Posted on 09/01/2005 3:21:59 PM PDT by EagleUSA
The MSM began politicizing the hurricane Katrina disaster before it even happened. Of course, their one objective is to blame President Bush, our military and anyone else that represents an idealogical barrier to their agenda. What the MSM has not done, is look in their own backyard -- in 1998 the Army Corps of Engineers provided a Draft Request to pursue the protection of noted areas in the Gulf region, to enhance their ability to survive heavy hurricane damage. The project was summarily REJECTED BY BILL CLINTON as not important.
The complicit MSM is making insane charges and accusations based on emotion and hate. Here, in the Federal Register is SOLID FACT that thier poster child, BILL CLINTON, materially contributed to the conditions which permitted hurricant Katrina to dessimate the Gulf region.
Defensively, not pro-actively. I can see lib/dems I know throwing this in my face. Why not have a little ammunition?
Unless someone was trying to blame Bush .. then it would be okay I bet!
Has Clinton come back from Kauai yet? Doesn't he feel our pain?
Thanks for the link, it's great information. Someone in the Clinton administration rejected this, and perhaps the congress as well. Do you have anything on this being "summarily rejected by Bill Clinton" or who asked for the report or why it was rejected? Democrats love wiggle room.
Yes, that's right. The liberals are being disgusting, as liberals are prone to be. We're better than they are. Or at least I'm better than they are; I can't speak for anyone else. And out of respect for the dead and the dying, I'm going to keep my pointing finger down until a decent amount of time has passed.
We aren't the ones who are politizing this - the dems started long before the hurricane ever hit.
The reason .. they want to get their digs in before it's learned that Clinton had the responsibility to help NO and he opted not to.
If you want to play political games with this calamity, that's fine.
-----
It is clear you don't understand the important implication here -- it is about the MSM and the left. Why don't you direct your scorn to THEM -- they are the instigators of hate-driven accusations. Wake up. We are on the RIGHT SIDE and tired of taking in the shorts from the sleazy MSM --- why don't you call the LA Times and the NYT and tell them TO SHUT UP!!! Hmmm?
Some guy was just on FOX and said that it was Bush who wouldn't approve the budget - not Clinton - and the FOX reporter never corrected him.
EeeeeGads! Now FOX is starting to cover for the Clintons ..??
Copy it before it "disappears, folks."
Good find, the RATS better STFU now.
Uh, because it's disgusting and repulsive and indecent and grossly disrespectful to those who are already dead and those who will die in the next few days? Is that a good enough reason?
If you want ammunition to deal with the lib/dems who are throwing it in your face, try this: "I'm revolted that you would even think of politicizing this tragedy while the bodies aren't even cold yet. If you want to talk about whose fault this is, I will be happy to oblige you... later." That's all the response such a slimeball deserves. Anything more makes you a slimeball just like them.
Actually the people to blame are all of us. We in the US let a city of 500,000 grow in an area below sea level over the last 200 years.
Everybody knew that this was not a case of if a disaster would happen, but a case of when a disaster would happen.
Of course the democrats are going to blame those evil conservatives for this, when they themselves with their decades of rule over New Orleans made this disaster ready to happen.
Is this what became Coast 2050, which has been funded at $14 million per year instead of the $470 million required?
They just haven't done their homework. Again. Sigh.
The Democrats already started blaming? Sydney Bleumenthal had a big article the other day. I think it's fair to use this defensively.That it fair.
This isn't as bad as what Bleumenthal wrote - he said things like "bush cut flood control funding by 80% to pay for the war in Iraq."
This article just says that Clinton also canceled something that helped - it doesn't say he had a bad motive.
Some guy was just on FOX and said that it was Bush who wouldn't approve the budget - not Clinton - and the FOX reporter never corrected him.
------
I don't think FOX even knows the facts as documented. Not saying Bush may not have done something later, not sure, but that was not in 1998. Hello FOX ???
Are you nuts? If the media politicize this, they MUST be answered. That hardly means that Freepers can't also donate or help out in other ways.
The media simply cannot be allowed to use their usual technique, which is to repeat a lie until it is believed by uninformed readers and viewers. They must be answered NOW, and unfortunately we don't have the luxury to wait until some better time.
President Bush can't get down in the mud and argue with the media, he has a job to do. But we can, and should, counter their lies with the truth.
Can someone explain what this means? Was it attached to some other bill that was "summarily REJECTED"?
Good job, ignore the thread nannies who urge decency and then swear at you!
These times always bring out who is on your side, and who is not.
I would imagine the bigger bloggers and Fox News would want to know this before running with it.
If we start waving this around and it turns out that it was defunded in the Congressional appropriations process, the blowback will be far worse than anything we've seen the Dims and the MSM dish out on this subject.
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.