It is an editorial show.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The no spin stuff is rhetoric and marketing, someone of your intelligence should be able to see past that.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And it is actually less partisan than one would expect, O'Reilly is quite critical of President Bush on many points.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
What I find most curious though is how Liberals have such absolute hatred of Fox News.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It is a good news source and a great way to see things from a certain point of view.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The intense hatred for it though is telling.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š But then again I also appreciate Al Jazeera as a news source.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Maybe I just am a more firm believer in diversity than you.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
Yea, Jennifer acts as if everything she states are the 'facts' and if anyone says differently then they are being 'partisan'. I don't get the whole phobia the Left has with Fox News, atleast they present many different points of view. That's a much better option than say CNN that will interview some moonbat with no counterpoint or follow up to challenge what the person is saying and they leave it at that. Could it be that these people really don't beleive in diversity of opinion? Maybe Jennifer has been hanging around too many liars, I mean lawyers... ;DÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I can just about garauntee you if she spewed some of the same stuff she writes on this board at the place I bartend at all the patrons would look at her like a moonbat. I have my ear pretty much to the 'common man' and more than 9 out of 10 would agree with what I have said here. Actually, most of my patrons that I have heard so far have expressed views more extreme than myslelf in regards to Katrina puting most of the blame on the people that didn't get out and the wingnut mayor of NO. I'm sure all these common folk would be branded with some kind of 'slogan' such as right wing fundamentalist or protestant extremist by her. Maybe they have been watching too much Fox News and listening to talk radio....
One could argue that you are just as misled as Nacho; of course only on a different path.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Fox News is a business.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š They found a niche that wasn't being filled - centrist to conservative news media - and marketed it, making money in the meantime.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
Honestly, what is so evil about Fox other than it tends to have a conservative bias?ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š How is that any worse than say Dan Rather or CNN?ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š For me being such an angry young man (to use your words) - YOU seem to feel quite angry about this.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I guess it comes down to me believing in diversity and free speech.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
Posted on: Yesterday at 12:05:27 AMPosted by: JenniferÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
Thanks for pointing out Jen's blunders, but I still don't get why my stance is wrong? While everyone was having their cryfest earlier and blaming Bush for not showing up the minute after the storm hit to wave his magic wand and make all the problems go away; all I maintained was that multiple failures occurred at the local level which could have alleviated most of the problems we are seeing now. Nope, all I saw here was allot of unfair criticism and not a peep out of anyone about the problems I cited earlier that happened at the local & state level. I think my approach was pretty fair to say the least. The feds also should get some of the blame for their slow response after the facts were known and the devastation realised.
Next thing we're going to be reading is that the current administration caused the hurricane as well; actually, I already have read this by those who criticize the administration's environmental policy. The bottom line is that we love to lay blame at people's feet, even when there is none; and if it's politically advantageous, watch out. Even had the local/state/federal government thrown more money into flood control in New Orleans, it probably wouldn't have helped; nearly all the flood control in New Orleans was focused on the river, this disaster was caused by the lake, the reason more effort was not put into protecting the city from flooding from the lake was that it has not been viewed as a significant threat, and only under very unique situations was it even possible; so had a couple billion more been thrown into flood prevention, it probably wouldn't have even helped.
Of course, everyone here is caught up in the emotionalism, it's a favourite tool for politicians to use to gain the support of the less intelligent elements of society (one of the greatest problems with democracy). Let's sit back and think about this rationally; yes, we could pour $100 billion tax dollars a year into disaster prevention and relief, but this would be utter foolishness because our current budget is more than enough to deal with the overwhelming majority of disasters; this, however, is a once in a century disaster, it's not something that is practical to plan for, you just hope it doesn't hit you, and if it does, you clean things up afterwards, and even if we wasted $100 billion a year (in relative terms) for the last century preparing for this disaster, and five times a year shut down every city that a hurricane might hit, costing the economy hundreds of billions more, what would we have gained? We Might be three days ahead of schedule at the most, there may be a few less people in the danger zone, though unless you are going to summon the militia and force the citizens of the city out at gunpoint for every potential threat, you'd still have tens of thousands who stayed behind in the city.
Thanks GiC for the common sense you have demonstrated. In an earlier post someone was whimpering about it's Bush's fault because he supposedly cut funding for levee projects. That's the typical modus operandi of the moonbats that sit around twitling their thumbs coming up with such crazy theories. Now to these people, huge cuts really mean that instead of a bureaucracy or project growing by 8% or more on an annual basis, it may get bumped down a point or two in the following years budget. They scream "evil republicans are cutting program's", but to date hasn't Bush been one of the biggest spending Presidents when it comes to such things? I guess these people think we have an endless supply of money and resources, that is as long as it's coming from that far away place we call Washington DC...
I would assume he hasn't been down there because there is no way he can have guaranteed security.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š People are walking around with guns everywhere.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š He could be killed very easily.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
Posted on: September 03, 2005, 04:09:08 PMPosted by: SilouanÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
Well actually according to some people in the 'black community' he's a racist that doesn't care about people of color. I think Jesse Highjack-son has already chimed in and in so many words said so. Bush extends hand and gives initial 10 billion, aid etc., they take money and aid from hand and at the same time curse and call him a 'racist' (of course the ones that use such tactics). I don't know why he goes out of his way everytime to please people like Jackson & Sharpton who have had nothing but contempt for him.
The biggest failure occurred at the federal level because the federal government is government that had the best opportunity to help in this kind of a catastrophe.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Louisiana is a poor state.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It's one of the numerous 'welfare' red states, i.e. gets more from the federal government than it pays in taxes.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š New Orleans is a poor city.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It can't even afford to educate its children.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Neither government could ever have had the means to handle this kind of a disaster.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
Jennifer, sorry but you are mistaken here. The federal government did it's job when it told the mayor of NO on Saturday to issue an mandatory evacuation. It was then up to the mayor to follow the cities guidelines on what they needed to do to get the remaining citizens of the city to a safe place. The mayor didn't do anything and sat on his @ss until it was too late. I'll post a picture of the hundreds of school buses that could have been used but were not. Incidentally, these buses were located only a few miles away from the superdome. Here's the problem I have with the local and state officials:
*Did not follow the New Orleans Emergency Disaster Plan;
*Wrung his hands over whether to make the evacuation mandatory until too late;
*Failed to utilize hundreds of city-owned buses to evacuate thousands of residents;
*Evacuated high-profile visitors while his city's citizens were suffering;
*Spent most of his time blaming President Bush rather than leading;
*Was emotional and irrational in a radio interview, adding to the chaos in his city.
*Provided no leadership whatsoever in this crisis;
*Refused Bush Administration's request for a federal takeover of the evacuation;
*Admitted Saturday, "We did not have enough resources here to do it all...;
*Yet failed to request additional guardsmen from neighboring states;
*Failed to mobilize the Louisiana National Guard before Katrina's landfall;
*Failed to take available firefighting resources as fires broke out in New Orleans;
*Her La. Homeland Security director refused to allow Red Cross into New Orleans;
*Blamed President Bush when she should have been leading;
*Was emotional and cried on television, hardly a portrait of strong leadership.
---So put that in your pipe and smoke it...