So. Cali is underprepared for a disaster response - why?

[Cross Traffic]

Civics must not have been her strong suit.

[Risa]

I thought pork was for pet projects, not for important projects?

Appropriating money for the levees is an important project.

And when that money is spent on floating casinos, marinas, portfolios of lakefront property or courthouse renovations instead of levee maintenance?

It's pretty fucked up, dude. It's Louisiana, so they don't have the 'Indian money' excuse to fall back on, right?

And yet how much money was being brought in by maintaining those casinos and marinas?

Industry didn't want anything to do with New Orleans, correct? What does it usually take to lure industry, the kind that means jobs for many and not just jobs for a few, into an area?

So we've got shipping and entertainment. And people who do their damndest not to see the poverty surrounding all of it, who wish to keep illusions (and class demarcations) alive and well, who turn a blind eye to the corruption that affects the little people, the hardworking lower and lower middle class, who do what they can and aren't taking advantage of anyone, it affects them most.

Everybody's at fault.


Still... the buck stops somewhere when catastrophe strikes. Louisiana is just a reflection of the top, and vice versa.

Why did you just breeze right by the fact that three levee board members are under federal indictment for obstructing an audit into their expenditures of federal money dedicated for flood mitigation?

I don't know.

Did that indictment have anything to do with why funding would be slashed in the first place?

If not, it's an evil thing, but it's also off the track, a distraction maneouver. It says nothing about why money wasn't earmarked in the first place.... if those indictments had nothing to do with whatever occurred in 2003 to significantly and severely undercut the amount of money the administration wanted designated for levee spending.

You know?

[Risa]

No, dude. when were the indictments?

it's one thing to be wary of giving money to corrupt officials who are just going to misuse it.

it's another thing entirely to not give a fuck about whether the money will be used appropriately or not, as long as your own pet projects are fully funded.

that's why i'm saying it's a red herring. it's wrong what they did. very wrong. but it's not relevant in the same way the levees not being considered important enough to adequately maintain in the first place is by those actually approving the money being given.

[DrDetroit]

The money was authorized, dumbshit. I posted a WaPo article that chronicles the level of money appropriated and how the locals squandered the $$ on everything but actual levy improvements.

End of story.

[Risa]

The money was authorized, dumbshit. I posted a WaPo article that chronicles the level of money appropriated and how the locals squandered the $$ on everything but actual levy improvements.

End of story.

And I'm saying that's irrelevant if that wasn't the reason why the actual money wasn't given in the first place.

Again, what they did was evil. That kind of theft is straight out wrong. But not ear marking funds in the first place and having no idea whether that theft occurs is also wrong.

Things took a sharp downward trend for the 2003 budget.
It wasn't because of charges of ill spending -- was it?

[DrDetroit]

The money was authorized, dumbshit. I posted a WaPo article that chronicles the level of money appropriated and how the locals squandered the $$ on everything but actual levy improvements.

End of story.

And I'm saying that's irrelevant if that wasn't the reason why the actual money wasn't given in the first place.

Again, what they did was evil. That kind of theft is straight out wrong. But not ear marking funds in the first place and having no idea whether that theft occurs is also wrong.

Things took a sharp downward trend for the 2003 budget.
It wasn't because of charges of ill spending -- was it?

WTF are you talking about?

What "theft?"

BTW, dumbass, your Democrat pals in Congress and on the op/ed pages of NYT and WaPo agreed with Bush's intent to reduce that spending, they going so far as to label the spending wasteful and pork.

Bye.

[Risa]

don't forget your galoshes, dear.

[Y2K]

Ohhhhhkay.

And the timber lobbies/timber companies that advocate thinning over clear cutting are....?????

Oh. There are none. Try again. Another example of using political doublespeak to promote profit for a precious few, at the expense of everyone.

The Forest Management here is done by Utility Companies (SCE and PG&E) There's a reason we have some of the most beautiful and safe campgrounds and resevoirs in the Sierra's (other than the areas now completely fucked over by the Clintonista Regime). Third Party Management outside the Enviornmental Idiots and Clear Cutting Timber Jackass's reach as well as both the State and Federal Government fuckups makes sense and actual positive results are acheived in every aspect of the health of the forest and the Safety of those who live and play there. This has been going on for years now but dipshits who have need to play Leftist Tree Hugging DooGooders or Cocksuckers hacking away forests for sheer profit simply buy enough legislators to ignore what's happening here because it just doesn't help promote their cause.
A Forest can be managed but until people get their heads out of their asses and quit quoteing catch phrases from their pet paid off political bitch it isn't gonna happen and fires will become bigger and more powerful by the year.