Archive for May 2006

Media Myths On Katrina

Wed,31 May, 2006

I find it interesting that libs demand apologies from Republicans for "lying", but they have ZERO interest in demanding the same from themselves or their media lap dogs when they lie. Cases in point: Dan Rather's so-called "documents" which supposedly proved Bush was AWOL and worse than that, any and all coverage of hurricane Katrina by their bitches in the media. It goes to show that libs don't give a damn about the truth and if they're proven to be liars, they ignore it and go about their business of smearing anybody in their path.

Check this out:

Media Myths On Katrina includes an article by Popular Mechanics dispelling the liberal media lies. Here's my favorite:

GOVERNMENT RESPONDED RAPIDLY MYTH:

"The aftermath of Katrina will go down as one of the worst abandonments of Americans on American soil ever in U.S. history."–Aaron Broussard, president, Jefferson Parish, La., Meet the Press, NBC, Sept. 4, 2005

REALITY: Bumbling by top disaster-management officials fueled a perception of general inaction, one that was compounded by impassioned news anchors. In fact, the response to Hurricane Katrina was by far the largest–and fastest-rescue effort in U.S. history, with nearly 100,000 emergency personnel arriving on the scene within three days of the storm's landfall.

Dozens of National Guard and Coast Guard helicopters flew rescue operations that first day–some just 2 hours after Katrina hit the coast. Hoistless Army helicopters improvised rescues, carefully hovering on rooftops to pick up survivors. On the ground, "guardsmen had to chop their way through, moving trees and recreating roadways," says Jack Harrison of the National Guard. By the end of the week, 50,000 National Guard troops in the Gulf Coast region had saved 17,000 people; 4000 Coast Guard personnel saved more than 33,000.

These units had help from local, state and national responders, including five helicopters from the Navy ship Bataan and choppers from the Air Force and police. The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries dispatched 250 agents in boats. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), state police and sheriffs' departments launched rescue flotillas. By Wednesday morning, volunteers and national teams joined the effort, including eight units from California's Swift Water Rescue. By Sept. 8, the waterborne operation had rescued 20,000.

While the press focused on FEMA's shortcomings, this broad array of local, state and national responders pulled off an extraordinary success–especially given the huge area devastated by the storm. Computer simulations of a Katrina-strength hurricane had estimated a worst-case-scenario death toll of more than 60,000 people in Louisiana. The actual number was 1077 in that state.

 NEXT TIME: Any fatalities are too many. Improvements hinge on building more robust communications networks and stepping up predisaster planning to better coordinate local and national resources.

PM PRESCRIPTION Improving Response

 ONE OF THE BIGGEST reminders from Katrina is that FEMA is not a first responder. It was local and state agencies that got there first and saved lives. Where the feds can contribute is in planning and helping to pay for a coordinated response. Here are a few concrete steps.

My point has been that there were rescue efforts in effect even before the storm had passed. There was an article in Firehouse Magazine which mentioned that while Mississippi was still being hammered, FEMA USAR teams were already moving into south Louisiana and beginning rescue operations. Heckuva job, Brownie! Meanwhile, where were the liberal douchebag Katrina Chickens??? Nowhere.

Considering how their bitches in the media reported on the storm's aftermath and the posing and race baiting from the left, I can say without a doubt that the liberals can shove it sideways on the Katrina issue.

Additionally, the libs got all wrapped up in politicizing the issue wound up shitting all over the rescuers in the process. Way to go, FAGS! They were too busy pissing themselves for not being able to photograph dead bodies in the water to give a damn about those who were rescued and the rescuers. They were too busy spooging themselves because Sean Penn (F.A.G.) did what to help out?

Advertisements

Wait. WHO Lied???????

Sun,28 May, 2006

Who Thought Iraq Had WMD? Most Everybody
By Larry ElderMay 25, 2006

As Memorial Day approaches, 51 percent of Americans, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, think the commander in chief "deliberately misled" us about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. "Deliberately misled"? Once again, let's go to the videotape:

Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, February 1998: "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, February 1998: "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983."

Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso, October 2003: "When [former President Bill] Clinton was here recently he told me was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime."

French President Jacques Chirac, February 2003: "There is a problem — the probable possession of weapons of mass destruction by an uncontrollable country, Iraq. The international community is right . . . in having decided Iraq should be disarmed."

President Bill Clinton, December 1998: "Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them, not once, but repeatedly — unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war, not only against soldiers, but against civilians; firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. Not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. . . . I have no doubt today that, left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again. . . . "

(more…)

It’s Tarantino-riffic!

Sat,27 May, 2006

So I watched Reservoir Dogs this morning on IFC. As with any other Tarantino film, I don't get it. Problem is, I'm not even sure what I didn't get, as with any other Tarantino film. I dunno.

I'm glad I saw it, but I wouldn't go out of my way to watch it again.

Call me crazy, but I kept having this feeling that Dennis Leary should have been cast as Mr. Orange. I dunno why, but I do think that.

Oh To Be a Minority In Congress

Fri,26 May, 2006

It amazes me how a "Democrat" can be videotaped accepting bribe money and nobody gives a good damn. Worse than that, the Republican leadership goes to bat for him. Nobody seems to give a damn about the fact that he commandeered rescue vehicles after hurricane Katrina to get his cash out of his house. If it had been a Republican who had done that, his career would have been over last September.  Looks like you can commit any crime and hide the evidence in your office and nobody will care.

"Democrats" say Well he's innocent until proven guilty. Right. Just like DeLay, Rove, Libby, Cheney, Bush etc.

Along the same lines, Hillary wants the federal government to pay for the education and healthcare of ILLEGAL immigrants. Pardon me, Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton, but I was under the impression that the taxpayers were already doing just that.

If only I were an ILLEGAL immigrant. I could get deals on education, housing, healthcare etc. and I wouldn't have to worry about it. I wouldn't have to contribute much either. Hell, if I were a liberal, I wouldn't have to even work. You don't need to work or even think for yourself. You can be the biggest pussy and gutless wonder and be elevated to high stature. You would take precedent over Americans. Hell, you could become president! The more of a gutless failure you are, the higher you'll go. Just look at the Clintons.

Also, it's not fair for those who were born with fair skin and a dick to get jobs and an education. If you're a black or Hispanic woman, you've got the most opportunities in America. You don't even have to show any appreciation for it. Just claim sexual harrassment and shit all over anybody who gets in your way. They deserve it, afterall.

But TGC, that's racist to believe that.

You're right. It is racist to promote one person over another on the baisis of skin color. It's also sexist discrimination that women are given positions in order to fill quotas. No matter how liberals spin it, they're the ones who are the racists & sexists.

And that's another reason I believe that libs can drop down, fifth ring, cook.

FYI: I’m Racist

Fri,26 May, 2006

Because I expect and demand that people who come to this country to live and work abide by our laws, I'm a racist, nativist, Xenophobe, sexist, bigot, homophobe, etc. I'm just not "nuanced". Add to that, I THANK GOD for it. I also happen to think that we shouldn't be rewarding people who violate our laws. The big issue of the day is NOT immigration. Don't let anybody suck you into believing that.

BTW, I don't think that minorities and folks here illegally should be given preferential treatment when it comes to getting a job, getting into a university etc. Nor should any member of the Talliban be admitted to any U.S. school. There are those who say "well we were at war with bin Laden, not the Talliban". Ask me if I give a sweet rosey shit.

 Let's pretend that we're liberals for a moment. I'll give you a chance to evacuate your stomach content first…………………..

O.K. let's pretend that there isn't enough money for education. Seems to me that one of the first steps would be to quit paying for those students who aren't supposed to be here in this country.

But then that would be racist.

Same Ol’ Scare Tactics

Thu,25 May, 2006

I found a rant by some kook jackball, over at Congress.com's Soapbox, entitled:

 More Republican Weapons of Mass Distraction Regurgitated For Your Voting Pleasure!!!

I thought about replying, but discovered that you had to pay to do so. Screw that. I can do it on my blog for free.

Anywho, it was a long, tired rant (the usual liberal lying points). I thought about dissecting it here, but had second thoughts. Don't want to bore anybody. I did, however, notice one particular point, on Socialist Stupidity, that shouldn't be ignored by anybody:

We have been and continue to lose our civil liberties! Our country and Social Security is going BROKE NOT because of illegals, it is because of BUSH and his LIE of a WAR!!!….Remember you have an obligation to yourselves and to your families to make this country the best and the healthiest environment possible; that means money in the Social Security coffers and no enormous deficit!

Wha????

First of all, all the other BS aside, Socialist Stupidity was doomed to failure from the beginning.

Secondly, does anybody else remember last year while Bush was touring the country promoting a plan to FIX Socialist Stupidity, the liberals were falling all over themselves and getting on all possible TV and radio shows to tell us that there was absolutely nothing wrong with it? Nevermind that in the latter years of the lord BJ "administration", there was incessant whining from the left regarding the state of Socialist Stupidity.

In all of that whining and crying last year, I don't recall the libs ever making a suggestion of their own to fix it. No. They wanted to maintain the status quo. They wanted it left untouched. I can't remember a whole lot of anything positive the libs have ever proposed over the last few years. All I remember is hate, condemnation and mockery.

So are the liberals going to regurgitate this lying point for this election as well? I know they hope like hell that we're too stupid to remember what they do and/or say in the past but I, for one, am not. Bring it on, douchebags!

Oh BTW, what the hell does Socialist Stupidity have to do with a healthy environment?

Rep. Putnam (R,FL) Responds

Thu,25 May, 2006

To my last post:

Dear Mr. S:

Thank you for your recent correspondence in opposition to the Putnam-Capps amendment to restore the Congressional moratorium on natural gas drilling off the coast of Florida. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

For the past several months, my colleagues in the Florida delegation and I have been working with the Resources Committee to devise a compromise plan that allows for responsible natural gas exploration in which the coastal States have a voice. The Interior Appropriations bill under consideration, however, would have allowed for drilling as close as three miles off the Atlantic Coast and 9 miles off the Gulf Coast, regardless of the laws of the states involved. By a vote of 217 to 203, the House voted to adopt my amendment and strip this provision from the bill.

 Congress should – and it will – consider all options to increase our nation’s energy supply. Those options will include discussions of drilling off the Outer Continental Shelf, and I will continue to work with Chairman Pombo of the Resources Committee to produce a reasonable, workable compromise.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your views. If you are interested in legislation that is pending before Congress, are experiencing difficulties with federal programs or simply wish to express your views, please visit my website at www.adamputnam.house.gov.

May God continue to bless America. Sincerely, Adam Putnam Member of Congress

Well that's great and all. The laws of the states should be respected. However, my sense is that so far, we're maintaining instead of decreasing restrictions. I dunno.

In the original article there was a quote which essentially said that starting drilling now wouldn't have an impact on current prices. I beg to differ with a caveat. Given that oil and gas are commodities, the prices that you see today were set about two months ago. If we could start drilling tomorrow, there would be a difference in the price 2 months from then and new drilling would cause the price to go down, barring any major problems. Maybe not a whole hell of a lot, but the market would respond to it.

(more…)