Sports Central Message Boards

Sports Central Message Boards (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/index.php)
-   Politics & Religion (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   A Government for the People (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/showthread.php?t=20302)

CKFresh 08-27-2008 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catman (Post 285094)
And Fresh, when did Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi become Republicans?

I'm talking about the executive branch, in both cases. You know, the branch the allocates (or fails to allocate) half of the funding?

Congress allocated proper funding, the funding that was requested. The President cut his portion.

Please cite specific examples of local government failure in the allocation of funds.

catman 08-27-2008 12:53 PM

No Fresh, I am not saying that George W. Bush is without fault. Mr. Clinton is not without fault, George HW Bush is not, Reagan is not, Carter is not. The feds have not done an adequate job of making the city of New Orleans accountable for the funds that have been given to them.

catman 08-27-2008 12:54 PM

Fresh, I'm not going to argue with you about this. According to you, George W. Bush is completely at fault and nothing will change your mind. Its a losing proposition for me as I would waste a tremendous amount of my time finding, quoting and sourcing the references which you would ignore.

CKFresh 08-27-2008 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catman (Post 285098)
Fresh, I'm not going to argue with you about this. According to you, George W. Bush is completely at fault and nothing will change your mind. Its a losing proposition for me as I would waste a tremendous amount of my time finding, quoting and sourcing the references which you would ignore.

Huh?

I specifically said that all levels of government were to blame.

I told you specifically why Bush was partially responsible. He cut necessary funding.

Your turn to back up your claims.

catman 08-27-2008 01:01 PM

Fresh, I have backed up all of my claims in the past with solid facts, which you ignore. I'm not wasting any more time with this discussion. If you wish to claim victory, by all means do so. It is not worth my time to do the research, but I will give you a few tips. We have brought this up in previous threads and those threads should be easily found -- by you. Have a nice day and enjoy searching these boards for the stories you need.

CKFresh 08-27-2008 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catman (Post 285100)
Fresh, I have backed up all of my claims in the past with solid facts, which you ignore. I'm not wasting any more time with this discussion. If you wish to claim victory, by all means do so. It is not worth my time to do the research, but I will give you a few tips. We have brought this up in previous threads and those threads should be easily found -- by you. Have a nice day and enjoy searching these boards for the stories you need.

No need to claim victory. I'm just trying to have a discussion...

catman 08-27-2008 01:22 PM

If you wish to have a legitimate discussion, leave statements like "Of course... Because the local government is democratic, and federal government is republicans... " out of it. Leave your biases at the door. We can have a constructive discussion without you accusing me of lying.
By the way, it is congress that allocates funds for everything. The president proposes programs.
This said, I feel that spending more time trying to convince you that your biases are incorrect would be a waste of my time. I will throw a post or 2 in every once in a while if I feel the need to do so.

CKFresh 08-27-2008 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catman (Post 285104)
By the way, it is congress that allocates funds for everything. The president proposes programs.

Not in all cases. In this case, there was funding from Congress, and funding from the president. The executive branch was responsible for funding half of the project. Congress approved their share, Bush cut his by 80%.

catman 08-27-2008 01:28 PM

Fresh, what happened to the funds that New Orleans received from 1975 to the present? Can you give a detailed accounting for all of it? I really don't think so.
The funds that were allocated should have been sufficient to rebuild all the levees damaged in the past, and maintain them properly. They should have been adequate, but were not. The problem is not in the lack of funding, it is in the administration of the funds that were allocated.

CKFresh 08-27-2008 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catman (Post 285107)
Fresh, what happened to the funds that New Orleans received from 1975 to the present? Can you give a detailed accounting for all of it? I really don't think so.
The funds that were allocated should have been sufficient to rebuild all the levees damaged in the past, and maintain them properly. They should have been adequate, but were not. The problem is not in the lack of funding, it is in the administration of the funds that were allocated.

Perhaps.

My question would be: why does the Army Corps of Engineers say that the funding from the federal government was insufficient?

They have said that if they had received the requested funds, much of the damage could have been prevented.

The Army Corps of Engineers had no complaints about funding until the Bush administration.

What do you know that they don't?

Tarkus 08-27-2008 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CKFresh (Post 285075)
I would say it does matter who is more culpable.

I use my analogy again. It's the difference between a kick in the nuts, or a slap in the face. Both are undesirable, but their is a clear choice as to which one hurts more.

& you're analogy does nothing in the way of demanding better from your party. Instead of getting mushy & gushy over a candidate who does the same as politicians thru-out time with their promises, the public should be hammering issues with no regard for promises but just handing over a job description. No ticker tape parades or fancy get-together, just hand over a punch list & tell him when the next grading schedule is. Earn the accolades...now that's a novel approach. :rolleyes:

As it is, the only issues ever bandied about are hot topics that can't be avoided or issues that are used like a carrot on a stick to woo the voters & damage their opponent.

This topic on the levees isn't new nor is the half-assed way it's being handled. Both parties have looked the other way & not only left the NO residents with the Sword of Damocles hanging over their head but the rest of the country with the future impending economy disaster...again.

Meanwhile you really believe the thing to be addressing is who is more to blame? Really??? & then writing off the failures of the Dems as only "a slap in the face"? Really???

Well, apathy on these issues just isn't my cup of tea, so to speak. Outrage would be a better fit...

buckeyefan78 08-27-2008 07:20 PM

The levee system has been in need of repair/upgrade since the 1920s or 30s...somewhere in there...so both parties have been ignoring it on all levels of gov since then.

They had a cane back in the mid 30s (again, someone check for exact dates) and the gov broke a few levees to alleviate pressure. The city flooded from that but no worries...only the poor suffered and died in nearly the exact same locations...just like last 2005.

:thumbup:

The government likes to do things like that from time to time. That's how they killed a bunch of poor folks in the Johnstown, PA flood (in the late 19th century) as well.

Gotta admire the consistency and who says our gov doesn't work? When there's poor folks to kill...they nail it!

Tarkus 08-27-2008 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckeyefan78 (Post 285126)
Gotta admire the consistency and who says our gov doesn't work? When there's poor folks to kill...they nail it!

Gallows humor but still...:lol:

By the way, what are you doing for the next 4 years? Got any spare time? I've got a real doozy of a fixer-upper if you're interested...Mr. President :D

buckeyefan78 08-27-2008 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tarkus (Post 285130)
Gallows humor but still...:lol:

By the way, what are you doing for the next 4 years? Got any spare time? I've got a real doozy of a fixer-upper if you're interested...Mr. President :D

Who me?

Hey, I'm just a poor street kid (puts hands up in a defensive position) that has been graciously allowed to survive by the hands of the corrupted.

In any event, I'm not done fillin' the body bags at my current gig.

;)

catman 08-28-2008 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CKFresh (Post 285109)
Perhaps.

My question would be: why does the Army Corps of Engineers say that the funding from the federal government was insufficient?

They have said that if they had received the requested funds, much of the damage could have been prevented.

The Army Corps of Engineers had no complaints about funding until the Bush administration.

What do you know that they don't?

I know the city of New Orleans has wasted most of the money allocated to them for levee maintanence. Maybe they should understand that sending more money down that rat-hole, without a specific plan to use it, would be wasteful spending.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.