Are you saying that Bush removed these funds by executive order?
I’m saying that hte reason cited by the Army Corps of Engineers for their funds being cut is Iraq, as reported by the Times-Picayune nine times.
Of course, if you had read my large post above, you would have also seen that I also laid the blame at the feet of the GOP-controlled House Appropriations commitee, which followed through with the Bush-requested budget.
If you are naive enough to believe that as de facto head of his party, in a non-lame duck situation, that President Bush had no say at all in the budgets passed during that time, I would suggest going down to the local community college and taking a refresher course in Political Science 101.
Don’t be an asshole, or stupid. You’re being both with that statement. Any precise or factual question may have a single answer. There are, in fact, an infinite number of questions with precise eiteher/or answers. Infinite does not equal “Very, very few.” You’re in no position to talk about what adults do and don’t understand if you’re going to make such immature statements.
So, if I were to read this properly (and please tell me if I’m mistaken) the correct answer to my origninal according to your thinking is “false.”
Bush is not to blame for hurricane Katrina.
For you, it is a simple either or question that can be answered simply.
It appears to me that you failed to do so because my question neglects a different question that you wanted to answer, rather than the question I asked.
The question you want to answer is “Bush is to blame for the level of preparedness of New Orleans to deal with a disaster like Katrina.”
To this question you would have answered “true.”
Is this a correct reflection of your stance?
Yeah, whatever. Will you just tell me if I’ve correctly interpreted your stance?
You may wish to stop being purposefully obtuse before making request in regards to the behavior of others.
I don’t think the Army Corps of Engineers or its representives can speak authoritatively on the rationale for national policy level budget decisions
Yes, I saw. That doesn’t necessarily prove anything. For example, lots of bad things have happened while Democrats controlled the white house or various committees.
In such instances, regardless of who is control it seems to me one needs to show that the particular decision was split along party lines. If, for example Democrats specifically opposed cutting the levy funds, and the GOP and Bush specifically endorsed the idea, than I think one can place the blame upon Bush or the GOP.
On the other hand, it was a bipartisan decision, or it went through largely unnoticed and undiscussed, than it is difficult to lay the blame squarely on a single person or party.
I have read what you written, and am trying to determine exactly what went into the decision, who was involved in making the specific decision and who was opposed to do it. Once I’ve done that, I can determine whether or not I think there is truth in what you say.
Well thank you very much for the suggestion. What I am trying to determine is whether Bush was personally involved in this specific decision, whether or not it enjoyed bipartisan support, and whether or not it was opposed specifically by the minority party, or whether it was a small non-issue in a much larger budget that was generally unnoticed by everybody.
Do you care to help answer these questions? They are reasonable and critical to the truth of your thesis. The cheap shots are not.
Or I may not.
You may wish to fuck yourself sideways with a razor wire dildo.
Or you may not.
On those that directly affect it, they are.
I’m sure the partisan blinders are comfortable, but do take them off for a moment.
Lets stay on topic here, dear. The conservative apologist “omg, the Democrats!!!11one!!” line doesn’t stay on topic.
Besides, next thing you know, it’ll all come back to the Clenis™.
Someone apparently does not know the process that goes into omnibus and military spending bills. The people to blame? The senator(s) whose office that part of the bill came from. That generally comes from the party in power. If you have any evidence otherwise, please produce your citations.
It certainly wasn’t unnoticed, given the multiple requests the the ACoE and numerous warnings by FEMA.
Well, at least you’re adult enough to admit to being purposefully obtuse. However, it’s generally not conductive to fighting ignorance. I would hope that a member that has been around as long as you would remember that fighting ignorance is the point of this site and board.
Y’know Kitchen. I asked you and Elvis questions because I wasn’t sure what exactly you were saying in terms of the extent to wish you wish to blame the Bush administration for Katrina and related damages.
It looked to me like you might have a point, so I asked questions. I’m open to the idea. You may be right.
But, if you’re going to play stupid games and dodge questions and make rhetorical cheap shots, than you make it difficult for me to evaluate what you are saying. I need to do that before I can have an opinion.
So, can we try again without the bullshit?
Would I be correct to say that your stance is that because that item went through in a budget from a Republican controlled house with a Republican administration in office, that therefore the consequences of that item are automatically the fault of the President?
If that’s not correct, would you restate it more precisely?
I refer you to my observation about your rigidly-binary mindset.
Wrong. Read again.
You already dropped your excluded middle, remember? Can’t bring it back, ya know.
No. Nor, per your own proud admission, are you even *capable * of interpreting anything more complex than “True or False”. Unless you can show how an attempt to get you to break loose from your binaryism might possibly succeed, there’s no point in continuing.
I was just about to express my hope that you’re proud of the way you’ve conducted yourself here, but there’s actually no doubt that you are.
Now I could see blaming him if oh the hurricane happened next year.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4200/is_20050606/ai_n14657367
After researching this a bit I came to the conclusion that it is a groups fault. The Army Corp Of Engineers fault. Wow the waste in that is unreal if they used the money that they wasted, to make New Orleans safer, some of this tragedy could of been lower.
Elvis:
Well, I guess if these kinds of simple questions are just too complex for you perhaps I’d better ask them elsewhere.
Abbie, perhaps you missed the part where that 4.0 bil is spread out over 8000 projects.
Per your White House link:
Now, I wasn’t a math major, but that comes out to roughly half a mill per project is spread out evenly. I assume it’s not, but 4 billion is a drop in the bucket.
The largest cuts came in 2002, which you conveniently did not link. That cut, and those further on, are what slowed the project down.
An intelligent person would know that simple questions do not do this topic justice.
Nonsense. Liars and obfuscators hide their reasoning. There’s no valid excuse for it.
You’re placing blame. I’m trying to determine on whom, to what extent, and what the reasoning is. These are simple questions, and they are entirely reasonable.
The only excuse for not dealing with them is disingenuousness.
Since you fail to define your argument, or answer reasonable questions, I can only conclude that your argument is either without merit and you are seeking to hide that, or that you are not competant to express your argument rationally.
How many projects was the 2000 budget for? You see I figure total budget is total budget and jobs have to get done. I “conveniently” didn’t link to it because I didn’t find it. I linked to what I found, a budget of 3.9 Billion in 2000 compared to a budget of 4.0 Billion in 2005.
Your saying the last fucking 3 years could of stopped something that was known for the last 300 years? So Bush is to blame for something that every President, New Orleans resident, Louisiana Governers where aware of since, well long before any of us where born?
Spread the blame around a little, or you just look like a total dipshit.
As far as the levees breaking, yes. The main levee that broke is exactly where the project stalled. No levees that were shored up under the SELA program (active since 1995) gave way.
You’ll need to produce some actual evidence instead of conjecture and ad hominems if you’re going to attempt to prove that my blame is misplaced.
There’s no obfuscation. You’re the only one that’s apparently having trouble figuring out exactly where blame is being placed, why it is being placed there, and if you wish to dismiss my argument because you have the inability to understand it when ever other poster that has commented on it appears to understand it perfectly, that is not my problem.
If you cannot properly rebut my assertion without reducing yourself to being obtuse, begging the question, and other forms of blatant idiocy, I hear Nickelodeon has wonderful debates on their forums that are right about your level. Be warned though, I don’t believe you’re allowed to drop the f-bomb there, or make reference to spiked dildos.
You have a cite for this? I looked through every news website I could, couldn’t find anything. I knew that SELA was cut back, but nothing about the main levee break being “where the project stalled”
My original post in this thread. See the link above the other quotes it’s grouped with.
But still the project was not slated for completion until 2007 so surely you can see this is not squarely on Bush?
2007 was the date of completion after budget cuts.
It should have been finished about a month ago if the money was there.
So surely you can see that the problem does rest squarely on Bush and the GOP.