitution. It's in the Preamble, right after the part about providing for a common defense.
That being said, it chaps my butt that people live in these areas prone to frequent destruction, and don't insure for it, knowing they will be able to feed off the government tit when they lose everything. I do live in an area where we have to deal with the occasional tornado, and as a result, I pay an extra premium for insurance coverage in case I suffer a loss due to tornado. If these people aren't willing to pay for insurance coverage for hurricane destruction, then it shouldn't be my responsability to pay for them to rebuild their house.
If tax dollars are being spent to reconstruct and refurnish homes after these all too frequent hurricanes, then technically, those homes and their furnishings belong to taxpayers. This rules out the crawford hag, but to the rest of us, it should at least entitle us to timeshare privledges in any one of those homes.
Sarcasm aside, the government is way to generous when it comes to giving away tax dollars. Somebody in Washington needs to grow some cajones and say no to these people. If they can't be smart enough to buy insurance this time, then maybe they will learn the lesson and be properly insured when the next hurricane comes rolling through.
Why in the world do you write 'poor people' in quotation marks? Is it because you believe they are not poor? I really can't believe how cold some of our Freepers can be when others are in dire straights.
James Madison had a very different interpretation of the "general welfare" clause than do you.
Perhaps he was wrong, and you are right.
:-)
"They have a responsibility to protect their citizens"
From what?
Natural disasters?
Over eating?
Under exercising?
Watching too much television?
Not studying enough?
Where does it end? What are the limitations?
Since the Constitution contains no such provision as to provide the federal government the authority to carry out charity work such as FEMA and disaster "relief", all such actions are extraconstitutional. Therefore, there are no defined boundaries, so perhaps you could define when and where the government should protect people from themeselves and nature, and when it should not...
Perhaps you are familiar with the Supreme Court decision which states the police have NO duty whatsoever to PREVENT crimes from happening.
Therefore, your argument falls apart. Those police officers have no obligation to risk their own lives for people who MAY need help in this case, especially when the help available will be very limited.
At least you admit federal charity is not Constitutional. But, I never said sink or swim. I am strongly in favor of private charity, and I encourage all Americans to help out as each is able.
Government provided "relief" for natural disasters is no different than welfare or food stamps in my opinion. Both are simply marxism come to life.
"..., to each according to his need". In this case, you allow your emotions to carry you away and obuscate this point, but it is there nonetheless. Just because the people of New Orleans REALLY need help, they should get it.
Guess what, I REALLY need help purchasing a house of my own and a new car. Do you want the federal government to step in and give me some of your money for my "needs"?
I'm debating the issue and illustrating my point with some satire.
It's your problem if you cannot have your ideas challenged or your opinion of President Bush questioned.
Either way, the issue has nothing to do with how wealthy we are as a nation, because as a matter of fact, the United States government is the biggest debtor in the world.
We have a negative net worth as a country, thanks to politicians like George Bush who think it is the role of government to redistribute the wealth of the people according to the tenets of Karl Marx.
Guess what? I live in Florida.
I have no problem with King George donating as much of his own money to the residents of New Orleans as he wishes.
I have a big problem when he confiscates money from MY family to do so.
Yea, and guess what? There is looting going on anyway, so the government has failed.
This is precisely my point. If the people had stayed, they could have protected their own property.
How is it that the looters can get in there without getting killed, but the law abiding citizens who obey the authorities are the ones who get screwed?
You think the government actually cares about the life of any particular individual?
Okay, define disaster.
So, you're saying that Madison didn't approve of the debating and passage of laws by Congress and the signing of them by the President?
:>)
We currently have the biggest government EVER.
More non-defense spending than EVER.
A doubling of the Dept of Education that Reagan wanted to shut down.
The biggest expansion of Medicare EVER.
Perhaps you can elaborate on his fiscal conservatism from the spending side because all I see is more spending than ever and bigger deficits than ever.
Yes, tax cuts are great, and I wish he would push more through or get on board with the fair tax plan, but he's too busy trying to create a windfall for Wall Street by "fixing" social security instead of eliminating it all together.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.