Third Party & Independents Archives

September 27, 2006

The Real Cost of Katrina

Surfing the net, I came across a heart wrenching video presentation entitled: The Real Cost of Katrina.

CAUTION !!! This video contains graphic images not seen on TV, of the aftermath caused by our government’s failure to protect its people. If you have a heart, you will weep! Be forewarned.

The levees were the responsibiilty of the Congress and the Army Corps of Engineers, an agency of the White House.

I cannot understand how anyone can watch this 8 minute presentation and vote for any of the vast majority of incumbents in federal government today who permitted this to happen through negligence, partisan bickering, lack of priorities and commitment to safeguard we, the people, of these United States.

We paid dearly in taxes for such protection as these levees, only to be killed and rendered homeless by political party warfare and campaign money greed which, crowds out all other contenders for first priority of government. We paid dearly in taxes for the security of our land and its people against attack. Yet, 9/11 happened.

If it were a car that failed so catastrophically we would have returned it, and sued for damages, and demanded the salesperson be fired. But it wasn't an auto salesman who cheated us, it was our own elected politicians.

The Real Cost of Katrina. (headphones or speakers needed if you wish to listen to the music background - not required).

Posted by David R. Remer at September 27, 2006 05:45 AM
Comments
Comment #184349

It would also be fair to consider that we hurt ourselves when we cede personal responsibility for our safety and welfare to the government which consistently and predictably fails to live up to its promises…always laying the blame at ourt feet because we do not pay enough taxes.

I also question the wisdom of paying for those to rebuild there…right in line for the next hurricane which will likely destroy property and human life again.

Posted by: Matt Goldseth at September 27, 2006 08:10 AM
Comment #184385

THE PLACE IS 15 FEET BELOW SEA LEVEL!!! What part of “Rollin’ the dice against Mother Nature is a bad thing” don’t we understand?

Places without levees got decimated too. Are the gov’t and its taxpayers responsible for that too?

Hurricanes are not called a “Natural Inconvenience”, they’re called a “Natural Disaster” because (drum roll please) hurricane results are commonly disastrous.

The English language is a beautiful thing.

Posted by: Ken Strong at September 27, 2006 10:57 AM
Comment #184396

Ken, all I can say is WOW. It must take a truly wicked man to take such pleasure to send the “its all their fault” message after viewing that video.

Seriously, were you laughing at all those dead bodies?

Posted by: darren159 at September 27, 2006 11:22 AM
Comment #184400

Matt-
We can’t be personally responsible for everything. We build sea walls, drainage structures, levee systems by means of government. We have to. It would be difficult and unwieldy to depend on private concerns and donations. We also insist on certain building codes, which can make the difference when it comes down to actual damage.

Hurricane Andrew’s destructive capacity was raised by the fact that many houses in the area were built substandard, unable to stand up to the forces. We can save millions, even billions of dollars by making government responsible for enforcing building standards.

As for rebuilding there? It’s worth noting that there are reasons that New Orleans was built there, reasons that only stop making sense if the city is hit all the time by these things.

If y’all will remember, a far less catastrophic episode of inundation struck Houston a while back, as TS Allison got stuck over it and dumped it’s precipitation on us. One could tell everybody there that Houston should have never been built in the midst of all those bayous, but then there are economic and historical reasons for its location, and its continued existence.

I think it would be rather sad if we just gave up every time a natural disaster claimed one of our cities.

If we rebuild intelligently, the next hit will do less damage. If we just negligently complain about the stupidity of the natives while letting lackluster rebuilding commence, it will do just as much, if not more damage.

Ken Strong-
What part of “main entry port for the Mississippi” do you not understand? There are reasons New Orleans was built where it was.
There’s a reason it will be rebuilt there. We might as well rebuild it well, rather than pay for a second failure when it comes.

I think Liberal politics is superior in that regard. Life is tough, liberals say, get use to it, plan against it, deal with it. Don’t just mumble something something about market forces and get lazy about it.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 27, 2006 11:37 AM
Comment #184409

Stephen
That was a very thought provoking post there, until the last paragraph.
Alot of what Ken and Matt posted deals exactly with that subject too.

“Life is tough, liberals say, get use to it, plan against it, deal with it”

That is no where near liberal politics, if it was, most of those who died would still be alive.

Life is unfairly tough, let the govt plan and deal with it for you, would be a more accurate saying.

Government is NOT the answer and savior to all of lifes happenings, like you and David suggest.
I would hope this disaster would show people that the only ones they should depend on, is themselves, but we know that will not be the case don’t we.

Just like 9/11, blaming any one party or part of govt for it is wrong.
Unlike 9/11, the majority of people who died, could have prevented their own death.

Posted by: kctim at September 27, 2006 11:56 AM
Comment #184505

Folks, separate what should be from what was. The American people entered a contract with the federal government, its politicians and the Army Corps of Engineers in which the government took their money for a service and product to be rendered to the people of New Orleans in the form of levees. The government took their money, and did not live up to their end of the contract to build, maintain, and upgrade, the levees to withstand the water pressure behind them.

If we are to rely on our government for national security, roads, dams, bridges for which we pay politicians our hard earned money, we must kick these SOB’s who failed on 9/11 and the N.O. people. The porous borders is the next tragedy waiting to happen. We are paying the government to protect our land, but, thousands of miles of border are free and open to any who would enter. Our politicians are still taking a band aid approach, 700 miles of border protection for 5000 miles of open border.

Don’t you people get it? It is afterall your lives, your families lives, your friends lives, you are paying these politicians to protect and you are going to let them get away with 700 miles of protection for a 5000 mile border? This is the Levees scenario all over again, and reelecting these politicians is telling them this, 9/11, and the levees, are OK with you, they are doing a great job.

Unbelievable!

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 27, 2006 04:59 PM
Comment #184533

kctim-
Civilization is built on the principle that many hands make light work. The government provides a platform from which difficult, costly, and unwieldy projects can be done collectively, rather than depend on an unstable foundation of conflicting private interests.

Look at the Interstate Highway system, and you see an example. Look at the internet to see another example. The Space Program, which saw us to the moon is yet another example.

Should we make everything a government concern? No. There are liabilities to centralization, liabilities to only having one set of people working on a problem. It’s parallelism that makes the market effective: many minds make for a smarter system overall. We call this an emergent behavior in science.

There needs to be a balance between centralized management of behavor, and the allowance of its natural emergence, allowing each to moderate the liabilities of the other.
If big government doesn’t work, go with business. If Big Business is causing problems, bring in Government, however subtly or obviously it is done. If business by itself can’t do it, don’t be afraid to bring in the government. If Government doesn’t have the agility to work it right, privatize it. Look at things in terms of what each system can do. Don’t close your mind on the subject of how man organizes to deal with its problems.

That is my liberalism: freedom from sticking to arrangements that don’t work.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 27, 2006 06:01 PM
Comment #184622

Stephen, your this AND that arguments, give this OR that, people a headache trying to hold two ideas in their head at the same time. This is precisely why as our educational quality drops and more fail to meet democracy’s challenges, so too does our future drop and slide toward failure.

We don’t live in a This OR That world anymore. People have to juggle paradigms in accordance with context. Failure to do so, results in inadequate decision making, policies and actions which fail to address the problems facing these people.

We are moving toward Jesus-Bush Brainwashing schools for our children and calling it superior education for our children and our nation’s future. The writing is on the wall. But, too many can no longer read.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 27, 2006 11:25 PM
Comment #184650

David:
I read your post and watched the video this morning. Then read a few of the posts it generated. I couldn’t post the rest of today after that — too upset and angry.
Our America is going down the drain — and all those floating bodies are the proof.
David, you are right — 100% right.
But all you’ve gotten as a reaction is all this heartless CRAP.
What a disgrace.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 28, 2006 01:03 AM
Comment #184687
Matt- We can’t be personally responsible for everything. We build sea walls, drainage structures, levee systems by means of government. We have to. It would be difficult and unwieldy to depend on private concerns and donations. We also insist on certain building codes, which can make the difference when it comes down to actual damage.
Im not sure you could name a single enterprise handled by government which the private industry, run by people who have profit, their employment, reputation and their lives at stake.

Those “substandard homes” you refer to are often homes of poor Americans who OWN nothing else. By imposing building codes on them, many could no longer afford to own and would be forced into the rent cycle again.

Building ‘codes’, like most regulation, are often the shell game of lobbyists…in this case lobbyists in the construction industry, who opportunistically create artificial barriers to competition. It raises the cost of doing business, but the big boys just pass on the costs.
Therefore, the buyers are also hurt.

Why is it considered bad taste to simply consider that building a city below sea level carries a large RISK FACTOR for which those who CHOOSE to live there should pay for?
Joe Blow living in NYV shouldn’t have to subsidize Cracker Jim’s Louisiana trailer or Surfer Bob’s beachhouse in Florida.

Katrina wasn’t the first hurricane to ruin N.O.
We see this in the Mississippi floods, Florida hurricanes and California earthquakes too.
The continued government bailout of people who build homes in flood, earthquake and hurricane zones provides the obvious incentive to stay in those high-risk areas and therefore, the government is somewhat responsible for the death and destruction.

The government should get out and insist that those who CHOOSE to live in such areas pay for that risk through higher insurance premiums.

While insurance would be expensive, demand for property in those areas would also decline resulting in lower real-estate prices.

Posted by: Matt Goldseth at September 28, 2006 08:49 AM
Comment #184698

Stephen
You are talking govt and business. I am talking about personal responsibility.

“Civilization is built on the principle that many hands make light work.”

The government may provide such a platform but personal responsibility is never a conflict of private interests.

“Should we make everything a government concern? No.”

Then why have we?

I doubt very many people actually believe that “many minds make for a smarter system overall.” The problem comes when those “many minds” are allowed to think for everybody else. This creates dependency which leads to inaction for ones personal self.

“Look at things in terms of what each system can do. Don’t close your mind on the subject of how man organizes to deal with its problems.”

The success of each of those systems depends solely on the individuals need and desire to contribute. If they don’t, the system is overburdened and does not work.
Contributing does not mean send money and let someone else worry about it either. It means preparing oneself and individually doing whats necessary to survive.

“That is my liberalism: freedom from sticking to arrangements that don’t work.”

A society dependent on govt has proven it doesn’t work. Katrina, welfare and other such disasters validate that every day.
Govt dependency is an arrangement that doesn’t work, are you ready to be free from that arrangement?

Posted by: kctim at September 28, 2006 10:00 AM
Comment #184749

The fact is, it is ALL our fault.
Yes, the government is to blame.
WE can blame government, but WE picked that government.
Yes, the government is irresponsible. There is absolutely no doubt about it.

But, WE The People, are irresponsible too, because WE know government is irresponsible, have known it for a long time, and WE keep right on re-electing those very same irresponsible incumbent politicians over and over, giving incumbents a 90% re-election rate, forever securing their cu$hy, coveted seats of incumbent power, for years (and decades).

Some will say WE didn’t choose the government, and it is out of the people’s control. That is false. As long as WE have the right to vote, then WE have the power to vote out irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians.

Some will say that politicians have the cards all stacked in their favor, and that is only partly true, but WE the people let that happen over many years.

So the fact is, WE are ALL responsible.

The solution to this problem is for all of US to do the one simple thing to make it better, to get to the real root of the problems in this nation, and one of those things is to stop lazily pulling the party-lever (i.e. voting straight ticket), stop being seduced into the distracting, petty partisan warfare, and stop re-electing those very same irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians that use and abuse US.

Reject the partisan warfare, and the do-nothing, crooked, FOR-SALE, pandering politicians that fuel it and bribe us with our own money, and start doing the one simple, common-sense, logical, no-brainer, non-partisan, peaceful, inexpensive, safe, and responsible thing that WE voters should have been doing ALL along, always:

  • Stop repeat offenders.

  • Don’t re-elect irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians

WE are ALL culpable, and there will be more Katrinas and more 9/11s, and more government blunders as long as slumbering WE, the voters, keep re-electing (empowering) irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians. Duh!

Now, some Democrats and some Republicans want to use this issue (and many other issues) for political points. That’s disgusting (just more partisan warfare). The real problem is both of them, and WE the voters keep re-electing them. That’s the real truth, and it is time to do the right thing, and re-electing irresponsible incubment politicians is NOT the solution.

Voters that keep doing that are just as irresponsible as the politicians they keep re-electing. That is why, after a year now, no one can list 10, 20, 50, 100, much less 268 (half of 535) persons in Congress that are responsible and accountable (and it is all too easy to show their corruption, pork-barrel, waste, pandering, and “looking the other way”).

If WE can not even name HALF (268), what does that tell you? HELLO! There is a definite correlation between this nation’s pressing problems and the 90% re-election rate. Most (if not all) politicians are irresponsible because WE, the people, programmed them to be that way, by giving them a 90% re-election rate (98% in the House of Representatives).

I will be the first here to admit that I have been seduced into the petty partisan warfare, used to a Republican, and used to buy the nonsense about evil Democrats. But enough is enough. This nation is not well. Things can (and should) be much better. 9/11/2001, Katrina, Iraq, and our many pressing problems, growing in number and severity, opened my eyes. No more pathetic petty partisan bickering. Now, I loathe politicians that fuel it. WE all should, because that is the most clever mechanism ever invented to distract voters from more substantive issues.

If WE really want to help, make a choice in these coming elections, and all elections in the future, to stop re-electing irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians, because well-meaning newcomers to congress will never be able to pass any badly-needed, common-sense, no-brainer reforms as long as they are out-numbered by many, longtime, irresponsible, corrupt, bought-and-paid-for incubment politicians that have amassed vast wealth and power to control the media (90% of elections are won by the candidate with the most money; usually, an incumbent; and, 83% of all federal campaign donations (of $200 or more) come from a tiny 0.1% of the U.S. population) and keep newcomers from ever passing reforms that might even remotely reduce their power, opportunities for self-gain, and the security of their cu$hy, coveted seats of incumbent power.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 28, 2006 01:20 PM
Comment #184956

Matt said: “Joe Blow living in NYV shouldn’t have to subsidize Cracker Jim’s Louisiana trailer or Surfer Bob’s beachhouse in Florida.”

Then you oppose the concept of insurance. About time someone woke up! For that is precisely what insurance is, taking money from risk takers and giving it to those who suffer the consequence of taking the risk, keeping a portion for oneself, of course. Insurance. The Ancient Greek shippers have a lot to answer for inventing the concept of insurance.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 28, 2006 10:03 PM
Comment #184959

KCtim said: “A society dependent on govt has proven it doesn’t work.”

Hmmm…. how do you create a society that has no government to depend upon? Now that’s a stumper!

The converse is true too! A society without government is anarchy, to each his own and everyone else’s if he can get away with it. Lovely concept. Republican concept given the 8000 earmarks in todays 2007 defense spending appropriations bill.

Vote Republican! Vote Anarchy! Down with Government. Up with Free for All if you can get away with it.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 28, 2006 10:08 PM
Comment #184965

KCTIM, your argument runs thus:

Dog bites child. No child should ever have a dog.

Government failed the N.O. people when the levees failed. People should do away with government.

Sorry, the logic just doesn’t hold up. Government is as responisible and accountable as the people hold them to. The problem is not government. The problem is people who keep voting in incumbents who breach government contracts with its people.

9/11 - Breached contract.

Katrina - Breached contract.

National Debt - Breached contract.

Future demise of Soc. Sec. and social safety nets due to national debt. Breached contract.

Early release of violent criminals to make room for non-violent drug users. Breached contract.

Keep voting the same people responsible for these breached contracts back into office, and one should expect ever more and greater breaches of contract between the people and its government.

Remedy. Vote out incumbents, and keep voting them out until contracts start being upheld and made durable and dependable.

It really is that simple.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 28, 2006 10:16 PM
Comment #185064

David
Its not a “stumper” at all, we honor the US Constitution.

I did not say for us to NOT have a govt in which the people could depend on, I said a society dependent on govt does not work.
Very big difference between the two and IF we honored our Constitution, the issue of what govt is responsible for and what we as individuals are responsible for, would not exist.

If you believe that to be my argument, then maybe I have failed in trying to explain it or you are reading it in a way to support your nanny govt views.

“Dog bites child. No child should ever have a dog.”

Wrong.
Dog bites child - parent provide aid/support for their child - parents decide if they wish to keep dog and take preventitive measures to keep such act from happening again.
They do not sit back and wait for someone else or for the govt, to show up and take care of the situation for them.

“Government failed the N.O. people when the levees failed. People should do away with government.”

Wrong.
Govt failed the N.O. people by building a levees system which would only protect from a Cat 3 or lower storm.
The people, which you ignore, failed themselves. They chose to live in an area with risks they were aware of. By doing so, it was up to them to be prepared for their own personal safety and if they had failed to do so, they should have evacuated when told so.
By sitting back, waiting and expecting the govt to do it for them, people died.

“9/11 - Breached contract”
I agree.

Katrina - Breached contract.
Yes it was. The local govt should be voted out for not doing everything they could to build a stronger storm defense.
Did Naygin win?

“National Debt - Breached contract.”
Amen to that.

“Future demise of Soc. Sec. and social safety nets due to national debt. Breached contract.”

Technically, yes. Constitutionally, no.

“Early release of violent criminals to make room for non-violent drug users. Breached contract.”

Your preaching to the choir on this one David.


“Keep voting the same people responsible for these breached contracts back into office, and one should expect ever more and greater breaches of contract between the people and its government.”

VOID sounds nice David, but our nation is too divided for it to work, IMO. I would love to be proven wrong on this.

Something much simpler would be to just get rid of all the un-Constitutional “contracts” and let govt concentrate on what it is supposed to do.

“Remedy. Vote out incumbents, and keep voting them out until contracts start being upheld and made durable and dependable.”

The only “remedy” that will work: Vote out and don’t elect, people who do not wish to honor the Constitution.

It really is that simple.

Posted by: kctim at September 29, 2006 11:17 AM
Comment #185324

… and vote out irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians too, always… . because that is simply what voters were supposed to be doing all along, always.

And, voters will (most likely) do that eventually (provided they don’t lose their right to vote, or an accurate count of the votes, which is no laughing matter with growing voter fraud, and illegal aliens ready to vote in the place of lazy Americans that don’t feel the need to bother, or keep re-electing the very same incumbents that are selling them out).

Why? Because pain and misery is a good motivator. Also, remember the statement: “it’s the economy, stupid” (NOTE: that is not directed at anyone here). When the majority of Americans finally feel enough discontent, get fed-up enough, and start to feel the inevitable pinch from massive debt, borrowing, money-printing, and general fiscal and moral bankruptcy, then the incumbents will find the security of their cu$hy, coveted incumbencies are not quite so secure anymore … as periodically happens, as in 1950, 1958, 1968, 1976, 1980, 1986, and 1992. Unfortunately, voters never follow through, and keep doing it, to really get the corruption out. Voters fail to realize that corruption is always trying to take root somewhere, and spread. Voters fail to stick with it, every election. That is why we keep having to revist the same problems, over and over.

The process is much too slow (for various reasons), and carries a lot of momentum, but it is somewhat, a self-correcting system. However, the path is not rigid or guaranteed, and the longer voters wait to make a correction (to discourage and reduce the ever present and growing corruption), the worse it is on voters themselves, and the more risky it gets.

kctim wrote: The only “remedy” that will work: Vote out and don’t elect, people who do not wish to honor the Constitution. It really is that simple.

Hmmmm … voters can’t easily determine that. If there is ONE thing that voters use as a measuring stick, it is the economy, because that is something voters see and feel daily.

Voters will (most likely) vote based on the health of the economy, than any other reason.

And, the following things are dragging down the economy:

  • median wages have been falling for six years,

  • unaffordable healthcare

  • more people falling into poverty

  • the war in Iraq is dragging down the economy, and most voters are NOT buying the spin that “Iraq is the “front on the war on terror”, or that it is “making us safer”.

  • insidious, ever present, rising inflation, the falling dollar, rampant money-printing and borrowing, increased destabilization of the economy

  • more jobs being outsourced overseas; growing corpocrisy and corporatism; Americans being sold-out

  • rising forclosures for over a year (nation-wide)

  • investor/corporate fraud

  • pension fraud and mismanagement, insolvent pensions, and the PBGC $450 billion in the hole (and more debt heaped on the voters)

  • $70 billion per year in net losses due to illegal aliens burdening schools, prisons, law enforcment, job displacement, hospitals, healthcare, CDC, Medicaid, welfare, voting fraud, etc. (and government that ignores the laws and refuses to enforce existing laws)

  • high energy costs (i.e. electricity costs; high fuel prices, and the rising prices of other things affected)

  • $8.5 trillion National Debt

  • $12.8 trillion Social Security debt

  • looming shortages in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and 77 million baby boomers expection to collect the benefits they have paid taxes into for a lifetime

  • 6 cases per day of eminent domain abuse

As the saying goes: “It’s the economy stupid”.
That is what motivates voters.
Pain and misery.
It is a good teacher.
Too bad we have to keep learning the hard way.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 30, 2006 11:08 AM
Comment #185666
Matt said: “Joe Blow living in NYV shouldn�t have to subsidize Cracker Jim�s Louisiana trailer or Surfer Bob�s beachhouse in Florida.”

Then you oppose the concept of insurance. About time someone woke up! For that is precisely what insurance is, taking money from risk takers and giving it to those who suffer the consequence of taking the risk, keeping a portion for oneself, of course. Insurance. The Ancient Greek shippers have a lot to answer for inventing the concept of insurance.

Wow…that’s certainly an absurd definition of insurance….mainly because it removes the most important issue of personal freedom.

I suspect most people understand the diffeence between insurance—which involves the WILLING participation of those seeking to minimize the VOLATILITY of risk by SHARING the expense.
I live in Florida…Hurricanes are an inherent risk. Statistically speaking, my odds are pretty good, but IF I am hit, the costs are tremendous.
Therefore myself, and thousands of others like me, share that risk by paying a small fee up front.

You really don’t see the difference between this concept and the government’s version of forced confiscation?
The government version doesnt require the risk-takers to take that proportionate burden themselves. It forces ALL citizens…even those who have chosen to avoid that risk completely.


BTW: Isnt there some forum rule that posts should stay on topic….it seems that many of these posts inevitably bear the stamp of the ‘Anti-Incumbent’ party platform.
We get it—-it’s a 3rd party forum.

Posted by: Matt Goldseth at October 2, 2006 08:31 AM
Comment #185695

Matt, I agree, homeowner’s insurance is NOT voluntary if you have any debt on the home (most Americans). Neither is auto insurance. Government mandates these insurances.

I have not paid insurance on my home because I built it myself. But, the instant I seek to take out an equity loan, BANG, no insurance, NO LOAN!

Where’s the personal freedom? For most Americans there isn’t any regarding insurance of these types. Insurance got in bed with politicians a very long time ago, and their progeny now control trillions of dollars of assets.

Choice? Yes, live debt free or self insure (only for the very wealthy).

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 2, 2006 11:07 AM
Comment #185696

kctim, no society can survive without a government. Government is inherent to the species, and begins in the nuclear family with the parents governing the actions and choices of their children. So, let’s put your fallacy to rest shall we?

Second, you said: “Govt failed the N.O. people by building a levees system which would only protect from a Cat 3 or lower storm.”

WRONG! BIG TIME! It wasn’t the winds of the hurricane that caused the levees to fail, it was the water pressure behind them. This could have happened with a CAT 2 storm if days of rain had preceded it.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 2, 2006 11:10 AM
Comment #185737
Matt Goldseth wrote: BTW: Isnt there some forum rule that posts should stay on topic….it seems that many of these posts inevitably bear the stamp of the ‘Anti-Incumbent’ party platform. We get it—-it’s a 3rd party forum.

Matt,

Wrong. Not anti-incumbent. Anti-Irresponsible-Incumbent.

What is wrong with that?

Seriously. Surely, you are not defending irresponsible incumbents, are you?

Also, it is not off-topic when incubments are at the root of the problems being discussed. Almost every thread gets down to root causes.

Sorry, but incumbent politicians have a lot to do with the several topics (such as this one). So, it is very much related to the topic. Likewise with many other threads, because of root causes (often being irresponsible incumbent politicians).

In fact, this entire web-site is about politicians and political parties, and government performance (most of which are incumbents). So, it is hard to not talk about incumbents.

Politics has to do with government.
Government has to do with politicians.
90% are incumbent politicians.

Matt,
Unfortunately, incumbent politicians are often at the root of what goes on in this nation. Especially so for this thread about Katrina and government incompetence. Not just Democrats, and not just Republicans. Both. It’s not even a third party issue. And equally important are the voters that keep re-electing them.

Is your complaint merely because you disagree with the idea of voting out irresponsible incumbents?

BTW, You appear to favor the Libertarian party (even though you don’t really sound very Libertarian to me), but no one is trying to twist the forum rules to make you stop, are they ? People might debate the issue with you, but no one was asking you to refrain from debate, where they?

The fact is, if you observe closely, you will see that the subject of incumbency is only on a small number of all threads, in which incubment politicians or government are related to the topic, and/or the root cause of the probelm being discussed.

Matt,
Haven’t you noticed many people saying we should vote Democrats?
Haven’t you noticed many people saying we should vote Republicans?
Some, like yourself perhaps, are promoting Libertarians.
And some, like me, and many others, are promoting the one simple thing we ALL were supposed to be doing ALL along, always: Don’t re-elect irresponsible incumbent politicians. If more of us did that, we may not have the problems that followed Hurricane Katrina, Rita, 9/11, Iraq, Vietnam, Korea, etc., etc., etc.

Also, if you don’t want to read a post, there is an easy solution for that. Just scroll past it.

At any rate, this thread “The Real Cost of Katrina” and all threads like it (that address government performance, or lack of it), ALL have a great deal to do with incumbent politicians, responsibility, and accountability, and whether voters should keep re-electing them.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 2, 2006 04:32 PM
Post a comment