Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mayor: 200 trapped on Ninth Ward rooftops; bodies floating in Bywater
WWLTV.com ^ | 02:37 PM CDT on Monday, August 29, 2005 | WWLTV

Posted on 08/29/2005 12:39:10 PM PDT by Smogger

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 561-565 next last
To: Marysecretary

This past year has been quite a revelation. Kind of disheartening but then I think of all the wonderful, generous freepers.


381 posted on 08/30/2005 7:08:39 AM PDT by OldFriend (MAJ. TAMMY DUCKWORTH ~ A NATIONAL TREASURE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

You're absolutely right. I remember that well. People need to check on those who are housebound, ill, infirm, crippled, mentally unstable, etc. and know where to take them in emergencies like this. We used to be so much more self-reliant then, too.


382 posted on 08/30/2005 7:10:47 AM PDT by Marysecretary (Thank you, Lord, for FOUR MORE YEARS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Southack

Oh, you think that couldn't happen here? Times are coming when we may do just that.


383 posted on 08/30/2005 7:12:13 AM PDT by Marysecretary (Thank you, Lord, for FOUR MORE YEARS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: najida

And they're all on this thread! Should make it easy to pick the winner!


384 posted on 08/30/2005 7:14:27 AM PDT by Marysecretary (Thank you, Lord, for FOUR MORE YEARS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: BayouCoyote

They've already started rising.


385 posted on 08/30/2005 7:16:01 AM PDT by Marysecretary (Thank you, Lord, for FOUR MORE YEARS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Conservative2

You think you know it all, dontcha Texas? Cheez.


386 posted on 08/30/2005 7:16:44 AM PDT by Marysecretary (Thank you, Lord, for FOUR MORE YEARS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
Ya know,
All I can think is "One day, you're going to be in a situation with your ill, bed bound mama, or your mentally ill brother and THEN you'll understand".

Geez, do this folks live in a parallel universe called Disney?
387 posted on 08/30/2005 7:17:56 AM PDT by najida (I run with scissors and I don't play well with others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary

"And what foreign country will offer their help? Don't hold your breath waiting though."

I was just going to post something similar. After all the aid and assistance the American troops and people have given to disasters worldwide, I wonder how many countries are going to step up to offer assistance w this disaster, how many rock stars are going to hold a 'Live Aid" concert - - think Bono will be 1st to step up to the plate, will the Saudis and others give us assistance with oil?? Unfortunately, I suspect the answers are None, Nada, No

Blair, Howard and the Japanese PM will probably offer condolences, but my guess is that's going to be the extent of any support.


388 posted on 08/30/2005 7:25:02 AM PDT by Seattle Conservative (God Bless and protect our troops and their CIC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: Veritas et equitas ad Votum

Whatever. Call me a marxist, liberal looney-tunes, or whatever else you care to.

I think you're clinging to principle to obscure the fact that you're a cold-hearted, pennypincher that begrudges a dime given to the federal government. Your fallback position of private charities in this case is ludicrous. The federal government has immediate access to monies and equipment private charities do not. They also possess the power of the state, and that's no small thing when you have to contend with looters and price gougers.

Yes, I am aware that the police TECHNICALLY may not have a duty to prevent crimes from happening...but apparently these officers disagreed with that. I, for one, am glad that they did, though it sadly cost them their lives. They are far braver people than most, when most could and (honestly) should run for safety.

There is a vast difference between helping someone recover from a natural disaster, and "helping" someone pay for things they otherwise could not afford. If you can't understand that, then we're through here.

Have a nice day.


389 posted on 08/30/2005 7:38:30 AM PDT by exnavychick (We're damned if we do, damned if we don't...so my vote goes for "do.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Amendments 9 and 10.

The fedgov ONLY has powers specifically listed somewhere in the Constitution.

The list of powers the framers intended the fedgov NOT to have would have been infinite.

In other words, the federal government is forbidden from doing EVERYTHING except those things specifically listed in the Constitution itself, and not hidden within the "general welfare" clause.

I believe that "conservatives" need to be careful when extending the "general welfare" clause to mean more than Mr. Madison meant it to mean, because there are many who would argue that gay marriage falls under that category. In fact, perhaps abortion is in our nation's "general welfare" interests. Such arguments are moral relativism and cannot be settled because there is no "right or wrong", just whatever you wish the term "general welfare" to mean.

Once you start down that road, you get into a democracy where a majority vote determines what falls under "general welfare". To me, that clause is invisible and meaningless.


390 posted on 08/30/2005 7:45:15 AM PDT by Veritas et equitas ad Votum (If the Constitution "lives and breathes", it dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 379 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

Storm surge combined with some leaks in the levies boundaring Lake Ponchetrein (sp?).


391 posted on 08/30/2005 7:46:48 AM PDT by BIRDS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

Storm surge combined with some leaks in the levies boundaring Lake Ponchetrein (sp?).


392 posted on 08/30/2005 7:47:11 AM PDT by BIRDS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

This reminds me of the photo from the Tsunami..the one with almost 500 bodies in one shot...

Terrible....


393 posted on 08/30/2005 7:48:45 AM PDT by Loud Mime (War is Mankind's way of ridding the world of the tyranny caused by liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: exnavychick

"There is a vast difference between helping someone recover from a natural disaster, and "helping" someone pay for things they otherwise could not afford."

I don't disagree, but the problem in my mind comes in when you try to define "disaster".

If a tree falls on my house and my property is ruined, but my neighbors are not affected, is that a disaster?

If not, why? Aren't I just as bad off regardless if the rest of the town is underwater or not?

Where do we draw a line between a personal misfortune and a natural disaster necessitating federal taxes be allocated for "relief" efforts?

Are you familiar with stories from Florida last year (where I live) in which people were getting supplies from FEMA and then selling them on Ebay or in the paper after hurricane season was over? Is this okay with you? How would you make sure this doesn't happen? Is some amount of waste and fraud okay as long as you feel good about helping some people who are "in need"?


394 posted on 08/30/2005 7:49:54 AM PDT by Veritas et equitas ad Votum (If the Constitution "lives and breathes", it dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 389 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary

"I can't believe they couldn't get busses in to pick folks up. What a sad commentary on their readiness in emergencies. I sure would have thought of SOMETHING."

I read that busses picked people up and took them to the Superdome.



395 posted on 08/30/2005 8:10:18 AM PDT by toldyou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: Veritas et equitas ad Votum
Well, there is your problem right there.

I'm not talking about "disaster" the way you mean. I mean NATURAL DISASTER in the common usage, which usually means a hurricane, flood, tornado, etc. Things beyond our control, Mother Nature spewing her wrath upon the planet and our peon little selves.

Yes, if a tree falls on my car through some freak lightning strike, etc. that is a disaster for me...personally. The entire area is not affected, and that is why I carry auto insurance. If I did not, I would be paying for a new car, all out of pocket. (Depending on my insurance, I still may be!) :)

Look, you obviously read the Constitution VERY literally, so I can tell you now that we are NOT going to agree here. Thanks for the discussion, but I'm not going to bang my head against a brick wall to try and convince you that you are mistaken.
396 posted on 08/30/2005 8:11:35 AM PDT by exnavychick (We're damned if we do, damned if we don't...so my vote goes for "do.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary

"And they're all on this thread! Should make it easy to pick the winner!"

That was your comment in reference to "Jerk of the Year."

Just whom are you referring to if not yourself?



397 posted on 08/30/2005 8:15:33 AM PDT by toldyou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: Veritas et equitas ad Votum
Are you familiar with stories from Florida last year (where I live) in which people were getting supplies from FEMA and then selling them on Ebay or in the paper after hurricane season was over? Is this okay with you? How would you make sure this doesn't happen? Is some amount of waste and fraud okay as long as you feel good about helping some people who are "in need"?

Forgot about this part, sorry. Yes, I am familiar with those stories, and they tick me off, royally. However, it is an undisputed fact that wherever or whenever there is a disaster, some people start acting like vultures. Looting, or selling disaster supplies on Ebay, as you say. Yes, I think it's acceptable to still dispense aid under those circumstances. What I think should be done is to prosecute those responsible (that can be caught) and levy stiff penalties against them...up to and including jail time. It's theft and/or burglary in the case of looters, and defrauding the government in the case of those selling disaster supplies.

It's ridiculous to think it can't be stopped,or prevented altogether, but you CAN minimize the impact by punishing those who do things like that...swiftly and severely. Just because someone might decide to help themselves to other people's property during a disaster, or decide to make themselves a buck off the taxpayer's back doesn't mean we should hesitate to help those who need it.

398 posted on 08/30/2005 8:18:59 AM PDT by exnavychick (We're damned if we do, damned if we don't...so my vote goes for "do.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies]

To: exnavychick

Believe me, I'm open on this issue, however I have a single major hangup with federal government provided disaster relief.

What is the criteria for a particular event qualifying as a "NATURAL DISASTER", in your opinion?


399 posted on 08/30/2005 8:21:23 AM PDT by Veritas et equitas ad Votum (If the Constitution "lives and breathes", it dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]

To: Veritas et equitas ad Votum

As I stated, a natural...usually weather-related disaster. Mudslides, wildfires, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, extensive and/or flash flooding.

Ya know, things that us peons can do little about. We do what we can with improving structural integrity, buying home and flood insurance, and helping our neighbors to safe places, etc. You already see people helping out with money, food, and shelter, independent of government assistance. But it isn't nearly enough, because far too many people are only out for themselves, and don't give a rip about others. "Sink or swim, there's no room in my boat for you!" they cry.

Some of these things are so severe, and local governments are knocked out by them, at least temporarily. Are we supposed to allow all to fall into chaos because the powers that be were morons and failed to implement (or develop) good disaster plans? Besides, the best laid plans...as they say. Also, some people simply cannot afford the extra cost in premiums for flood insurance. Should they, therefore, not be allowed to own a home because they may have to go to FEMA in the event of a natural disaster or be homeless? Geesh.

People need our help, and I don't give a crap if Uncle Sam has to ride to the rescue. We aren't talking about welfare slackers, etc. We're talking about people who have their lives devastated by natural disaster. You know, those folks that are hiding in attics right now, praying that they aren't washed away to their deaths.

Can you really, truly sit there and say because the Consititution doesn't specify a duty for the federal government to provide disaster relief that they shouldn't be providing it? My God, if they can waste money on pork barrel projects, the least they can do is put SOME of my hard-earned money towards doing some good!


400 posted on 08/30/2005 8:51:42 AM PDT by exnavychick (We're damned if we do, damned if we don't...so my vote goes for "do.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 399 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 561-565 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson