Live Thread: Bush Speech About New Orleans (9 pm EDT)

www.freerepublic.com | September 15 , 2005

[Howlin]

9 P.M. EDT.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I'm sorry...I have no idea what you're commenting on...pls enlighten me.

Your initiative.

[nopardons]

States rights...go read up on them. And while you're at it, read the transcript of the president's speech, because you've assumed things that were not said therein.

[BigSkyFreeper]

The reason YOU are confused is because the topic of discussion for which you inserted yourself into dealt with "racial discrimination" and not "federal funds funneled into state projects" or somesuch.

[paulat]

The quote you provided in your initiative might as well come from the Civil Rights Law, and probably did.

EXACTLY!!! It directed the same language to state government!!! That's why it stood up in court! It was aimed at all of the state programs funneling Fed money...you are precisely right! But states have to pass their own versions. It's now like the Kelo decision...states will have to pass their own property rights laws.

[beyond the sea]

I think it is time we had an investigation into the MSM's part in the HYSTERIA in this country concerning Katrina and New Orleans.

Yeh, ......... that will happen. Bring Mary Mapes and Dan the Man back out of hiding to expose the truth of the matter (sarcasm off).

By the way, that investigation would be quite welcome here.

Do they still have those 40,000 body bags ready down there?

[MJY1288]

When I hear about a program that offers people the chance to OWN something rather than GET something, as I did tonight, I see that as progress. Along with ownership, comes dignity, and with dignity comes purpose, and with purpose comes hope, and this is what ends a life of poverty

[BigSkyFreeper]

EXACTLY!!! It directed the same language to state government!!!

The Civil Rights Act isn't a "states right" issue.

[TomasUSMC]

The American taxpayer should not subsidize flood insurance in areas that have a 100% chance of flooding.
isthisnickcool
==
He's swallowed whole the idea "racism" is why the people in New Orleans have so many impoverished persons. This speech is a *mess* and it won't do ONE GOOD THING to improve 'race relations'. He's pandering. Pandering!!
newzjunkey
===
but Dubya doesn't do himself any favors acting as if someone has proven that he has a hurricane generator in the White House basement.
by thelastvirgil

---

Every Cabinet secretary is going to participate in a comprehensive review. We will learn from Hurricane Katrina.

The people of this country have come back from fire or wind or floods and been stronger and rebuilt better than before
by Peach

---

A California judge rules against God, while this President praises Him. The American people will notice this and figure out for themselves which side they're on.
by yaya123

---

WHO ELSE SAW THE WOMAN FROM NOLA ON ABC! SHE JUST SLAMMED THE LOCAL LEADERS AND TALKED ABOUT THE BUSES KOPPEL DIDN'T SHOW EARLIER!

HA!

At least someone gets it.
by FreedomPoster

---

My hit parade.

Its a mess. Bush is just trying to clean it up as fast and in the best possible way he thinks will work. Seems like he was concerned more about the poor blacks in New Orleans than poor NON-blacks elsewhere.

- As all of us saw on television, there is also some deep, persistent poverty in this region as well. And that poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action. So let us restore all that we have cherished from yesterday, and let us rise above the legacy of inequality. When the streets are rebuilt, there should be many new businesses, including minority-owned businesses, along those streets. When the houses are rebuilt, more families should own, not rent, those houses. When the regional economy revives, local people should be prepared for the jobs being created.

The President should be helping ALL Americans that were hit by Katrina with businesses and homes and jobs equally.

[nopardons]

EXACTLY !

The president did NOT talk about a whole lot of "giveaways" for nothing. Neither did he say that money would come pouring into the effected states, with no strings and nobody overseeing where and how that money was used.

[TAdams8591]

I was thinking the same thing. There must have been little REAL opportunity.

And perhaps after the failing of Nagin and Blanco, and their complete and utter lack of concern, they feel betrayed. i.e. Compare the Superdome experience of some with the Astrodome. Wait... there is no comparison.

[paulat]

Just a quick question:

How do you think contracts will be let to PRIVATE companies in individual states with massive Federal grants? Who will get those contracts?

That's why we now have this STATE law:

The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

[BigSkyFreeper]

When I hear about a program that offers people the chance to OWN something rather than GET something, as I did tonight, I see that as progress. Along with ownership, comes dignity, and with dignity comes purpose, and with purpose comes hope, and this is what ends a life of poverty

The foundation of his speech was in effect, just as you posted. Beyond that, the ones who will be putting on the most elbow grease will be the private sector.

[paulat]

The Civil Rights Act isn't a "states right" issue.

Our initiative took the language of the FEDERAL Civil Rights Act and made it germane to the state level.

[nopardons]

That's not what you were originally talking about at all and has nothing to do with "STATES RIGHTS".

TRY READING THE CONSTITUTION !

The president stated, quite clearly, that there are to be OVERSEERS.

[BigSkyFreeper]

How do you think contracts will be let to PRIVATE companies in individual states with massive Federal grants? Who will get those contracts?

Through the private sector.

That's why we now have this STATE law:

The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

Which is covered in the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964. Like I said, it's not a "states right" to completely ignore Federal Law.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Our initiative took the language of the FEDERAL Civil Rights Act and made it germane to the state level.

States Rights or Civil Rights? Which is it? One has nothing to do with the other.

[KingKongCobra]

"That would be interesting, wouldn't it?

But, then, who would they argue with?"

The truth is that the SuperCon thread would get no posts since they're only here to be disruptive. Their purpose is not served by talking to themselves.

[paulat]

Through the private sector.

Again...if you think that Federal grants will not be passing through the private sector, then you are extremely naive. It is amusing to see that you refuse to see that the 1964 Civil Rights Act does NOT govern these situations. Apparently, millions of WA state residents were able to "get" it.

[paulat]

States Rights or Civil Rights? Which is it? One has nothing to do with the other.

The recent Kelo decision by the Supreme Court (seizure of private property) illustrates PRECISELY why Fed and state law are related. States are scrambling to get their versions of property rights laws in place to offset Kelo.

[BigSkyFreeper]

It is amusing to see that you refuse to see that the 1964 Civil Rights Act does NOT govern these situations.

Au Contraire. I find it amusing that you're wasting everyone's time by dodging simple "yes" or "no" answers and remaining completely off topic since you and I started this back and forth exchange. Your "situation" had NOTHING to do with the original post from which you posted to.