Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I just saw that Bush is going to launch an investigation to see what went wrong with the reent disaster in New Orleans.

He also made sure investigations were launched into the snafu's that resulted in 9/11 and further investigations were launched regarding the war in Iraq, both it's inception, how it is being handled, and situations such as abu gahrib.

Is anyone else sick of Investigations that seem more attempts to cover the ass of people responsible. Nothing came of the others, I doubt anything will come of this.

Comments

1) Bad Managemnt on Finances - Money was being chanelled elsewhere.

2) Lack of foresight, altough there were whistle-blowers saying that New Orleons would be ****ed with a Cat 4/5 or a staggering Cat 3.

2) Ultimatly, Bad Mangement on logistics with all the Bureacracy going on.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
I just saw that Bush is going to launch an investigation to see what went wrong with the reent disaster in New Orleans.

He also made sure investigations were launched into the snafu's that resulted in 9/11 and further investigations were launched regarding the war in Iraq, both it's inception, how it is being handled, and situations such as abu gahrib.

Is anyone else sick of Investigations that seem more attempts to cover the ass of people responsible. Nothing came of the others, I doubt anything will come of this.

Comments

People ***** when he doesnt do anything, people ***** when he does do things. Jesus.

I am thinking:

IF John Kerry came to power in the last elections........would it have been different ?

There cannot be any real investigation until all the facts have been gather. Currently there is a major bad case of finger pointing. Everyone is trying to cover their own rear. It will take weeks and prolly months until things can finally be more clear. Taking sides won't help the least bit.

Might I suggest a read ?

The Creeping Storm

thats amazing.

we get to see a collasal lie in its fetal stages.
we can all rest assured when the investigation reveals that everything was done to perfection...in fact, above and beyond the call...in fact, we are so lucky to have an administration like we have today, because under clinton the entire southern coast would have been swept away!

i ask again, where was the national guard? and forgive me for pointing the finger, but if he didnt send them to iraq, who did? please let me know so i can point my finger at the appropriate party, since i would hate to accuse the innocent. i wonder if that will show up in the report?
doubt it

I read something similar to that article yesterday while watching face the nation. What is happening here is that the Federal government was slow to respond. And the State Goverment was not prepare properly. Again, this is all part of the blame game. If you're looking for a bad guy in this whole issue. Then you're on witch hunt. Are you taking sides?

Originally posted by KharmaDog
I just saw that Bush is going to launch an investigation to see what went wrong with the reent disaster in New Orleans.

He also made sure investigations were launched into the snafu's that resulted in 9/11 and further investigations were launched regarding the war in Iraq, both it's inception, how it is being handled, and situations such as abu gahrib.

Is anyone else sick of Investigations that seem more attempts to cover the ass of people responsible. Nothing came of the others, I doubt anything will come of this.

Comments

Well, these investigations are helpful...as long as you want to distract the public. It's all an effort to distract the public from the real issues...that this administration has been caught with it's pants down...and no they're getting their naked asses spanked. And rightfully so.

What are they going to investigate? It was a natural disaster, what more can they find out?

Originally posted by WindDancer
I read something similar to that article yesterday while watching face the nation. What is happening here is that the Federal government was slow to respond. And the State Goverment was not prepare properly. Again, this is all part of the blame game. If you're looking for a bad guy in this whole issue. Then you're on witch hunt. Are you taking sides?

reminds me of the "class warfare" cry of foul when someone points out the blatent truth.

i accept that the administration shares the blame with state government, but does that mean that they somehow cancel eachother out and we should all say "oh well" and forget about it?

Originally posted by BackFire
What are they going to investigate? It was a natural disaster, what more can they find out?

Maybe why it took four days to airdrop supplys...why no effort was made to FORCE people out of the path of this thing. Maybe to find out why these storms are getting more and more violent. Why the gulf coast waters are warmer than they were a few years ago. Why the head of FEMA is another one of GW's inexperienced buttbuddies. the list goes on.

Originally posted by WindDancer
I read something similar to that article yesterday while watching face the nation. What is happening here is that the Federal government was slow to respond. And the State Goverment was not prepare properly. Again, this is all part of the blame game. If you're looking for a bad guy in this whole issue. Then you're on witch hunt. Are you taking sides?

Who me ?

Some constructive criticism:

What i know for sure, as it seems, the states are succesful in planning out their logistics elsewhere on foreign soil such as Kosovo, Iraq and The persian gulf. Its taken for granted that the US can deliver ships and troops in a region within a 36 hour time frame. Yet it was not so efficient and accurate when dealing with a crisis in its own back yard.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Maybe why it took four days to airdrop supplys...why no effort was made to FORCE people out of the path of this thing. Maybe to find out why these storms are getting more and more violent. Why the gulf coast waters are warmer than they were a few years ago. Why the head of FEMA is another one of GW's inexperienced buttbuddies. the list goes on.


Oh, alright.

Originally posted by GCG
Who me ?



No, I'm talking about people who alredy made up their minds and will not take any recent or developing story. I don't see you as someone who makes up his mind immediatly. I can see your point with the 36 hrs logistics. But not all situations are the same. Delivering supplies to an affected area can be challenge and even a danger. We can't really predict the dangers or the risks of delivering supplies. And I'm not excusing what happen last week in New Orleans.

Originally posted by GCG
Who me ?

Some constructive criticism:

What i know for sure, as it seems, the states are succesful in planning out their logistics elsewhere on foreign soil such as Kosovo, Iraq and The persian gulf. Its taken for granted that the US can deliver ships and troops in a region within a 36 hour time frame. Yet it was not so efficient and accurate when dealing with a crisis in its own back yard.

what a superbly worded point!! thats exactly what needs to be dealt with!!

and this one just kills me:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050906/ap_on_go_pr_wh/katrina_washington_44

so basically Bush is gonna investigate HIMSELF?? why do i think there wil never be any accountability for this? good grief its worse than having three stooges run the white house.. instead of larry, moe & curly we get Georgie, Dick & Condoleeza

Call for his resignation

People of the US of A................you dont deserve this man being there. You all focked up in putting him back in the oval office, dont continue doing the same by letting him remain there.

I'm thinking he's insulting absurdity of FEMA bilb and politicians' inability to act.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
I just saw that Bush is going to launch an investigation to see what went wrong with the reent disaster in New Orleans.

He also made sure investigations were launched into the snafu's that resulted in 9/11 and further investigations were launched regarding the war in Iraq, both it's inception, how it is being handled, and situations such as abu gahrib.

Is anyone else sick of Investigations that seem more attempts to cover the ass of people responsible. Nothing came of the others, I doubt anything will come of this.

Comments

I'm sick of investigations and you're 100 percent right. One way to truly solve this problem is voting Democratic in the next four years...or better yet..supporting independant canidates who aren't controlled by right/left wing fringe groups.

Or just vote for whoever you think will do the best job, regaurdless of their political affiliation.

Its stupid to just vote with one party. Stay independent and just vote for the right person.

Which Bush isnt.

you cannot vote for your president ; therfore you cannot NOT vote for your president.

Anyway G.W. Bush cannot be President next elections ; he has dont 2 terms which i might add, have been eventful.

Originally posted by GCG
you cannot vote for your president ; therfore you cannot NOT vote for your president.

Anyway G.W. Bush cannot be President next elections ; he has dont 2 terms which i might add, have been eventful.

no necessarily. lets not forget f.d.r.

f.d.r. what is that ?

Originally posted by GCG
f.d.r. what is that ?

franknin d. roosevelt
u.s. president during ww2
he long exceeded the 2 term limit because of the war.

But wasn't he president before that rule was made?

Cause I think Eisenhower (sp?) served more than two terms as well.

Originally posted by PVS
franknin d. roosevelt
u.s. president during ww2
he long exceeded the 2 term limit because of the war.

But that wasnt through the national elections, was it ?

Who knows some of his cronies will try to replace him and be as bad as him.

I anticipate Cheney going back to a cushy job at Halliburton after the demise of this U.S. Administration. So which crony are you referring to?

president rove? *shudders*

Rice? Unlikely. Rumsfeld? Unlikely. Ashcroft? Unlikely. No one in the Admin stands a chance imo.

My spidey sense says Sen. John McCain.

wouldnt be surprised for dubya's brother ; just to keep the Bush's roots & race into the presidency

Originally posted by PVS
franknin d. roosevelt
u.s. president during ww2
he long exceeded the 2 term limit because of the war.

The two-term or 10 year limit amendment was added after FDR died, before that there was no real limit.

Originally posted by Afro Cheese
But wasn't he president before that rule was made?

Cause I think Eisenhower (sp?) served more than two terms as well.

Eisenhower was president after FDR and served 2 terms.

Well in Canada they go far as long as they are voted in and as long as they want. Some were prime ministers for 11 years straight. the best one was from 1968-1980 to 1980-84. There was another prime minister who from 1920-1950 served 22 years in between here and there.

okay i think i would not mind john McCain.

Originally posted by Lana
The two-term or 10 year limit amendment was added after FDR died, before that there was no real limit.



Eisenhower was president after FDR and served 2 terms. Well.. at least I got 1/2 of my post right. I've never been good at remembering history facts.

Originally posted by PVS
franknin d. roosevelt
u.s. president during ww2
he long exceeded the 2 term limit because of the war.

PVS.. PLEASE GOD NO!!

Originally posted by bilb
very happy you can get a chuckle or two out of thousands dead & hundreds of thousands homeless.. real class act there dude

Oh, please...and BTW, that's exactly what I was doing. Don't worry about poking fun at the blame game that gets tossed around for every GD thing that goes wrong in this world...oh, no, I wouldn't do that.

Try reading and understanding (key word here - take note) the underlying context of the post next time. If it's over your head there are a number of users here who could help you out next time. Just PM KharmaDog or PVS and they'll help you out. Got it? Just trying to help.

Originally posted by botankus
Oh, please...and BTW, that's exactly what I was doing. Don't worry about poking fun at the blame game that gets tossed around for every GD thing that goes wrong in this world...oh, no, I wouldn't do that.

Try reading and understanding (key word here - take note) the underlying context of the post next time. If it's over your head there are a number of users here who could help you out next time. Just PM KharmaDog or PVS and they'll help you out. Got it? Just trying to help.

but you arent making fun of beauracracy dear.. you laughs come at the expense of victims.. so again so happy you find it amusing.. I for one will continue to be nothing but compassionate toward the victims and irate at the government.. sorry if that seems simple to you but hey.. just the kinda gal I am (you know RATIONAL? look it up.... www.dictionary.com - just trying to help)

Originally posted by manny321
Well in Canada they go far as long as they are voted in and as long as they want. Some were prime ministers for 11 years straight. the best one was from 1968-1980 to 1980-84.

Are you talking about Pierre Trudeau? Are you Nucking Futs?

Trudea was an arrogant ******* who dismantled a once proud, efficient and world reknowned military force. His idiotic economic policies increased our national debt and politically alienized the west from the east just to mention a few of his accomplishments.

When he died people held him up as the saviour of Canada, in truth he was a leader that really divided this country and really screwed things up.

Originally posted by bilb
you laughs come at the expense of victims..

Substitute "victims" with "people sitting on their ass shouting meaningless words of blame that will solve nothing in this crisis" and then we're getting somewhere.

Blah, it's too early to argue. Good luck with whatever everyone's trying to accomplish here.

Originally posted by botankus
Substitute "victims" with "people sitting on their ass shouting meaningless words of blame that will solve nothing in this crisis" and then we're getting somewhere.

Yeah i say he sucked on money and economy but you forget he changed the whole social fabric of Canada.

I agree he wrecked the economy but he really changed the country by the core. He finally gave us a Constitution and a bill of rights. He changed the demographics of this country, the languages we speak, he stooped the referendum in Quebec and the insurrection in quebec and finally he really made Canada a society where minorities and immigrants could finally be treated like decent people for once. He put forward multiculturalism in 1971 where the Americans are just starting to talk about it now !!! He did bad things but what he did for minorities was the reason he is considered a great PM. He even had influence after he left when he slammed the meech lake accord. It died shortly after. He did have influence over Canadians.

I still think he was still the best, because if he wasn't he would not be known so well today. Everyone knows him and came third in the greatest Canadian poll. Only Pearson and King changed Canada as much as he did.