![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 33 to 57 of 68. Go back in thread:
Posted by Declan on November 3, 2005, at 5:56:32
In reply to Re: god bless america!!!! » Declan, posted by alexandra_k on November 2, 2005, at 20:37:01
Fair go Alex, not rap, no no no. Good American popular music.
I've spent 40+ years listening to good American popular music, even before Roy Orbison.
US films are an insult with a couple of exceptions. Every year when they are all gathered together for the Academy Awards I find myself thinking......
Declan
Posted by AuntieMel on November 3, 2005, at 9:25:16
In reply to Re: ?? » AuntieMel, posted by alexandra_k on November 2, 2005, at 16:18:06
>> "Because schools have been inundated with American creationist literature being sent to them."
> "Oh no, I just meant that the literature is coming from America. "And the point? Lots of things come from America. Some good, some bad. But calling something "American" seems to me to imply that it either has the support of the majority of the people, or it has been done by the government.
-------------------------------------
"Ah. So when Americans die then that is because other people *intend* innocent people die.""I think we are more inclined to be charitable to our own"
"The noble and honourable intentions of the US, for example. "
"I don't believe... We get anything like an objective (or an appropriately inter-subjective) take on things."
Do you think it's hard to discern the intentions of someone who flies a plane into a building? Or bombs a school bus or a restaraunt? Or a subway system? Do you think it's possible that the target was something *other* than civilians and their deaths were collateral?
------------------------------------------------
"Because... The cycle has to stop somewhere. "
But we also know that appeasement doesn't work. And if you would like some verification of that I'll give you the email addresses of some of my friends in Poland.
I agree that war is a tragic waste. And I personally never believed the hype of WMD. *AND* I've never been a supporter of Bush.
But for this particular conflict? I've had mixed feelings since the beginning. Not because I was worried about WMD, but because I am horrified by a leader who will use chemical gas on his own people, and by many other things that this particular leader did. The rape, the murder, the torture....
Yes, sometimes war can be noble. Is this one? I don't know yet.
-----------------------------------------------
"I don't believe... We get anything like an objective (or an appropriately inter-subjective) take on things."
"LOL! You don't know what sites I have been looking at. We get a variety of news sources in NZ. British, American, Australian, increasingly New Zealand sources too... I think... Us New Zealanders are considered 'neutral' rather than 'friendly' towards the US for a reason..."
I don't look at my country through rose-colored glasses, believe me. I purposely read web sites that are *not* friendly to us, AlJazeera, Pravda, one in Pakistan, and so on. I try to (not always successfully) find the truth, which is usually somewhere in between the positive and the negative.
--------------------------------------------------
> Not the way we spend money? About NASA:
> "i think its all pretty interesting
> but... i'm sure people won't have too much of a hard time thinking of better uses for the $$$"Yup. Do you disagree?
Well, yes I do disagree. If not for NASA then I would probably not have gone into the sciences. I wouldn't have known to follow dreams. And before you say 'that was then' my youngest went to Space Camp twice - and she became fired up about sciences herself.
-------------------------------------------------
I think the one thing you don't understand about us is that we are not the government, we are the people. All individuals. Sure, it's good to have some safety net, but most here rely on each other more than the govt. in times of trouble. At least in my neck of the woods.
It's the PEOPLE that make me love this country.
People like my eldest who worked every day at the Astrodome, from the day before it was opened as a Katrina center until the day it closed.
Like my youngest who worked there when she was in town.
Like the complete strangers who went to the dome to adopt families and take them home with them.
Like the hundreds and thousands who donated their time to help.
Like, when the roads were deadlocked before Rita, the hundreds who drove to them and passed out food and water and ice and gasoline to the stranded.
Like the nurse my daughter talked to who risked her life at a New Orleans nursing home trying to save the elderly from drowning.
This is just MY personal experience of *only* the last couple of months. It's not extraordinary - these things happen on different scales all the time.
And they are happening in Iraq. Not by the government, but by soldiers and citizens. I've read dozens of stories of people being brought over here for medical treatment that wasn't available to them before.
But - that's not newsworthy, is it?
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 3, 2005, at 9:30:28
In reply to Re: ?? » AuntieMel, posted by alexandra_k on November 2, 2005, at 16:18:06
> the war is not in anyone's interest (Halliburton et al excepted)
>
> Declan> By 'you people' I didn't mean *all* americans. I meant the ones who think there is something particularly noble about risking their lives, the lives of their family and friends
>
> Because war is a tragic waste.
> To make it in to something 'heroic'
> Is to do a disservice to those who lost their lives
>
> alexandra_kPlease respect the views of others and be sensitive to their feelings.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above posts, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by AuntieMel on November 3, 2005, at 9:56:08
In reply to Re: the Ministry of Civility, posted by alexandra_k on November 2, 2005, at 13:47:01
"I only get what I can see on the news...
And some stuff I've read off the internet...But my understanding was that the poorest areas were the hardest hit
And the slowest to get aidWas that wrong? "
---------------------
Many who see the film clips assume that "black" equals "poor" and assume because the shots show more stranded black people than white people then it must be racist and classist.
But - New Orleans is majority (67%) black. It only makes sense that the people in the film clips were also mostly black.
And Dinah is right about neighborhoods. The ones I see on TV that were most devistated were either neighborhoods of newer larger homes or areas of older 'gentrified' homes.
You can't always believe what you see on TV. In fact, you *usually* can't believe what you see on TV.
Posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 14:47:02
In reply to Re: the Ministry of Propaganda » alexandra_k, posted by AuntieMel on November 3, 2005, at 9:56:08
I'm going to have to look for a map of New Orleans neighborhoods and give a description of how badly each was hit, and how each area got flooded.
More than anyone wants to know about Katrina. :)
But this is what has me upset
http://www.wwltv.com/topstories/stories/wwl110205levee.1fb472b0.html
That's where I was saying that the 17th Street Canal had flooding on the Orleans parish side where the pilings were 18 feet deep, but not on the Jefferson parish side, where pilings were 30 feet deep. Same corps of engineers, I can't imagine the design was different for two sides of a not very wide canal. Different contractors, different officials in charge of each side. The London Avenue canal also was a victim of failure either to poor design or poor construction.
I hope they do a thorough investigation and whoever was to blame for 18 instead of thirty feet walls is held accountable for the deaths that resulted.
There's a fair amount of outrage around here, and I'm sure a great deal more public attention will be paid to flood wall protection. Also there are calls for a regional rather than per parish levee board system, which should probably help a lot.
I don't know who's responsible, but it just doesn't make any sense. If you've seen pictures of the seventeenth street canal, you know how narrow it is. To have two different governmental bodies, two different contractors, and if it is possible, two different corps of engineers specs is beyond believable. To have one side twelve feet more shallow than the other side, ending slightly above a known peaty level is beyond beyond believable.
There's plenty of room for outrage, but I think it should be directed where it's deserved.
Posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 16:02:25
In reply to Re: ?? » alexandra_k, posted by AuntieMel on November 3, 2005, at 9:25:16
>Lots of things come from America. Some good, some bad.
Sure. Same with most places in the world.
> But calling something "American" seems to me to imply that it either has the support of the majority of the people, or it has been done by the government.
Not at all. The Kiwi is a New Zealand bird. While it may well have the support of the people and the government, it would continue to be a New Zealand bird even if we hunted it into extinction.
> Do you think it's hard to discern the intentions of someone who flies a plane into a building? Or bombs a school bus or a restaraunt? Or a subway system? Do you think it's possible that the target was something *other* than civilians and their deaths were collateral?I don't think people should do that. But then... I heard a wedding party was bombed by the US military. I don't think people should do that either.
Another issue is how much the war is effective with respect to getting people to stop doing those things. With respect to 9/11 there you are dealing with a suicide bomber, for example. Part of being a suicide bomber means he is already dead. I worry about the slippery target of 'terrorism'. I worry about how many innocent people die in the name of protecting the innocent (though how much is it about that, and how much is it about revenge?). How much is it about an attempt to save face? You can't get away with doing that to us! Somebody must pay! And the public requires a scapegoat. Fairly easy to get them to support a war. And as for film coverage... How much is made in a hollywood basement?
> "Because... The cycle has to stop somewhere. "> But we also know that appeasement doesn't work. And if you would like some verification of that I'll give you the email addresses of some of my friends in Poland.
Sorry, I'm not too sure what 'appeasement' means. Doesn't work to do what?
> I agree that war is a tragic waste.PBC
<joke>
;-)
> because I am horrified by a leader who will use chemical gas on his own people, and by many other things that this particular leader did. The rape, the murder, the torture....Yeah. And I'm sure there was a lot of information out there on this particular leader (mostly American in origin). People do worse. There are people doing worse in other parts of the world. Is the american government planning on taking them all on? Or just those whose countries have oil?
> Yes, sometimes war can be noble. Is this one? I don't know yet.I think Hitler needed to be stopped. I'm not opposed to war under all circumstances. I have more sympathy for defending ones boundaries than I do for 'pre-emptive' strike...
> I don't look at my country through rose-colored glasses, believe me.I know. You are one of the most informed people I chat to. I'm not so good on knowledge of what the media presents. In a way... I don't want to get too caught up in it. But people like you correct my facts and I do think quite a lot about the information I'm presented with...
>I purposely read web sites that are *not* friendly to us, AlJazeera, Pravda, one in Pakistan, and so on. I try to (not always successfully) find the truth, which is usually somewhere in between the positive and the negative.
I've given up hope of finding the truth. I just don't want people do be killed anymore.
>i'm sure people won't have too much of a hard time thinking of better uses for the $$$"
> Yup. Do you disagree?
> Well, yes I do disagree. If not for NASA then I would probably not have gone into the sciences. I wouldn't have known to follow dreams. And before you say 'that was then' my youngest went to Space Camp twice - and she became fired up about sciences herself.Yeah. And that is a terrific thing. I hear you. But... What I was thinking... Was that money could probably be better spent on... Oh... On equal access to healthcare for all; equal access to education; equal access to 'basic' needs like food and shelter and so on. I bet those kinds of things... Would inspire far more americans to make something of their lives...
Or building better dams in new orleans even...
> I think the one thing you don't understand about us is that we are not the government, we are the people. All individuals. Sure, it's good to have some safety net, but most here rely on each other more than the govt. in times of trouble. At least in my neck of the woods.
I DO understand that. But I think that in reading what I have to say you don't get that I DO make that distinction. When I said about how some americans are very lovely people - I meant that. Most of the Babblers I've met are American. And are lovely people.
But this is the politics board.
And on the politics board I'm not talking about individuals.
I'm talking about political systems.
I'm talking about government policies.
I'm talking about countries as abstract entities
Where their laws and policies define what the nature of that country is when we consider that country as an abstract entity.I think some people are a little uncomfortable with this...
Like how Dr Bob looks at Babble from the group level and people worry he doesn't see the individuals.
I talk about America from the country level and people worry I don't see the individuals.
But I do see the individuals. And I babble with the individuals over on psychology, or social, or admin, or writing.
But over here...
Its political
Not personal
Really.
> It's the PEOPLE that make me love this country.
>
> People like my eldest who worked every day at the Astrodome, from the day before it was opened as a Katrina center until the day it closed.
>
> Like my youngest who worked there when she was in town.
>
> Like the complete strangers who went to the dome to adopt families and take them home with them.
>
> Like the hundreds and thousands who donated their time to help.
>
> Like, when the roads were deadlocked before Rita, the hundreds who drove to them and passed out food and water and ice and gasoline to the stranded.
>
> Like the nurse my daughter talked to who risked her life at a New Orleans nursing home trying to save the elderly from drowning.
>
> This is just MY personal experience of *only* the last couple of months. It's not extraordinary - these things happen on different scales all the time.
>
> And they are happening in Iraq. Not by the government, but by soldiers and citizens. I've read dozens of stories of people being brought over here for medical treatment that wasn't available to them before.
>
> But - that's not newsworthy, is it?
I know there are a lot of kind and big hearted people in the US.I just wish... That came through at the level of government a little more.
People don't need handouts if you help them be self-suficient.
People wouldn't have needed handouts if the government had done its job of looking after the citizens properly and had followed the engineers reccomendations regarding reinforcing the dam or dyke or whatever ya call it.
Now maybe this is wrong (please correct me if it is)
But I heard...
That the engineers had been saying that the walls needed reinforcing or precisely this was going to happen. I dunno what its called... But congress or whatever were going to spend this money on doing that... And then Bush declares 'state of war!' and diverts the resources to Iraq.
You need engineers in Iraq you see...
Is that right?????
Posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 16:08:00
In reply to Re: the Ministry of Propaganda » alexandra_k, posted by AuntieMel on November 3, 2005, at 9:56:08
> Many who see the film clips assume that "black" equals "poor" and assume because the shots show more stranded black people than white people then it must be racist and classist.
> But - New Orleans is majority (67%) black. It only makes sense that the people in the film clips were also mostly black.I never mentioned skin colour.
I only mentioned economic status.> And Dinah is right about neighborhoods. The ones I see on TV that were most devistated were either neighborhoods of newer larger homes or areas of older 'gentrified' homes.
Yeah. Are we likely to have more sympathy for a flooded tenement or a flooded 'gentrified' house?
> You can't always believe what you see on TV. In fact, you *usually* can't believe what you see on TV.I know that. Haven't seen anything on TV about this actually. Read a little of the paper.
Poverty.
I would be interested to know whether aid would have been sent faster if the earning potential of the AVERAGE person in there had been higher.
I would be interested to know whether the engineers would have been sent in to prevent this if New Orleans didn't have such high rates of poverty in the place to start with.
Posted by Declan on November 3, 2005, at 16:23:20
In reply to Re: please be supportive » Declan » alexandra_k, posted by Dr. Bob on November 3, 2005, at 9:30:28
I suppose my point was that the war is not in the interests of the United States (in particular). Halliburton has done well out of it (contracts). What's the problem with that?
I think that it is too much of a challenge to have a civil politics board in today's climate. And anyway, some things just have to be fought out. Wait till there is really something (oil, climate, food) to fight about. In our lifetimes, I'm sure.
Declan
Posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 16:37:17
In reply to Re: ?? » AuntieMel, posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 16:02:25
Didn't you read the link I sent? Or heard what I said about two sides of the canal being built differently?
There's something that stinks to high heaven, but it's local not national.
On the other hand, regardless of where the money's going (because not all our money is going to Iraq, you know), I think the US is going to write off New Orleans. President Bush's administration has pretty much said they're going to rebuild to Category 3 levels only. They're also not going to spend the dollars that need to be spent to build up the marshes. Without the marshes, we're a coastal city. We can't survive as a coastal city. We're too low. So at this point, I'd say that anyone who comes back to New Orleans or who stays here does so without national help and without much care from the government. But I don't think it has anything to do with race or income. I think it just has to do with the fact that they just don't care.
Perhaps we could get some of the money we get by increasing taxes enormously on any oil or natural gas that depends on Louisiana for production. I'd hate to see us do that to the rest of the country, but if we're not important to them, we're not important and we'll have to do whatever we have to do to look after ourselves. Or else lose all our investment in our homes and businesses and just leave the city, like it looks like the feds just as soon we do. Either that or have several more Katrinas that will cost more than the flood protection.
Posted by zeugma on November 3, 2005, at 17:25:23
In reply to Re: ?? » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 16:37:17
> Didn't you read the link I sent? Or heard what I said about two sides of the canal being built differently?
>
> There's something that stinks to high heaven, but it's local not national.
>No. it's a national problem as you explain later.
> On the other hand, regardless of where the money's going (because not all our money is going to Iraq, you know), I think the US is going to write off New Orleans. President Bush's administration has pretty much said they're going to rebuild to Category 3 levels only. They're also not going to spend the dollars that need to be spent to build up the marshes. Without the marshes, we're a coastal city. We can't survive as a coastal city. We're too low. So at this point, I'd say that anyone who comes back to New Orleans or who stays here does so without national help and without much care from the government. But I don't think it has anything to do with race or income. I think it just has to do with the fact that they just don't care.>>
Someone mentioned that they read al Jazeera or something for 'balance.'
But our current leaders indict themselves quite well. Not rebuild deltas? Let the environment go to hell? I live in New York, and we are far from immune to hurricanes and next year it might be Hurricane Gamma that takes us out. But there won't be charges of racism etc. leveled at President Bush. New York is not mostly black. It's mostly Democrat.
>
> Perhaps we could get some of the money we get by increasing taxes enormously on any oil or natural gas that depends on Louisiana for production. I'd hate to see us do that to the rest of the country, but if we're not important to them, we're not important and we'll have to do whatever we have to do to look after ourselves. Or else lose all our investment in our homes and businesses and just leave the city, like it looks like the feds just as soon we do. Either that or have several more Katrinas that will cost more than the flood protection.>>You indict the current administration far better than I could in a torrent of words. It is an error to suppose that New Orleans is the only city that could have been vulnerable; last time I looked at a relief map of Florida I didnt see Alpine heights.
I have no doubt that the national Guard performed heroically. But it is a fact that most of the Louisana National Guard was in Iraq when the hurricane hit.
It is also a fact that Michael brown, FEMA director at the time of the hurricane, had beetr things to do than listen to the pleas of the official he sent to N.O. to investigate what was happening. Hate to use the cliche, but 'fiddling while Rome burned.'
I must say one thing in favor of President Bush, however.
Most public officials pretend sadness over departing subordinates who have lost favor with the public and so have to go. Better off whithout the fool who made me look bad, they think. But I believe Bush was quite sincere in his estimation of brown's competence and compassion.
Competence and compassion. I can add foresightedness to that list.
-z
-z
Posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 17:48:01
In reply to Re: ?? » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 16:37:17
> Didn't you read the link I sent?
Yes, I read it. And that is one story and I have also heard many others... That is one source, Dinah. Local news is one tiny little set of American news which is still one little set when compared with international news sources.
>Or heard what I said about two sides of the canal being built differently?
Yeah. Sounds like they got to building it properly and then got to not building it properly. Or vice versa...
> There's something that stinks to high heaven, but it's local not national.I heard that engineers predicted that this was going to happen if money wasn't spent on upgrading pronto. That that was presented to congress? And it was going to happen, congress (or whoever) were in fairly much unanomous support of it. But in a state of national emergency (war basically) the president is allowed to over-ride congress. And that by declaring war on Iraq... He was allowed to over-ride congress and that that is why teh engineers were in Iraq instead of being in New Orleans designing improvements to teh dam. Because good engineers are a scarce resource, Dinah. And they were in Iraq and not in New Orleans.
(excuse my ignorance congress might be the wrong term)
Is this false?
I'm wary of potential scapegoating...
Blaming New Orleans for the tragedy is one way for the government to say they are justified in leaving them to deal with the situation with less government support. Blame someone on the local level and try and use that to absolve the government from responsibility to its citizens...
> On the other hand, regardless of where the money's going (because not all our money is going to Iraq, you know),I do know. But I also know the money that went to Iraq... Well... That would probably keep NZ going for the next 10 years or so...
Just imagine the fancy canal you guys could have built with that money. Imagine the social services that could be put in place. Imagine the new homes and schools and community centres and churches that money could have built for New Orleans. All that stuff wouldn't have brought back the dead. Wouldn't have erased teh traumatic memories. But it would have helped. It would have helped immenseley.
> I think the US is going to write off New Orleans. President Bush's administration has pretty much said they're going to rebuild to Category 3 levels only. They're also not going to spend the dollars that need to be spent to build up the marshes. Without the marshes, we're a coastal city. We can't survive as a coastal city. We're too low. So at this point, I'd say that anyone who comes back to New Orleans or who stays here does so without national help and without much care from the government.
I think that sounds terrible :-(
I think... The role of government is to serve the people. I think they should think very carefully about whether it is a better service to the people to have them rebuild vs relocate. I think that decision should be made democratically. Do you think that sounds right, or do you not think that is part of the role of government?
> But I don't think it has anything to do with race or income. I think it just has to do with the fact that they just don't care.
You don't think that the fact that they don't care might have something to do with income? I'm serious here. I don't particularly want to get on the race bandwagon... But it is true that more black people are poor than white people. Auntiemel said something like 60% of New Orleans population is Black. Were around 40% of people in the dome white - or much less than that? Was the average income of those people very much lower than the average income of the population as a whole? I have to say... I think that is why they don't care. Because the wealthy are probably better off out. They will be okay (traumatised clearly - but okay). But what about the poor? What are they going to do? Continue to live in New Orleans with lack of public services? I'm sure the other states are welcoming them with arms open wide (joke).
I dunno Dinah...
There was a comment... Something about america being stronger after this... I have heard comments... About how very much that sounded like the country is better off after some elimination of the 'unsuccessful' went on...
> if we're not important to them, we're not important and we'll have to do whatever we have to do to look after ourselves.Yeah. And personally - I don't think that is fair. Thats what frightens me about american individualism. That attitude. I don't think that is acceptable. Its when people are confronted with that attitude that they feel all the more justified in turning to crime or whatever in order to make a living to make ends meet in the face of an uncaring nation (when considered at the policy level)
> Or else lose all our investment in our homes and businesses and just leave the city, like it looks like the feds just as soon we do.
Yeah. It is okay if you can afford to cut your lossed I suppose. For those who were struggling to make it just out of poverty... They are back into poverty.
And for those who were in poverty to start with... What are they going to do?
:-(
Posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 18:17:09
In reply to Re: please be supportive » Declan » alexandra_k, posted by Dr. Bob on November 3, 2005, at 9:30:28
I'll admit it didn't occur to me that people on the boards may have served or lost the lives of people they cared about to start with...
But when I did realise...
I should have been a lot more sentitive.
Sorry.
Posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 18:43:30
In reply to Re: ?? » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 17:48:01
Alexandra, it's true that they warned that certain hurricanes would do this. But that wasn't this hurricane, not for the majority of the city. This hurricane was within the force levels the walls were designed to hold. At the very least for the 17th Street Canal and the London Avenue canals that have most raised my ire. The Industrial Canal and MR GO are different.
And yes, this is just one news source (though all the local news is about the same), but with all due politeness, I've got to say that I trust the local news to know what's going on in the local area more than I trust the international news who probably don't know the difference between Gentilly and Bywater. And the locals are far far more familiar with the background of the agencies involved than any national, never mind international, news source can be. Why, I saw a picture of the "devastation" showed on the national news that was actually a camp built in the middle of the Bonnet Carre Spillway that is *supposed* to be surrounded by water.
And as far as National Guard numbers, since there were enough when they were sent, I assume there were enough the days earlier when they *should* have been sent. They didn't bring them back from Iraq in that time frame.
And yes, Auntie Mel is correct that New Orleans proper is largely black. But the greater metropolitan area is not. And the greater metropolitan area needs the flood protection, not New Orleans. The entire area is all being thrown to the wolves, not just New Orleans proper.
And as a New Orleanian, as much as I'd like to blame the feds for everything, I just can't. Local officials have earned their reputations honestly, so to speak. Not all of the current ones, certainly. But enough of the ones over the years to have contributed mightily to this problem.
I just don't know how much the rest of the country understands the unique challenges of New Orleans. And I don't really feel up to explaining them. Not under the circumstances of this board, anyway. If anyone's genuinely interested in what's really going on, babblemail me and I'll tell you. But not this way. Not under these circumstances.
I'm not even going to check this board for replies.
I'm bowing out with whatever tattered grace I have left.
Posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 18:58:57
In reply to Re: ?? » Dinah, posted by zeugma on November 3, 2005, at 17:25:23
I think I partly answered you in my post to Alexandra.
But if you want to say that the President's priorities are not for preserving the environment, not even if preserving the environment is actually cheaper than the consequences of not preserving the environment, I'll agree completely. And if you were to say that policies that would prefer to make huge payoffs in the face of a disaster rather than huge, but less huge, outlays to prevent a disaster, then I'd have to agree completely.
And anything most anyone could say about Brown wouldn't surprise or offend me in the least. That email about dinner in Baton Rouge really astonished me. Not much could surprise me after that.
I think there is some difference between most other areas and New Orleans, though. I *think* we're the only major metropolitan area under sea level. I think you'd have to go to the Netherlands for comparisons.
What I don't agree about is that events would have been one whit different had troops not been sent to Iraq. Or that this is the result of racism or classism. I'm relatively certain any city would get the same treatment.
Sigh. I must be out of my mind to even consider staying here, no matter how much my son likes his school.
Posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 19:23:12
In reply to Re: ??, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 18:43:30
> Alexandra, it's true that they warned that certain hurricanes would do this. But that wasn't this hurricane, not for the majority of the city. This hurricane was within the force levels the walls were designed to hold. At the very least for the 17th Street Canal and the London Avenue canals that have most raised my ire. The Industrial Canal and MR GO are different.
Okay. But I still want to say... I heard that the engineers told congress (or whoever) that a fairly standard hurricane in New Orleans would have fairly much the effects that it had UNLESS they did something about that pronto and that congress was going to do something about that pronto but then a state of war was declaired and thus nothing was done.
Is that false?
> And yes, this is just one news source (though all the local news is about the same), but with all due politeness, I've got to say that I trust the local news to know what's going on in the local area more than I trust the international news who probably don't know the difference between Gentilly and Bywater.
Sure. I understand that. News sources are selective in what they present. There is the simple fact that they have to be because there is just too much going on for them to present everything. I'm sure you have much more of an idea of the local situation and I'm sure that the local news is also going to present a fairer representation.
> And the locals are far far more familiar with the background of the agencies involved than any national, never mind international, news source can be. Why, I saw a picture of the "devastation" showed on the national news that was actually a camp built in the middle of the Bonnet Carre Spillway that is *supposed* to be surrounded by water.
Yeah. Not quite 'made in a hollywood basement' but close...
> And as far as National Guard numbers, since there were enough when they were sent, I assume there were enough the days earlier when they *should* have been sent. They didn't bring them back from Iraq in that time frame.Though I suppose we could haggle over whether there were 'enough' in the sense of IF there were more THEN how much faster would appropriate aid have been dispensed?
> And yes, Auntie Mel is correct that New Orleans proper is largely black. But the greater metropolitan area is not. And the greater metropolitan area needs the flood protection, not New Orleans. The entire area is all being thrown to the wolves, not just New Orleans proper.
Okay.
> And as a New Orleanian, as much as I'd like to blame the feds for everything, I just can't.I'm not saying to 'blame them for everything'. I'm just saying that I think they should be doing more than they are. The government should be about helping and protecting its citizens. I'm not sure they are doing everything they should be doing there. And yet... Your tax money funds them.
> Local officials have earned their reputations honestly, so to speak. Not all of the current ones, certainly. But enough of the ones over the years to have contributed mightily to this problem.
Sure.
> I just don't know how much the rest of the country understands the unique challenges of New Orleans. And I don't really feel up to explaining them. Not under the circumstances of this board, anyway. If anyone's genuinely interested in what's really going on, babblemail me and I'll tell you. But not this way. Not under these circumstances.
> I'm not even going to check this board for replies.??
> I'm bowing out with whatever tattered grace I have left.
??
I'd be interested...
But I don't really want to get into a babblemail discussion over it.
(I've gotten a warning thus far and I probably should be kept in check ;-)
It is interesting to me to hear other peoples pov.
Posted by zeugma on November 3, 2005, at 19:34:46
In reply to Re: ?? » zeugma, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 18:58:57
Dinah, you may be 'thin skinned' as you described yourself once, but you are a truly strong individual. I know how New York was traumatized by 9/11, but your entire city was flooded.
From everything I have read the local authorities did not distinguish themselves, unlike the NYPD and New York Port Authority, many of whom willingly died to save others.
I can't evaluate Governor Blanco or the mayor ( I forget his name), unlike the prominent members of the Federal Government their every word is not analyzed in depth here. I did read about police officers committing suicide, and officers now being persecuted for desertion. It's easier to understand the suicide than desertion.
I relied on local news sources (New York Times) for my information on the events as they were happening. Whether the Guard was present or not it was not deployed properly. And I posted a while ago about two leutenants who went out of their way to save lives with their helicopters because they saw none of our vaunted military doing anything to help. In return one was given command of a kennel for dogs of Army officers made homeless by the flooding. They were both reprimanded for ignoring what the military thought were proper priorities. Now I know that if I had been dangling from a beam on top of the World Trade center, and a military helicopter making some kind of routine flight (it is astonishing how the military responded to the disaster! astonishing!) plucked me to safety, i would be grateful. I wouldn't care if the pilot didn't get the Medal of Honor. Serving in a dog kennel is noble service compared to other activities the military is currently engaged in IMO.
No good deed goes unpunished around here, it seems.
But I hear even Trent Lott is distancing himself from the President. I suppose when it's your own house that is blown down it doesn't sit so well, no matter how many houses you'd let smoke elsewhere.
I think with hurricane Katrina, we officially became a Third World country.
-z
Posted by zeugma on November 3, 2005, at 20:02:51
In reply to Re: the Ministry of Civility, posted by alexandra_k on November 2, 2005, at 13:47:01
Why were the mortality rates so high in the better off neighborhoods? Why couldn't those people get out?>>
They didn't have cars.
-z
Posted by alexandra_k on November 4, 2005, at 4:05:59
In reply to Re: ?? » zeugma, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 18:58:57
About this:
> I heard that engineers predicted that this was going to happen if money wasn't spent on upgrading pronto. That that was presented to congress? And it was going to happen, congress (or whoever) were in fairly much unanomous support of it. But in a state of national emergency (war basically) the president is allowed to over-ride congress. And that by declaring war on Iraq... He was allowed to over-ride congress and that that is why teh engineers were in Iraq instead of being in New Orleans designing improvements to teh dam. Because good engineers are a scarce resource, Dinah. And they were in Iraq and not in New Orleans.
That is one story. And I'm sure it is an unfairly simplified one at that. And probably fairly inaccurate.
I don't know whats going on.
Thats what bothers me.
Because there are so many stories out there.
So many different takes.
I don't know what to believe.And so I have a tendancy to cling to what may very well be prejudices. And I cling to them mostly because if that isn't true then I just don't know what to believe.
But that just leads to needless arguing...
So.
In one of the links you gave me it was saying about how it seems that most people are saying they aren't going to stay in New Orleans anymore. And about how they aren't going to try and rebuild the whole city.
I think you said you had been there for a long time. I've been pretty much where I am now all my life. I can't imagine how I'd feel if that happened.
I'm sorry
Posted by AuntieMel on November 4, 2005, at 12:08:25
In reply to Re: ?? » AuntieMel, posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 16:02:25
A lot to answer, from several posts. Let's see if I can kludge together something coherent.
---------------------------------------------------
"Not at all. The Kiwi is a New Zealand bird. While it may well have the support of the people and the government, it would continue to be a New Zealand bird even if we hunted it into extinction."
Big difference - we were originally talking about man made things.
-----------------------------------------
> "Because... The cycle has to stop somewhere. "> But we also know that appeasement doesn't work. And if you would like some verification of that I'll give you the email addresses of some of my friends in Poland.
Sorry, I'm not too sure what 'appeasement' means. Doesn't work to do what?
----
It doesn't work to stop the cycle. It only prolongs it. Chamberlain and Czechoslovakia come to mind.
---------------------------------------------------
> because I am horrified by a leader who will use chemical gas on his own people, and by many other things that this particular leader did. The rape, the murder, the torture....
Yeah. And I'm sure there was a lot of information out there on this particular leader (mostly American in origin). People do worse. There are people doing worse in other parts of the world. Is the american government planning on taking them all on? Or just those whose countries have oil?
------------------
Well, I'm hard pressed to know what could be worse, but I personally thought we waited too long to help out Bosnia and I personally think that we maybe *should* get more involved in those situations.
But I'm a liberal.
-------------------------------------------------
> Well, yes I do disagree. If not for NASA then I would probably not have gone into the sciences. I wouldn't have known to follow dreams. And before you say 'that was then' my youngest went to Space Camp twice - and she became fired up about sciences herself.
Yeah. And that is a terrific thing. I hear you. But... What I was thinking... Was that money could probably be better spent on... Oh... On equal access to healthcare for all; equal access to education; equal access to 'basic' needs like food and shelter and so on. I bet those kinds of things... Would inspire far more americans to make something of their lives...
------------------
Maybe - but, human nature being what it is, people tend to appreciate things less if they are free. Or maybe that's a bad way to put it. People tend to get comfortable when they have a lot. Necessity is the mother of invention? No progress without pain? Any more trite cliches?
Marxism was a wonderful ideal, as is Lennon's "Imagine" but as long as humans are involved it just aint gonna happen. Sad. I wish it weren't true.
--------------------------------------------------
"I'm talking about countries as abstract entities
Where their laws and policies define what the nature of that country is when we consider that country as an abstract entity."I think that is backwards. It's the nature of the country that defines the laws and policies.
Our history is one of second sons, religeous outcasts, refugees - those with adversity that want to work their tails off to make a better life for themselves. People didn't come here because their life back home was a bed of roses.
Those who came over here (willingly) had their fill of government interference and frankly didn't want any more. And with governemt help comes government strings.
Now, I don't mean that folks should be made to go hungry or have good oppertunities. But the majority of the people here just don't think it's the government's job to make able bodied healthy people *comfortable* - that they should feel enough discomfort that they *do* become self sufficient.
Is healthcare equal? No - but it's available. Is it equal elsewhere? Not that I've seen. In the UK for instance, there is national health, but those with money or good insurance get better care.
Is education equal? No - but it's available. Even the poorest school districts have good enough schools for those who really want to study and get ahead. Yes, there are better schools for those with money - but I'd bet that is true worldwide, too.
Food and shelter? available.
==============================================
On the levee system
" But I heard...
That the engineers had been saying that the walls needed reinforcing or precisely this was going to happen. I dunno what its called... But congress or whatever were going to spend this money on doing that... And then Bush declares 'state of war!' and diverts the resources to Iraq.
You need engineers in Iraq you see...
Is that right?????"
Well, yes and no. Each bit - 'engineers warning' 'Bush declares state of war' etc are correct. But together they aren't the true picture.
Appropriations of the money had nothing to do with Iraq.
The number of engineers in Iraq are a minuscule part of the total number of engineers.
Warnings were there, and a feasibility study on beefing up the levees was ongoing at the time of Katrina.
------------------------------------------------
"I'm wary of potential scapegoating...
Blaming New Orleans for the tragedy is one way for the government to say they are justified in leaving them to deal with the situation with less government support. Blame someone on the local level and try and use that to absolve the government from responsibility to its citizens..."Don't be too wary of scapegoating.
Forgive me, Dinah, if I'm a bit too indelicate here.....
New Orleans is largely below sea level. Years ago (1940s) a levee system was started around it to protect it from the Mississippi river. Before the levee system the river would occasionally flood (which btw added silt, helping keep the city at a higher elevation.)
The levee system wasn't designed for a Katrina type storm at the time. As the city subsided the system was added to and modified.
People in the meantime have warned that a major flood could be catastrophic.
BUT if the building of the levees had been done properly in the first place - it would have protected the city far more than it did.
Now comes the indelicate part.
Lousiana has been joked about for years - about corrupt politicians, Huey Long and his cronies among the worse (though as corrupt as Huey was he *did* get a lot done)
It is looking like corruption might have played a part in the failing of the levee system, though I'm not familiar with the dates of these particular additions to the system. Parts of it, under the direction of some local people, were built correctly. Other parts were not.
Which parts failed possibly has a *lot* more to do with which politicians were in charge of those particular spots at those particular times than the economic class of the people they were supposed to protect.
At least I think that's what Dinah was alluding to when she was talking about failures at the local level.
-------------------------------------------------
"There was a comment... Something about america being stronger after this... I have heard comments... About how very much that sounded like the country is better off after some elimination of the 'unsuccessful' went on..."
"And for those who were in poverty to start with... What are they going to do?"
At the risk of sounding like Barbara Bush the truth is that the less you had to start with the less you lost. The truly poor will probably continue on as before.
And the wealthy will continue on much as before.
It's those in the middle, as usual, who have the toughest time of it.
But things are being done, if not by the feds.
Habitat for Humanity is building hundreds of houses, for example.
I predict New Orleans will rebuild. The rest of the country wouldn't have it otherwise - the locals aren't the only ones who love the city, it's wonderful history and architecture, the parties, the people, the food......
Posted by alexandra_k on November 5, 2005, at 22:58:17
In reply to Re: ??, posted by AuntieMel on November 4, 2005, at 12:08:25
> A lot to answer, from several posts. Let's see if I can kludge together something coherent.
lol. you did a good job. there is rather a lot there...
> Big difference - we were originally talking about man made things.oh okay. waikato is a new zealand beer because it originated from new zealand. american news is news that comes from america. new zealand news is news that comes from new zealand. new zealand creationist literature would be creationist literature that came from new zealand. american creationist literature is what the schools in new zealand were inundated with. in the sense that the literature was sent from america. that is all i was trying to say with that comment. i didn't mean to imply that the majority of americans endorse it or anything like that because i believe... that it would actually be fairer to say that the majority (or at least 40% surely) do not.
> Sorry, I'm not too sure what 'appeasement' means. Doesn't work to do what?> It doesn't work to stop the cycle.
Sorry, what doesn't?
(I don't know what 'appeasement' means)
I've never heard the word before.
> > because I am horrified by a leader who will use chemical gas on his own people, and by many other things that this particular leader did. The rape, the murder, the torture....
sorry... what particular leader? is that what the war is supposed to be about?> Well, I'm hard pressed to know what could be worse, but I personally thought we waited too long to help out Bosnia and I personally think that we maybe *should* get more involved in those situations.
even without being invited? i mean... if someone asks for assistance then that is one thing... but to give it and get upset when people aren't grateful is quite another...
> But I'm a liberal.hmm. i thought i was a liberal. i thought pacifism was rather liberal... i don't know what these terms mean really...
> Maybe - but, human nature being what it is, people tend to appreciate things less if they are free. Or maybe that's a bad way to put it.
yes. i'm thinking needs here, not luxuries. needs. i think people appreciate their needs being met a great deal and are really very frustrated when those needs are not met. that our appreciation / frustration is similar in virtue of us being human beings with certain needs (for a state of health, for shelter, for food etc)
> People tend to get comfortable when they have a lot.
i'm not talking 'a lot' i'm not talking luxury items i'm talking about basic needs like food and healthcare and education and shelter...
>Necessity is the mother of invention?
>No progress without pain? Any more trite cliches?do you really believe this?
> Marxism was a wonderful ideal, as is Lennon's "Imagine" but as long as humans are involved it just aint gonna happen. Sad. I wish it weren't true.marxism... not sure what thats about... i don't know much about politics. i just think... all people have basic needs. and i think that people should do what they can to ensure that people have those basic needs met. if that means taking from the rich to give to the poor than so be it.
why would anyone choose to not have their basic needs met?
wouldn't that in itself indicate a state of sickness?i think we might disagree on this point...
but...i don't think people prefer handouts
over being provided some way of obtaining what they need for themselves.
or if they do...
then that in itself indicates a state of sickness...help and compassion...
> "I'm talking about countries as abstract entities
> Where their laws and policies define what the nature of that country is when we consider that country as an abstract entity."
> I think that is backwards. It's the nature of the country that defines the laws and policies.yeah okay. i don't really mind :-)
> Our history is one of second sons, religeous outcasts, refugees - those with adversity that want to work their tails off to make a better life for themselves. People didn't come here because their life back home was a bed of roses.yeah. same here. well... fairly much. the maori came first. they came in canoes and navigated by the sun and moon and stars. there were lots of maori tribes and they were at war with each other. they thrived pretty well over here. then... people came from england and france. the english tried to get the treaty up off the ground because they didn't want to lose the country to the french.
then what happened... the english sold land to people in england. they were sold 1/4 acre sections, or fertile farming land or whatever. the people who came tended to be the poorer people who dreamed of getting out of the slums in london to their 1/4 acre section or farm or whatever.
only problem was... they weren't told they would have to clear the land first. and new zealand bush (forest) is very dense and very hard work to clear. and so those people (or pioneers) slogged their guts out to make a living off their land.
only other problem was... the land they were sold was maori land. so not only did they have to work to clear the land... they had to fight the maori to keep the land as well. maori would come in raids to fight to get the immigrants off their land. and there were the new zealand wars... thats what those are about. and land claims are still going on today.
> Those who came over here (willingly) had their fill of government interference and frankly didn't want any more.yeah. australia is a little like that... more so than us i suppose. because convicts were sent there. convicts from england. the thought was that criminality was inherited and so they would ship the criminals off to prisons over the other side of the earth. so they did that... any wonder australians are proud to be free and a little sceptical of good old 'mother england'? of course they found more criminals would arise soon as they could ship them off. because of the society. because if you have to steal to eat... well... you have to steal.
> And with governemt help comes government strings.
what sort of government strings?
ours comes with... a three tiered tax system. where the top bracket is something like 33% (of every dollar earned over... $50,000 or something like that).not sure that people worry about what strings come with assistance with respect to their basic needs... i mean... i'd beg or steal food if i needed it. if i feel a 'sense of endebtedness' to the government or whatever for giving me enough money to purchase basic food items... well... small price to pay i would have thought.
> Now, I don't mean that folks should be made to go hungry or have good oppertunities. But the majority of the people here just don't think it's the government's job to make able bodied healthy people *comfortable* - that they should feel enough discomfort that they *do* become self sufficient.ouch. so the thought is that everybody who *chooses* can support their basic needs.
(think about the children of the adults here too...)
and thus if someone is unable to do this...
or if they resort to crime...
that is of their own making.
and rather than thinking that something must be not right for them to have that attitude (if it is indeed true that they do)
the thought is just leave them be
but what about their children?
and is it really hard to see why some people don't have much of a chance
when they go to school hungry
when their parents tell them there is no point trying because there is no hopei just think people need...
a little help.
> Is healthcare equal? No - but it's available. Is it equal elsewhere? Not that I've seen. In the UK for instance, there is national health, but those with money or good insurance get better care.(about to be logged off)....
Posted by alexandra_k on November 5, 2005, at 23:36:41
In reply to Re: ??, posted by AuntieMel on November 4, 2005, at 12:08:25
> Now, I don't mean that folks should be made to go hungry
okay. but if (for whatever reason) you don't have a job... then aren't you either relying on handouts from other people or... having to resort to other ways of getting food and other necessities?
i mean... 6 months unemployment benefit entitlement.... what are you supposed to do once that is up if you cannot get a job and have no savings?
or what if you a female.
what if you get raped.
you aren't allowed an abortion in the US...
so you have to have the kid.
how do you look after that kid?
what if your family won't / can't fund that?
what are you supposed to do?
or what if you are sick but don't have health insurance for whatever reason?
what are you supposed to do?and even if some people just are lazy (which i don't believe) even if people could work but they don't because they would prefer to go hungry. even if we should just let them starve... then what about their kids? should we just leave them be too? and when their kids grow up doing the same thing leave them too? and then their kids? so you see it is a cycle.
and if you interveane with the children in mind then the real effects... will come through when those children grow up and have children of their own. with each generation.... they have a better chance. they have more opportunities. more hope. but intervention is required... otherwise... it just continues...
>Is healthcare equal? No - but it's available.
is it available to all (regardless of $)
is it free for children to go to a doctor?
is it free for children to have prescriptions filled?
why not?
does this mean that some children do not get access to doctor and medicine because their parents can't afford it? doesn't matter WHY their parents can't afford it from the perspective of the sick child...> Is it equal elsewhere? Not that I've seen. In the UK for instance, there is national health, but those with money or good insurance get better care.
Sure. Here... Healthcare isn't too bad. The issue is more around waiting lists (might be a couple years for a hip replacement) than about receiving treatment. Free doctors for children. Under... 16 I think. But the age may be a little lower than that... And there are emergency grants that you can apply to. For social welfare. If I needed to go to the doctor and I couldn't afford to go then I'd go along and fill in a form and I'd be given the money to go and do that. And I wouldn't have to pay it back in most instances. Though... I personally don't need to do this because I can see a doctor for free in virtue of being a student. My prescriptions cost me $3.00 each (unless I go with a non-subsidised version). Thats because I have a community services card. If you earn under... Something like $30,000 then you get one of those. Typically... $15 doctors visits and $3 prescriptions. Specialist treatment is available from the hospital. Waiting lists come into play there.
But private... Well there are private hospitals too. With their flashy atmospheres etc. Nice if you can afford it I suppose.
But basic care... I guess the issue is in defining 'basic'. I've recently been told I don't quality for mental health treatment. Not severe enough for treatment in the public system. SO... No, the system isn't perfect. But thats what the higher taxes funds. Social services like those.
> Is education equal? No - but it's available.
yeah.
> Even the poorest school districts have good enough schools for those who really want to study and get ahead.
yeah. but if you are persistently told you are stupid (by your parents lets say) and you go to school hungry are you likely to really want to study? are you likely to believe it will make a difference? are you likely to believe you are capable of getting ahead? some people manage to come to this. but they tend to be the exceptions. in general... the best predictor of how well you are going to do in the educational system is how well your parents did.
and some kids can read before they go to school.
other kids... don't have any books at home and have never seen their parents or their friends open a book.
don't you think that has a significant impact?
dont' you think the latter... need a little more help?>Yes, there are better schools for those with money - but I'd bet that is true worldwide, too.
yes. though... it depends what you mean by 'better'. oh yes it does indeed. you are much more likely to do better in school if you are reasonably happy in your homelife, recieving adequate nutrition, are encouraged in your schooling by your family and peers etc. the more expensive schools have more of that going on because the parents pay more and are typically more involved and more supportive. the public schools... well... there is more of a variety.
> Food and shelter? available.
after using up your 6 month dole entitlement?
after having a kid?> Appropriations of the money had nothing to do with Iraq.
yeah. sorry 'bout that.
> The number of engineers in Iraq are a minuscule part of the total number of engineers.
i'll take your word for that.
>> "I'm wary of potential scapegoating...
Blaming New Orleans for the tragedy is one way for the government to say they are justified in leaving them to deal with the situation with less government support. Blame someone on the local level and try and use that to absolve the government from responsibility to its citizens..."> Don't be too wary of scapegoating.
?
thanks for the stuff on new orleans.
>>"There was a comment... Something about america being stronger after this... I have heard comments... About how very much that sounded like the country is better off after some elimination of the 'unsuccessful' went on..."
>>"And for those who were in poverty to start with... What are they going to do?"
>At the risk of sounding like Barbara Bush the truth is that the less you had to start with the less you lost. The truly poor will probably continue on as before.
ouch. the more you have the more you can afford to lose. if you have one can of spagetti then you cannot afford to lose it. if you have a trillion cans then a loss of a million or two is hardly going to touch the sides.
> It's those in the middle, as usual, who have the toughest time of it.
middle and low i'll grant you that.
>I predict New Orleans will rebuild. The rest of the country wouldn't have it otherwise - the locals aren't the only ones who love the city, it's wonderful history and architecture, the parties, the people, the food......
i hope so.
Posted by alexandra_k on November 5, 2005, at 23:54:15
In reply to Re: ??, posted by AuntieMel on November 4, 2005, at 12:08:25
because i guess you are from the middle
and know lots of people from the middle
and so you see yourselves as working jolly hard for what you haveand i accept that.
fully.but (from around the age of 7)
i was from the low
and i knew lots of people from the low
and so i could see people with not much hope who didn't believe there was much point in trying because they wouldn't succeed.there was intervention.
and it helped.
we would have been far worse off without it
far worse offi don't know what i would have done
i don't know where i'd bei imagine those standardised tests...
would have ruled out university as an option for mei'm thinking drugs and crime
because it was a close call...
it was a close call for me over here...
but over here...
well...
i have received government assistance
thats what has supported me everyday since i was 7.i remember living on...
$130 per week.
i'm serious.
thats $100 board (+ food / power etc)
$20 cigarettes
$10 bus to school
toiletries were an issue for a while there...
but my choice because i prioritised tobaccoi lived like that for three years and thats how i got myself through high school.
without it...
drugs and crime...
i couldn't work a 9-5 day
maybe...
maybe it is about choosing not to...
i don't know
but i couldn't do it...maybe i should have been left...
maybe i am just lazy...
i don't know.but i guess where we are in the world...
influences our beliefs greatly(a get a little more than that now i should say - but not much. welfare isn't about luxuries. its about basic needs.)
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 6, 2005, at 17:16:13
In reply to Re: ?? » Dinah, posted by zeugma on November 3, 2005, at 17:25:23
> I suppose my point was that the war is not in the interests of the United States (in particular)... What's the problem with that?
>
> DeclanThe problem is that there may be people here who support the war...
--
> But our current leaders indict themselves quite well.
>
> Most public officials pretend sadness over departing subordinates who have lost favor with the public and so have to go. Better off whithout the fool who made me look bad, they think. But I believe Bush was quite sincere in his estimation of brown's competence and compassion.
>
> zeugmaAnd our current leaders, too.
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 6, 2005, at 17:24:15
In reply to Re: ?? » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 17:48:01
> personally - I don't think that is fair. Thats what frightens me about american individualism. That attitude. I don't think that is acceptable.
Keeping in mind that the idea here is not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down, could you please rephrase that?
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on November 6, 2005, at 20:41:10
In reply to Re: please rephrase that » alexandra_k, posted by Dr. Bob on November 6, 2005, at 17:24:15
> So at this point, I'd say that anyone who comes back to New Orleans or who stays here does so without national help and without much care from the government... I think it just has to do with the fact that they just don't care.
So at this stage anyway, the government has said that they won't be rebuilding the majority of the city. I can see how one might be led to conclude that the government doesn't care about what is best for the people in New Orleans.
I feel sad in response to that too.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.