Re: McCain 'n' Palin Ticket!!!!!!!!

"George Z. Bush" <georgezbush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:A%mwk.21039$3A4.15711@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Evelyn wrote:
"California Poppy" <GoldenStatePoppy@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:b72a9680-0142-42d7-a511-481760d5d75e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sep 5, 2:43?pm, al Guacamole <a...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 5, 1:23 am, "George Z. Bush" <georgezb...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:





al Guacamole wrote:
On Sep 3, 4:29 pm, "George Z. Bush" <georgezb...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
al Guacamole wrote:
On Sep 2, 4:06 pm, Rita <R...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The details are in the fine print. ?It is always wise to
investigate
before taking something a politician says at face value.

Rita, Palin like Obama, is a politician. They are expect to "refine"
their opinions. What's the big deal?

If you believe what McCain says about such stuff, then you know that
he
thinks the use of earmarks is a big deal. ?Are you saying that he
doesn't
know what he's talking about? ?Perhaps he doesn't, since he picked a
candidate who had been involved in so many of the wasteful federal
spending
projects that he so often and so vociferously deplored and objected
to.
How
can he do that and still expect the voters to see him as the maverick
he's
so often described as being? ?Maybe that whole maverick shtick is all
for
show and he really doesn't object to all of the sucking at the
Federal
teat
that goes on in Washington while the rest of the country is hurting
economically.

George Z.

It's relative George. What is wasteful to you may not be so to the
beneficiaries. That's part of "refining" the term earmarks.

That's a cop-out by way of response to my objections. ?I don't buy it.
?In
terms of wastefulness, the only ones who have a right to be concerned
are
the taxpayers, not the beneficiaries.....introducing the business of
"refining" is little more than an attempt on your part to steer the
discussion out of an area that you know you can't defend without being
disingeneuous.

George Z.

Baloney... The problem with earmarks is that vital things can be
funded in no other way. Consider the levees of New Orleans... When we
can set up a priority system instead of the current chop suey method,
earmarks will continue to be the way the system funds things both
important or not.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What we need is someone who has the courage to say that New Orleans
shouldn 't be rebuilt. It is like pouring money down a rathole.
Anyone who rebuilds in a high risk area assumes the cost themselves.


Poppy, I do agree with you. They should outlaw building in the lowland
areas that flood repeatedly and turn them into what they always
were....wetlands.

Although I must admit the Dutch have done a pretty good job of living below
sea level......

Evelyn, please check my response to Poppy on this subject. I suspect that you haven't given it any more serious thought than she did. The two of you have responded viscerally to an unhappy situation that requires a lot more thought than you've probably given it. It isn't as easy as either of you think.

BTW, living in North Carolina, I have no ulterior or economic self interest involved in New Orleans.

George Z.



Hi George, I have just read your reply to poppy and yes, I do agree that NO is an important port city. But it is subject to a lot of dangerous storm activity and large parts of the city are below sea level, and the levees that protect those areas have long been neglected. Katrina was a situation that was long in the making.

Since the army corps of engineers shored up the worst of the levees it is a little better scenario, but the truth is that it still needs lots more money and effort to properly maintain a city below sea level that exists right on a coastline.

We have oil refineries in that area, and if NO is indeed vital to this country's oil supply and if it is indeed a valuable port city, it is going to need some serious infrastructure to protect it from storms. That kind of money and effort can only come from the federal level. Short of that, periodic flooding, with expensive, extensive evacuations will be happening all the time, with all the expected upheaval and loss etc.

I don't say that the city doesn't have a wonderful and unique history, or that it doesn't have value, but I am saying it is probably a waste of money to rebuild there unless really serious money and effort is spent to protect it.

--
Best Regards,
Evelyn

"Be wise, treat yourself, your mind, sympathetically, with loving kindness. If you are gentle with yourself, you will become gentle with hers." --Lama Thubten Yeshe

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: RDU light rail program likely dead
    ... more roads proposed than we have funding for. ... > prioritization criteria used ... ... If federal money is involved, ... Alexandria is a charter city. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: Profit versus Interest
    ... and the word "interest" to describe the return to loaned money (in their ... the fee paid for borrowed money or the income to a money lender. ... George keeps his eye on the flow of real goods. ... is correct in insisting on consistent terms to explain the real economy. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Re Carnival ship hurricane donation WATCH ! 9/4
    ... > your city can not withstand a Cat 5. ... The only money in the house is the milk ... The stadium has air conditioning with emergency generators to ... > Cat 5 hurricane did not hit only NOLA it was wide spread. ...
    (rec.travel.cruises)
  • Re: Warning about OHIO SHOW this weekend..READ!!
    ... money revenue for the City to justify more ... Does the money go to the cops, ... I know a lot of tickets are given just for the money, ...
    (rec.games.pinball)
  • Re: I only had one note last week...
    ... On Saturday, our new timpanist, Shannon Wood, agreed to play ... professional negotiator for the first time. ... any other city in Michigan. ... make any money! ...
    (rec.music.makers.percussion)
Loading