Why didn't Hollywood save New Orleans?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

I told you that every time you bring up the aluminum tubes again, I would find another place on the Cellar where you were mistaken. ...
However, when pressed, tw could not identify any such budget cuts, and actually failed to reply at all until pushed hard. It turned out there had actually been a 1/2 Billion increase. tw was wrong.

If UT read all of that previous discussion, first the shuttles needed $2.2 billion of upgrades. Second, the ISS was comsuming another $8 billion. So George Jr only gave them $0.5 billion - and UT does not call that a funding increase? Furthermore, Columbia needed a major refurbishment. Therefore Columbia was to be retired rather than spend money. Instead, under George Jr, Columbia was not retired and a minor (considered insufficient) refurbishment was performed. They did not provide the necessary money.

Meanwhile TW never said the Columbia was exclusively a result of George Jr bean counting - as UT misrepresents. Cost cutting was discussed early as a contributing factor. Later posted were the reasons for that disaster from the investigation report:

Both Columbia and Challenger were lost also because of the failure of NASA's organizational system. ... This chapter shows how previous political, budgetary, and policy decisions by leaders at the White House, Congress, and NASA impacted the Space Shuttle Program's structure, culture, and safety system, and how these in turn resulted in flawed decision-making for both accidents.
The explanation is about system effects: how actions taken in one layer of NASA's organizational system impact other layers. History is not just a backdrop or a scene-setter. History is cause. History set the Columbia and Challenger accidents in motion.
Connecting the parts of NASA's organizational system and drawing the parallels with Challenger demonstrate three things. First, despite all the post-Challenger changes at NASA and the agency's notable achievements since, the causes of the institutional failure responsible for Challenger have not been fixed.

Curious. Management failures were responsible for both disasters. Cited by other sources is the lady boss who specifically stopped every engineer attempt to save seven lives.

Ironically, the reason for so many deaths in New Orleans is the same reason for death of seven Columbia astronauts.

Meanwhile, UT started this by taking cheap and insulting shots at TW. My response to his interpretation: a classic example - Pearl Harboring of Iraq by promoting a lie - those alumunim tubes. No way around this fact when one posts insults rather than stick to logical responses.

Original question is easy to answer IF personal biases are kept out. Show me where George Jr is not acting as a racist? Amazing how that is converted by UT into some kind of political statement, instead of a simple question of fact.

Rather than continue with these childish and irrelevant accusations, UT, why not instead answer the original question? Its not difficult to keep your political baggage out of a simple question. Its an easy question to answer. Swallow your personal agenda (don't act like a Fox News reporter) and stick to facts. That is not what you did when you kept hyping those aluminum tubes for a mythical WMD.

Show me where George Jr did anything last week to dispell the rumors of racism. Show me.

It's just not a difficult question. Show me.

Sorry to interrupt your hissy match with UT, but I can't help but be curious, tw. Why do you refer to yourself in the third person as in "Meanwhile TW never said..."? I know that in formal writing it is frowned upon if one uses the first person since it is a given that the writing is done from the author's perpective. However, even if you are attempting to follow the Chicago Manual of Style here in the highly informal cellar, wouldn't you write, "Meanwhile, it was never said..."

I just mention this because everytime you do this it throws me for a moment and I have to go back and check who wrote the post. I'm retarded I know.

OK, carry on!

[Trilby]

maybe it's a literary tick.

[Undertoad]

[xoxoxoBruce]

No, Bush isn't a racist. He's an Ivy League snob that has no use for poor people.
If your Daddy ain't rich, you obviously come from poor genes.

[tw]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Why do you refer to yourself in the third person as in "Meanwhile TW never said..."?

Does it bother those when it is not done the traditional way? Good. The message is still correct. Make them start thinking ... innovatively.

Meanwhile, this should sound familiar. "I don't post politically correct. I post bluntly." If that means upsetting English teachers by changing perspectives - then good. I have less respect for those who portrary things in terms of phallic symbols and innuendo rather than stating the point bluntly. Instead some people insist mixed perspectives violate English teacher grammar rules. Intolerance.

For reasons I can only speculate, UT replied with a pissing contest rather than answer a simple question. Maybe those mixed perspectives so bother him as to post accordingly? Ask him. Somehow he cannot even answer the simple question without attaching personal bias.

Rather amazing how one can ask a question right at the heart of racism and get a distorted and emotional reply with so much innuendo attached. Or does too much first and third person make people emotionally distraught? One thing we do know – I posted no phallic symbols. If I had intended to say “Fuck you”, I would have said it up front and bluntly – or maybe in 'third person' to only add insult. Such phrases don't provide logical value to the simple question:

Show me where George Jr did anything last week to dispell the rumors of racism.

Apparently the only answer is in a photo op (sometimes called acting) where the people are carefully screened - and not from New Orleans. It is an answer; apparently the only one that anyone can provide. A 'smoking gun' answer would have George Jr personally firing Michael Brown and personally taking charge until another could be found. That is but one example of what a real leader would have done.

Yeah, yeah UT. Bush pays people big bucks for all those nice photo ops, and they're earning their pay. So fucking what? Where was Bush when the Republican party tore the funding for those levee's and pumps down to nothing? Where was he when their brothers and fathers and sons got sent off to Iraq? How come he has consistently cut funds for housing for the disabled and battered women trying to escape with their children away from an abusive environment? Yeah, Mr. Compassion George. Got any more fairy tales for us?

Originally Posted by tw

Does it bother those when it is not done the traditional way? Good. The message is still correct. Make them start thinking ... innovatively.

Meanwhile, this should sound familiar. "I don't post politically correct. I post bluntly." If that means upsetting English teachers by changing perspectives - then good. I have less respect for those who portrary things in terms of phallic symbols and innuendo rather than stating the point bluntly. Instead some people insist mixed perspectives violate English teacher grammar rules. Intolerance.

Nah, I'll tolerate it, tw. Its just an unusual manner of posting and, like I said, it throws me sometimes. Thanks for the explanation.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by tw

If I had intended to say “Fuck you”, I would have said it up front and bluntly – or maybe in 'third person' to only add insult.

This cracked me up. In third person, I think you'd have to say "TW will fuck you."

[Urbane Guerrilla]

This really is a 'barn door' administration. They are completely reactive to all threats, from terrorism to infrastructure.

You can't have it that way, nor try and have it both ways, RichLevy: were they completely reactive, they wouldn't have taken the proactive step of going to kill the terrs in their own back yards, but instead have forted up behind our borders.

Turning to the ever-odious TW: stop demanding that we prove a negative, you rounded and pink ass. That is what you allege will be what satisfies you, as here:

Simply provide an example that George Jr is not a racist.

We're wise to your dishonest little game. You got called on it back on page 2 of the thread, yet you still do it! Are you stupid, or simply evil? You deserve to have your head held under floodwaters -- nice stagnant ones full of corrosive and human waste. Your head will not emerge in especially worse shape from this treatment than the condition in which it entered, you damned ambulatory bad example. Do you live to make your ideas look bad? -- if so, you have succeeded superbly.

Oh, Urbane, you're back. We were so hoping you'd been visiting down in New Orleans. Oh, well. :p

[NICOTINEGUN]

[quote=tw] "Can you simply answer the question OR do you have personal agendas that would distort the question?
Simply provide an example that George Jr is not a racist. And so we again ask, what did George Jr do that demonstrates he is not a racist."

I guess we would have to see the reaction of the administration if something like this occured in a largely white community. We can only guess until that point, or until we see W. in a KKK uniform burning a cross in Condi Rice's front lawn, which I know we will never see, or he frees the slaves, which I know we will also never see because there are none.
We must also take into consideration the environment and how difficult it is to get to the people. Also consider divising a plan that would get food and water to the people without creating a riot. Think of how the people would rush a truck full of food and water.
As far as an agenda, I don't want a situation to be turned into a racial thing without proof. I don't like to see race used as an issue in any case, Black, Brown, White, or otherwise.

[tw]

[quote=NICOTINEGUN]

Originally Posted by tw

As far as an agenda, I don't want a situation to be turned into a racial thing without proof. I don't like to see race used as an issue in any case, Black, Brown, White, or otherwise.

Your response is admirable. However given that others need something positive or specific to feel otherwise and considering facts of this past week; the race card is being played daily. Look at all those pictures of George Jr on his latest photo shoot in MS, et al. You tell me he is not trying to fix his PR from Friday by challenging the race card. The race card exists no matter what you want because race is part of a first impression AND we all (unfortunately) judge based upon first impressions. First impression from this event - mostly blacks were left in the city to drown and then left for four days without food, water, or medicine.

Considering the facts of New Orleans, the race card was played long ago whether you like it or not. Gossip is only left to decide who played it first. And the list of players does include this president.

There is much credibility to the accusation that such would never have been permitted to happen in Orange County. One could not dispute that. Again, the only question remaining is why? Race, political influence, or money?

At any rate, given answers to the original question, it would be impossible to not have the race card played. Damage has been done. If not a race card, then something else must be to blame. And with spin, they must try to deflect blame away from presidential competance. Clearly not on the list of suspects is mother nature even though spin doctors will try that tactic as well. Something or someone must be blamed. If not the leadership's intellect, then why not racism?

A curious question for students of spin. Notice the only reason given to prove the president not a racist are the staged photo oppurtunities. Like it or not, the race cards are being played even by this White House.

[bargalunan]

Originally Posted by Hemlock

They are different news agencies. AFP = Agence France-Presse, AP = Associated Press
Learn to read before you spout off "racism" that someone has shown you. It could be that they have different standards for captions. Perhaps one will not sue the word "looter." Just because the guy who I caught breaking into my house was black, I am not racist for calling him a thief.

I don't like your too emotional answer.
This subject seems too sensitive for you. Read my message again.
Meanwhile you're right : this example would be stronger if the two captions were written by only one news agency. (AP or AFP, that doesn't matter).

Originally Posted by marichiko

Oh, I don't see the French as having any problem with the word "loot," especially on an international story. If anyone was going to be afraid of law suits, it would be the US news agency which used that term in our litigenous society. I think you are being just a bit disengenuous here.

The problem would arise if you call the black guy who broke into your house a thief, but called the white guy who broke in someone who was "borrowing" something. That's what those two news captions illustrate.

Thank you Marichiko again

[Undertoad]

A curious question for students of spin. Notice the only reason given to prove the president not a racist are the staged photo oppurtunities. Like it or not, the race cards are being played even by this White House.

When using the metaphor "play the race card" only the first player to play the card can be said to be "playing the card", or the metaphor fails. The first player to play the card was tw.

As usual, I have to say, I dislike being the one to defend W. But to look at the whole big picture and decide that race has anything to do with it is to take the very stupidest of possible criticisms. It's like criticizing Hitler because his mustache was silly.

We could take a timeline of Katrina and suggest what the possible choices and actions would be at each point on the line, and ask who should be making decisions and taking action. Instead we are on this moronic jackoff about race because we want to explore the darkest possible motive in W's heart. Why?

It's self-indulgent, unhelpful and, as Mike Moore found out, unproductive. Like the constant drum beat of "lies" wrt WMD, the public sees through such self-indulgent crapola as name-calling and not truly germane to the real discussions that make things work. (Please, no WMD sidebar, this is just an example.)

You talk about these things instead of having intelligent discussion.

To continue the discussion after the photos is just an attempt to continue to control the agenda and keep it on the self-indulgent crap. I'm not playing after this post, so you will have to play with yourself, t. Control all the agenda you like. Talk amongst yourself.

Lastly, somebody doesn't understand what the upset would be to the process, of setting Air Force One down in the middle of a lawless flooded sector of town so the Pres could get his feet wet pretending to care. Someone may not have heard that it was discussed and there was a rational decision made about that. It would interrupt everything else that is happening on the ground in that area, just to get the shots that tw wants. Frankly I would rather have him hugging people in the safe zone for a day. I guess I'm racist.