Redstate

I think that, to an extent, Kos would like to have 9-11 fade into the background.  shrugs I would like to see it fade as well, mostly because I despise 'bloody-shirt' politics on general principle.  However, I see nothing wrong with a remembrance on the day of 9-11, especially locally in New York City, because of its massive impact on that city in the last generation.

Katrina (as you so honestly put it, 'God forbid') may produce far greater loss of life and property damage than the events of 9-11.  However, that does not lessen or greaten either tragedy.  Both are just that, tragedies.  We have current concerns, and remembrance for past pains may be made in the appropriate fashion while we deal with these current concerns.

I may wish that the 'bloody shirt' of 9-11 terror politics would fade, but I see no reason that we should pointedly forget one tragedy because of another.  That would be an insult to people whose loved ones are dead in New York, and a cheapening of the pain of those in Katrina's path today.

...you're point that most Democrats somehow didn't dare reveal their true feelings that they didn't want to go into Afghanistan is every bit as much a politicization of 9/11 as anything Markos has ever said.

I believe that Markos' point, which I'm sure you'll disagree with, is that the event, as it is being staged, is another conflation of 9/11, terrorism and the Iraq War.

if it is re-focuesed on relief fundraising. This doesn't mean pushing the significance of 9/11 aside, but I would be amazed if any of the 9/11 survivors would begrudge this moment to Katrina's victims.  In fact, it may recall the country to some of the unity we experienced during that horror.

Katrina is just a vehicle to "get over" 9/11, to deny its centrality in our history, and to delegitimize the war on terror, likely from the moment the first CIA sentry set foot on Afghan soil.

First off, I don't think anyone is denying 9/11's "centrality" in our history.  Why is it so bad to point out that we have another disaster to deal with in the immediate term?  And why exactly is the Freedom Walk a vital function of government anyway, even given that 9/11 is the central event of our lifetimes?

Secondly, EVERYONE SUPPORTED AFGHANISTAN.  It's really time to stop pretending otherwise.  Even Dennis Kucinich supported war against Afghanistan.  The criticisms of the Afghan War on the left are that we haven't done enough to keep the Taliban out of power.

Kos called it "a creepy 9/11 propaganda event" before Katrina ever hit. And the left blogosphere made a point of scaring WaPo away from sponsoring an innocuous event.

Those who "support the troops not the war" are seemingly very intent on deligitimizing this. I don't get it. If September 11th is not an appropriate time to support the troops -- and this is not an appropriate venue -- what is?

Katrina's immediate damage, both human and monetary, is worse than 9/11.  It should receive as much immediate attenton as did 9/11, but of a different kind, except it will need even more money to set it right.

It in no way means we should reduce our efforts in the war against Islamist Absolutists.

It just means we have more work to do.  Who can do it better than we?

Call me silly but I thought if 9/11 had one impact, one lasting legacy it would be that my government would be ready at every level to quickly deal with a major catastrophy.

It's been 5 days since the storm. Five. Turn on the TV and weep: Americans dying in the streets as if we're some third rate African village.

--

To the cleansers: It does'nt take a liberal to critisize the government.

This nugget from Best of the Web might leave Kos conflicted:

"This is mass chaos," said Sgt. Jason Defess, 27, a National Guard military policeman who had been stationed on a ramp outside the Superdome since Monday. "To tell you the truth, I'd rather be in Iraq," where he was deployed for 14 months, until January. "You got your constant danger, but I had something to protect myself. [And] three meals a day. Communications. A plan. Here, they had no plan."

Possible Kos angle: "It's time to forget that they actually did have a plan in Iraq, and focus completely on this report that they didn't have a plan in New Orleans!"

I read DKos and although my politics are pretty liberal, I myself think the site goes too far many times. He doesn't speak for "the left."

It seems like the posters here wait for him to post something inflammatory and pounce on it to show how out of touch "the left" is with mainstream America.

I don't know if it's just a way whip up anger and increase traffic, or because it's a slow news day (!). As someone who reads Redstate to see what the intelligent right thinks and why, I'm finding less and less reason to come back.

Believe me, if we only posted when Kos posted something inflammatory and idiotic, we'd never have empty space on the front page.

There's very little that they can do right now. New Orleans is completely cut off. They can't get vehicles to the site because the roadways are either flooded or damaged. The local airport is barely operational, restricted to daylight operations, and there's no way of getting supplies from there to the places they are needed. The National Guard is on its way, but it takes time to get the logistical train necessary to support them.

This is about the worst situation we can face - and there is very little we can do until we can get some kind of emergency transportation infrastructure.

9/11 was bad, but that only effected a small area and most of Manhattan had water and power. New Orleans has no potable water, no power, no transportation, and millions of tons of debris scattered everywhere. Coordinating a disaster response under those conditions is damn hard.

I lived through the 1993 Des Moines flood, which was bad. But we had power throughout most of it, and only a small amount of the city was flooded for a short time. This is orders of magnitude worse - as bad as it gets.

There are more than a few reasons why:

1. We have a lot of RedState / DailyKos crossposters, people with dual anonymous identites.
   
2. People from Kos love to pick on RedState and then have their trolls come over here and play games.
   
3. Several Kossacks a month show up posing as Republicans and then head back on over to report back to the Comrades.  It's like trench warfare.
   
4. Usually, important Democrat memes eventually wind up on DKos and so it really is an obligation for us here at RedState to report on them.
   
5. They can't be ignored because they're so large, and so funny!  Armando looks great in his clown suit, you should see it.

Never forget. Never, never never.

Never quit. Never, never, never.

But my perception is that Redstate is starting to  mimic the worst traits of DKos.

Harder not to do so in the future.  DKos is ten times the size of RedState.  It's difficult not to be inundated by them, and people like Clayton and Thomas and Nick and others do their best to make sure we're not inundated.  But I agree, to some extent -- we shouldn't adopt the mannerisms of the madhouse.  Hard when you're getting kicked and punched all the time.  RedState tries to keep the place free and open to all -- and unfortunately that means that every time we get mentioned on Kos a half dozen or more wackos show up to cause trouble.  

Thank you for the kind and informative reply.

I think you might have missed my point but perhaps that was my fault. Let me re-state it.

I'm not comparing 9/11 with New Orleans. Nor am I comparing the emergency response of 9/11 to todays events/

9/11 held many lessons for us. Cheif among those, I think, was that catastrophy prepration is critical. It's vital. And it's role that the federal government must play a leadership role in.

You write "This is about the worst situation we can face". Is it though? Worst than a great earthquake in a major urban center (I live in Los Angeles), worst than a nuclear detonation?

I expect better of our government. 4 years out from 9/11 and our national emergency reponse has had it's first test and the response to date has been a misarable failure. Pathetic and shameful. From local politicians all the way to the top.

I want accountability. Why? So response is improved the next time.

It's not a partisan thing with me.

The other observation is that it's free.  It never ceases to amaze me that people imagine that there is something other than the law of the jungle happening in cyberspace when everything costs nothing and is up for grabs.  It may very well be that RedState's model is untenable in the long run.  I've argued that before, so far the directors have thought I'm being a bit of an alarmist.

A couple of things:

The Left, and The Right, are comprised of people of various beliefs, of various levels of fervency, and should not all be lumped together as such. Saying "America's left did this, and then this, and then cuddled with Michael Moore, and then..." is simplistic and untrue, just as similar rhetoric lumping America's Right together would be.

Secondly, whether you agree or disagree, the 9/11 event is propaganda because it PROPOGATES a message, in this case "Support the troops." Now, whether this particular propaganda is right or wrong depends on who you ask. It is a rather curious anniversary (4th?) to do it on but that's just my opinion. I would say it's in bad taste to do it while the disaster unfolds in New Orleans (regardless of whether something can be done about it at that very moment) but I do think that whoever suggested making it a fundraiser for that effort has a good idea on their hands.

Good reply.

after 9/11, most of the country, left and right was mostly supportive of Afghanistan. As a Democrat myself, right after 9/11, I wanted the US to go in Afghanistan and destroy Bin Laden and his cronies as much as everyone else.

I think in regards to Afghanistan and Democrats, from the beginning of the post-9/11 era, their true feelings were "Let's go into Afghanistan and get Bin Laden."

9-11, DC also got hit with a plane, and one of its buildings was apparantly the target of the plane that went down in PA.

While NYC saw the greatest loss of life, and greatest property damage, we shouldn't forget the victims that died elsewhere.

And frankly, I don't think 9-11 is something that we should banish or forget about.  

Katrina was solely a natural disaster-nobody created Katrina-it just happened.

9-11 was solely a man made event.  Had it not been for the darkness inside some men's souls, 9-11 wouldn't have happened.

They are different tragedies.  The response to them is also different-there is a certain sense of horror that comes about, when humans set out to kill other humans-that isn't there, when a natural disaster strikes.  

I don't think we need to start pitting 9-11 victims against Katrina victims, in the end everyone will lose.

understand is how the US was there so quickly after the Tsunami (along with the Aussies) doing food drops and rescuing people.

Why can't we do food drops?  Surely there are some helicopters to spare, there appear to be plenty of news ones circling the city-if they can get there why can't the US relief organizations?

While I think criticizing Bush over this is silly, I do wonder about the response to the tragedy, and I can't help but wonder how well the city planned for evacations.

President George W. Bush, 9/1/05 (via WaPo):

"this is a natural disaster the likes of which our country has never seen before ... New Orleans is more devastated than New York was" after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

That wasn't my intent.

I only wished to compare the immediate damage to both property and humanity, and the aftermath of each event.

Different events, different harm, different solutions.  Neither set relating to the other.

for reminding me of the other two planes.

I disagree regarding what should and should not be remembered.  Details in a history book?  Yes.  Memoires in the families and lives of those affected?  Certainly.  National holiday once a year?  ...I'll yield.  It was, after all a turning point.

Constant reminders about the world 'since 9-11?'  Pass.  I would prefer to see the end of its predominance in the overall scheme of things.  I wanted it to fade years ago, just as I wanted coverage of the Murrah Building Bombing to fade when I lived in Oklahoma, and I actually knew people affected by that one.  I do not like our culture's obsession with death and its tendency to parade its corpses about.  I find it unhealthy, both spiritually and psychologically.

I'm sorry, but bloody-shirt politics and reporting will never have my vote of approval.  Don't forget?  Fine.  I could do without the parades and usage of the 9-11 moniker in repeated political speeches.

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to celebrate the efforts of firefighters and police on 9/11 than the troops?

but sooner or later it's bound to fade in memory, and sooner or later something even worse was bound to happen. 9-11 drove the OKC bombing out of our hall of memory icons as The Principle Horror Of Our Time; and now the Drowning of New Orleans will take that spot from 9-11. C'est la vie.

...is a fairly obvious observation. Regardless of fatalities, a flooded out city is going to bring more widespread physical devasation than two buildings going down. That does not mean they are not morally the same thing.

Re: New Orleans is completely cut off.

I have to wonder why this is so. Yes, the roads are an impossible mess and the airport is closed. But one of the world's biggest rivers runs right through the city. Seesm to me they could have commendeered every barge and cruise ship between Tampa and Houston to carry supplies in and ferry suruvors out.

I don't get that either. I heard a FEMA rep on TV say that they only got a request to get food to the New Orleans convention centre around noon today. They said that they then responded immediately by sending truckloads of food which should be arriving shortly.

How could it take so long? You couldn't turn on a tv without hearing aboutthe lack of food and water at the convention centre.

This muck raking from the left at a time of dire need has to end.

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/624

I felt they needed a little more exposure.

So John Kerry's repeated reminders that he served in Vietnam are equally taboo?

And Wes Clark's heroic leadership over Kosovo?

And any reminders of WWII or Korea?

I assume you were equally outraged about questions on Bush's NG service?

How about reminders that any current military engagement is 'another Vietnam'?

If all that is taboo, then your comment has some intellectual honesty.

How long do you find it appropropriate to dwell on the most significant terrorist attack on our nation?

How long until you say that you're tired of hearing about Katrina?

But this is a Pentagon event, to commemorate those that died on that dreadful day and honor those that have served subsequently.

A voluntary army doesn't get to debate whether to answer the call to service.  When the President says 'Attack' they attack.  So why is it partisan to honor those that choose to serve?

You can attack the motive or rationale behind the war any day of the week, or every day of the week, but can't you also thank the troops for serving at the same time?

who was 150 feet away from the WTC on 9/11 I find it loathesome when EITHER side uses 9/11 for their own political purposes.

Even the roads aren't completely cut off. There are buses going from the stadium evacuating people to Texas.

How those roads are being used, right?

There have been only a few truly momorable moments in the past few decades, which have really shaped our culture. I don't think any of them will be forgotten any time soon, because they all exemplify one part of our fears.

• Waco, in which the government attacks a bunch of domestic nutjobs who were fairly well contained, causing a horrific and pointless loss of life.
• Oklahoma City, in which a domestic nutjob blew up a federal building
• 9/11. Foreign nutjobs and civilian targets.
• Anthrax. Terrorists get away with it.
• Drowning of New Orleans -- here it remains to be seen whether the short story will be man smacked down by nature, or poor response takes matters from bad to worse.

The United States Coast Guard (USCG) estimated at 1200 hours today, that based on the damage to the

range lights and aids to navigation in the river, and based on the updated number of navy vessels

scheduled to enter the river, commercial transit into and out of the river is probably going to start Saturday

at best.

Also, based on the condition of the aids to navigation along with the continuing need to push relief

vessels into the queue, it will take a number of days to clear the backlog of vessels wishing to transit

into/out of the river.

http://www.iss-shipping.com/news/newsdocs/hurricane_katrina_update_31_augus
t.pdf

rivers closed for commercial ships but the Navy is apparently using it for theirs.

Judging by the tone of your post, maybe I don't. I'm not sure why barges would make more sense. Are the buses only ferrying people to locations where they are then transported by water?

First off, let me remind you that the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, i.e. Hollywood solidly opposed the Afghan War. Moveon.org which bough and paid for the Democratic Party opposed the Afghan War. Joe Biden opposed the Afghan War and made several statements opposing the bombing of Afghanistan calling it a war crime. Michael Moore opposed the Afghan War and also called it a war crime. Cindy Sheehan, the new heart and soul of the Democratic Party, opposed the Afghan War and believes it is a "Pax Americana that is a cancer upon the world." Mother Sheehan demands immediate pullout of troops from Afghanistan.

ANSWER and Peace and Justice all opposed then and now Afghanistan. You can't pick and choose. Dems got into bed with these folks and now you are stuck with them. Want to bash Bush with Cindy Sheehan? Fine but that means you signed on for the ANSWER/Code Pink/United for Peace and Justice crowd's anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-Afghan War.

Secondly, the Pentagon (remember that?) was hit on 9/11 with more than 300 killed. This is a significant event that demands commemoration no less than OK City or other sorts of things. People had friends and colleagues murdered on that day, they deserve their remembrance.

Out of decency it is the very least we can do and the opposition can only be described as reflexively anti-Military and Ward Churchill-type "America deserved it."

Last, the problems of New Orleans match 9/11 perfectly. There was NO political will for the measures to be taken to save lives:

*Mandatory evacuation and mobilization of statewide resources to forcibly remove very poor people from New Orleans on the order of 200,000 people.

*Doing this around 4 days out; which would require mobilization of resource 7 days out.

*Blowing away the idea that New Orleans will continue to have last-minute saves and missess and other good luck, despite years of warnings on this.

I recall in 1995 reading discussions about how New Orleans political leadership was refusing to face reality on the danger of hurricanes flooding the city and killing hundreds of thousands in the Times Picayune. Eerie in that it echoes the refusal before 9/11 (and afterwards) that yes we face a threat and have to do costly and unpopular things to address it.

Denial is not a policy.

The lesson is political, in the sense of broad policy and bashing heads.

Preparedness and costly, politically draining steps MUST be taken early to avoid disaster later.

New Orleans and Army Corps of Engineers bickered and diddled for over ten years (I recall reading the same thing in 1995 and 2005) over fixing the levee systems and various politically correct measure (levees were supposed to be "bad" environmentally and environmentalists opposed them; the Industrial Canal was opposed by East New Orleans residents but demanded by shipping interests to be kept open).

Point is steps could and should have been taken before Katrina, before 9/11 and they were not because the politics dictated that costly measures would eat up political capital for no clear gain. That dynamic HAS to change, politically, otherwise it will happen again and again and again in various ways.

Look at the politics now. It is driven by those who control the Dem Party (Kos arguably represents those interests who control most of the Party) and refuse to learn the lessons from each event:

Spending political capital before disaster can prevent or mitigate horrific loss of life later.

was also attacked on 9-11.  I realize that they didn't have nearly the number of casualties that NYC had, but that doesn't mean the attack was any less devastating to them.

We sometimes overly focus on NYC when it comes to 9-11, almost to the point that we forget there were victims in other places.

red cross don't watch the news.

I was talking about the lack of food/water in the stadium with somebody yesterday, and wondering why they weren't taking food to them.

We managed food drops in Asia after the tsunami, surely we can manage to do them here in the US.

by the destruction of the I-10 bridge. Fortunately I-12 exists north of the Lake so east-west transcontinental commerce in the South will not be disrupted as it was when I-10 was closed at Pensacola last year.

Apparently it is still possible to get in and out of the city by vehicle to the west.

...President Bush said NO is more devastated than NYC was on 9/11.

President Bush, in a rare appearance on morning television, said he understood the "frustration" of people at the pace of relief in the area affected but said "this is a natural disaster the likes of which our country has never seen before. . . . New Orleans is more devastated than New York was" after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "So we've got a lot of work," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America."

We may have lost one of our most distinctive and best loved cities. Does it matter how it happened?

I wish we had gotten the job done in Afghanistan. Letting bin Laden and his lieutenants slip out of Tora Bora was galling then and it's galling now.

but I think the initial post complained about someone saying that this disaster was worse than the attacks of 9/11

Where did the anthrax come from?

that this diary hasnt been taken down.

President George W. Bush, 9/1/05 (via WaPo):

"this is a natural disaster the likes of which our country has never seen before ... New Orleans is more devastated than New York was" after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

This is the guy who feels nothing when Americans are killed, dismembered, and their remains hung off of a bridge.

He is not expected to care about domestic terrorism, either, I don't think.

So John Kerry's repeated reminders that he served in Vietnam are equally taboo?

Yes.  I got sick of those the second time I heard them.

And Wes Clark's heroic leadership over Kosovo?

The first time.

And any reminders of WWII or Korea?

Those are generally given in historical context, not as political speeches.  I don't see their memory used as rhetoric to plug a solidarity in the face of strife theme.  As I said, I don't have issues with remembrance in appropriate context.  I dislike 'bloody-shirt' politics.

...I also dislike people who don't read history books enough to know the distinction between historical remembrance and that particular form of political maneuver.

I assume you were equally outraged about questions on Bush's NG service?

They got old... I think the third time I heard them.  That whole 'military service' line got old fast, as I thought it wasn't a distinct selling point or killing point for any candidate.

How about reminders that any current military engagement is 'another Vietnam'?

...the instant that was insinuated, I flew into a rage.  It still sets me off.

If all that is taboo, then your comment has some intellectual honesty.

I will not concede your point, as you put a simple matter of history in there, and I already stated that I approve of historical remembrance.  You seem incapable of distinguishing between a history book and a political tactic.

How long do you find it appropropriate to dwell on the most significant terrorist attack on our nation?

Around the time the buildings were being rebuilt, I thought it was past time for the nation to rebuild.  One does not build one's foundations on rubble.  One builds them on stone.  I view the ashes of remembrance to be a poor foundation for growth.

In more definite terms:  That will vary from case to case.  5 years is too long.  I think after the first anniversary it was time for pro-active movements and future sights to take center stage for those not personally affected by matters.  You might think this cold, but here is my question for you-

Did a loved one in your family die there?  If the answer is yes, grieve as much as you need.  if the answer is no, ...why do you grieve for what you did not lose, perhaps longer than even those who did lose?  What right is it of yours to partake in their pain and to parade it before them regularly as a political motivation.

How long until you say that you're tired of hearing about Katrina?

Roughly around the time that we move to a stable stage of rebuilding, probably giving the leniency of about 6 months to a year afterwards, as the stories of rebuilding themselves will be many and varied.  The stories of NO survivors are going to be more varied simply because of the broader land mass affected directly.

Gauging from current estimates, probably about 2-3 years.  I give it more time, as relief aid will be required in a significant sense for far longer.  The Trade Centers were searched and plumbed for a couple months and then the sites were bulldozed.  NO will take far longer than that.

What made 9/11 unique is the evil involved -- a handful of evil -- for you non-Manicheans that's spelled E-V-I-L -- individuals visiting unparalelled death and destruction upon thousands. What made it so horrific was that someone could will such a thing.

Katrina's strike was arbitrary -- the loss is beyond comprehension, but there is no evil personage giving it that added malicious dimension -- fantasies of Rove flicking the switches on the Atlantic Hurricane Generator notwithstanding. Traditionally after major natural disasters, America has picked itself up, rebuilt, and gone about its business -- because there is no remediating the Atlantic hurricane season, that's all we can do. There is no doubt that will take longer in this case, but you'll be surprised at how quickly it happens.

Not so with acts of war. In those cases, there is an evil which must, MUST, be remediated. For that reason, they linger longer in our memories and influence events for years and years to come.

It's frankly pathetic that something so basic still needs to be explained.

This is war.  Our goal — notwithstanding any out-of-context quote you may pull here of President Bush's, so don't even bother — was to destroy Al Qaeda's ability to attack us.

We succeeded in that.  Al Qaeda's international organization is smashed, along with its ability to shuttle money around.

This isn't some rinky-dink criminal matter where the goal is to "frog march" UBL and have some big show trial.

because of willful malice or willful negligence probably won't much matter to you.

FTR, I am not blaming the President for this.  IMO, catastrophes will always occur.  When we successfully prevent catastrophe no one really notices.  When our infrastructure fails everyone wrings their hands and starts playing the blame game.  Happens everytime.  

The important thing right now is to save everyone we can and rebuild a better coastline.

First off, let me remind you that the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, i.e. Hollywood solidly opposed the Afghan War. Moveon.org which bough and paid for the Democratic Party opposed the Afghan War. Joe Biden opposed the Afghan War and made several statements opposing the bombing of Afghanistan calling it a war crime. Michael Moore opposed the Afghan War and also called it a war crime. Cindy Sheehan, the new heart and soul of the Democratic Party, opposed the Afghan War and believes it is a "Pax Americana that is a cancer upon the world." Mother Sheehan demands immediate pullout of troops from Afghanistan.

ANSWER and Peace and Justice all opposed then and now Afghanistan. You can't pick and choose. Dems got into bed with these folks and now you are stuck with them. Want to bash Bush with Cindy Sheehan? Fine but that means you signed on for the ANSWER/Code Pink/United for Peace and Justice crowd's anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-Afghan War.

These might be the two most incoherent paragraphs I've ever read on this site.  

I'd like a link for the Biden statement, by the way.

You cliamed that Kos was trying to delegitimize 9/11. What is Bush doing by making his statement? IOKIYAR?

what one is saying and then pass this lie off to your readers. Do you not trust your readers with the truth? Kos sited that this disaster is of larger scale then 9/11. Plain and simple. The actions of this adfministration should should have been swift. But Bush also acted cowardly after 9/11 disappearing for days before surfacing for photo-ops. I know you are a 30%er that will blindly follow Bush but the rest of the public is seeing through the facade.

It's frankly pathetic that something so basic still needs to be explained.

I find so many of these posts offensive. It galls me that ANY true-blooded American could say 'oh let's get over this already' when for the first time in 60 years American's were attacked on our own soil. Pre-meditated attacks on innocent civillians occurred as a result of Islamic EXTREMISTS out to 'prove a point.' The ball was dropped when they did this the first time in 1993. Who was president then? Oh goodness I know it's on the tip of my tongue...AH! Slick Willy was Prez! That's right none other than Bubba "Sax me up" Clinton! Maybe if he'd been doing his job instead of getting one, we'd not have had these attacks. Again, when the USS Cole was attacked, he turned it into a CIA circus instead of the instigation of war that it should have been. Who else but a Loony Lefty could see an attack on our MILITARY as a CIA matter. Too weak to send troops, that is what it was. We obviously had done something to prompt the attack so let's study the reason to it and then apologize profusely, send monetary compensation and move on.

You know, when Pearl Harbor was attacked the American people wanted blood. And we had a President willing to go after it. I don't recall there being such a backlash against his actions as there has been against modern Presidents who chose to go to war. No one is willing to gripe until someone (God forbid) dies in war. Unheard of, right? Cindy Sheehan and her kind need to get their heads out of their own hineys and realize that maybe those people who died in the attacks on 9/11 didn't want to die either. But they didn't sign up to fight in the military and her son did. If she didn't like the idea of losing him the time to complain was before he signed up not after he died. Military service has rewards and risks. You can't have one without the other.

Am I the only one who sees the logistical problem of sending aid to New Orleans? Ok. Imagine someone stranded in the middle of a huge lake on a sandbar. Surrounding them are gator-infested waters, swarming with debris. There is no available dry land to land a plane, or a helicopter, and nearby are other people waiting for aid as well. Only whenever a copter approaches, some nutjob pulls out a gun and starts shooting. Then there are crowds of starving people awaiting on the shore ready to riot whenever someone arrives with a truck of supplies. Now. YOU are a volunteer heading in to help those in need. Knowing the odds of you being shot or trampled, or ending up a gator feast, how eager are you to run right in? How do you drop supplies from a plane when there is so much water that it can land in? How do you drive in on buses when there are so few roads to drive on? What about the Army Corp of Engineers attempt to pump the water out of New Orleans to expedite recovery? There were several people shot for shooting at volunteers just days ago. There is madness in New Orleans. This is not the federal government's fault. It's no one's fault. These people were too poor or too scared of losing all they had to leave. If anything it is their LOCAL government's fault for not having a preparedness plan in place. Why weren't public buses sent in before the storm hit to transport people without a means of leaving to safety? Why wasn't an evacuation plan in place?

'The foolish man built his house upon the sand. The wise man built his house upon the rock.' These people took a risk of sorts by living where they did. Some had no other choice, maybe. But when Pompeii blew ages ago, those living in its shadow were unprepared as well. Now, having learned a lesson, the people near the volcano are ever ready for another explosion. The same with Mt. St. Helens. You can't live in an area prone to disaster and hope ignorance will protect you.

Maybe just maybe Bush has the long-term benefits of this nation at heart in the war with Iraq. No one liked the war in the Gulf under Bush 41, but notice that Kuwait is coming to OUR aid now that we are so in need (is that oil looking any better now that we can benefit from it, lefties?). A free Iraq means less loony extremists in charge in the Middle East. Perhaps Bush is hoping that the seed of Democracy being planted in Iraq will spread to other nations one day in the future?

As a democrat myself, I was definately sold on the idea of getting bin laden. God knows what happened to that. I think some parties are a bit scared of what the political wake of katrina may be because so many resources we could have urgently used here in the states are being spent thousands of miles away on a war that has had growing opposition.    

No not totally one main road stayed open others passible for army and high water vehicles. Response was a failure, city government failed to realize and hoped federal levees would not hold.

take the 2,5 billion we are spending in Iraq each week. Give EVERY Iraqui even kids a debit card with 100 dollars added to it each wee cost total 2.5 billion. Net savings ........ many many lives.

Of course, that assumes that if we just up and leave, no one will shoot anyone else.

Do you have a substantive argument to make, or just scattershot trolling?

We good, democrats and french are bad

Mostly true but all french and things french are to be despised

watching you guys trip over Mobys. I know it's wrong, I feel bad about it, but I can't help myself. As penance, I'm gonna suggest you just pull the trigger on this guy.

yeah we are safe now thanks to our President

your merest whim is our command. Poof.

but the Pentagon is in Arlington, Virginia, not Washington, DC. Washington, DC did not experience a terrorist attack on September 11th. Just a technicality.

I'd like world peace and a RB for the Vikes.

Seems like a waste of a wish to me, but you're the boss. The running back thing is going to take longer.