72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? chat & forums.

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Show ALL Forums

Author

Thread: 72 Hours -- Are You Ready?????

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 92 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/28/2009 6:27:12 AM
"I expect you to either admit that your "all about white people" remark was indeed racist or to refute my factual evidence that it was NOT, in fact, "all about white people." " No, I live here. It is all about white people. Go to the courthouse and check out the deeds and the money and it is all about white people. Google "Brent Warr", the Republican mayor of Gulfport. He got over 200k. He's a multimillionaire. Not a dozen black families got housing grants -- it was all about white people. Our Governor, Republican Haley Barbour saw to it that the traditional ethnic neighborhoods got nothing. We have entire sections of town with 3 and 5 thousand houses missing. All inhabited by asians and blacks. Pretend all you want. I live here. It's all about white people. "The Saudi Prince didn't get any money..the company he is a shareholder in got money." And of course the infusion of 250 billion dollars into the corporation did nothing to affect the value of the shares that he owned. When you want to start name calling, be careful where you throw your stones. Your sir are a poorly educated person of obviously low intelligence. To try to make one believe that the infusion of 250 billion dollars wouldn't affect the value of the shares is the height of arrogance. Perhaps you are that stupid. Few are. And as to your "straw man" argument, you sir brought the straw man on board. You sir tried the straw man approach. I merely shoved him up your ass.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 87 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/26/2009 12:35:37 PM
"Seems like he tried to....but the moron who is Gov. of La. doesn't want to take the money" Louisiana has a new governor since Katrina. The MORON of whom you speak is a republican. He was the hand picked man for the job by George Bush. First rule of holes -- quit digging. You are exposing your republican whores and sluts.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 83 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 7:23:11 PM
"That is what's known as a straw-man argument. You are now attacking the amount of money the Saudi Prince got " You brought the Saude prince up, not me. Can I help it if you injected into the discussion that a Saudi prince got about the same amount of money as the entire city of New Orleans. You expect me to ignore that? The bank bailout of the last 90 days of the Bush administration was all about bailing out predominantly white owned banks. Every bank in my world -- every bank in my sphere -- every bank that I know received bailout funds is white owned. Every one. You want to pretend that that is not true -- go ahead and pretend. But the banking industry in this nation is overwhelmingly white owned. That's a fact. "But, according to the Federal Reserve there were only 31 certified black operations in 2006" Wow, 31 black owned banks in the entire US. Wow, I'm such a racist for pointing out the truth. Yeah fella, you're a piece of work. You bring up the Saudi prince and I shove him down your throat. You want to pretend a bunch of facts to support your arguments. Pretend all you want -- the banking industry is overwhelmingly white owned. They got the 770 billion. All your lies, all your denials won't change the truth. And I'm very sorry about your mother. But she didn't own her house. People don't lose houses to foreclosures that they own. You lose a house to foreclosure because you don't truly own it -- the bank does. Why don't you check and see how much money in bail out funds your mother's bank received. And the greedy **stards still took the house. You're the one who should be angry. They took the money -- and they still kicked her out.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 81 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 5:10:40 PM
"how much money Katrina victims got compared to how much this Saudi Prince" I said nothing about a Saudi prince -- you brought him into the discussion. Don't open the door if you're not prepared to deal with the horses stampeding out.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 80 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 5:07:44 PM
"PS - My white mother lost her home in a foreclosure last year. " No she didn't, she didn't own it to lose. You own it when it's paid for. So she bought a house with someone else's money and then couldn't afford to pay them back. That's a far cry from owning a house -- having paid for it -- and having it destroyed. You don't want to help my people, fine. But don't go complaining that your mother bought a house she couldn't afford and therefore had to let her creditor have its house back. And I didn't complain about the treatment we received after Katrina -- this nation owed us nothing. But when I read in the news that a Saudi Prince received a welfare payment -- and that's what the payments to your banker friends are -- welfare -- equal to what my entire city got -- yes, I did indeed get incensed. I am tired of reading about this disaster and that disaster and the whole thing comes down to people buying houses they could not afford. Wow, what a tragedy.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 77 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 4:54:17 PM
"Citi, who's biggest investor is Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal bin Abdul Aziz al Saud, ROFL. He owns 3.6% of the company himself." Oh wow, that's comforting. 3.6% of 250 billion dollars-- would that be about 10 billion -- the exact same that several hundred thousand families in New Orleans received. That sure gives me a warm fuzzy feeling -- the tax payers of this nation gave the same amount of money to one member of the Saudi royal family as they gave to 200,000 families in New Orleans. The Saudi prince -- and his relationship with the Bush family is what?

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 76 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 4:47:03 PM
"I've only seen you make race an issue" I didn't make race an issue. Race is an issue. It's the elephant in the room. I'm just the one screaming --"There's an elephant in the room!" I didn't put the elephant in the room. It has always been there. You can use the emperor has no clothes metaphor if you like. Same result. I didn't steal the emperor's clothes. I simply refuse to pretend he has some on.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 72 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 4:11:28 PM
"How about the Governer of LA? he is guilt free? the mayor of New Orleans? " The governor or Louisiana was a "she" incidently. And they didn't have the power to have any guilt -- they were democrats and completely ignored by the republican hierarchy. Go to google and type in George Bush and his Katrina flight over NO in airforce 1. Take a look at what he thought of us. He flew over and looked out the window at the devastation. Do you seriously think LA or San Francisco or New York would be treated with such disdain. He did everything short of telling us to eat cake. "And why are you not ****ing about Obama not giving money to Kitrina victims?" I am. I want full status in this nation. "is so little not becasue the majority of the people are black, but that they are poor, and the large amount (obsene amount really) given to wall street and GM is not becasue they are white, but becasue they are rich" It's called economic racism. Your statement is not a defense. It's a confession.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 71 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 3:56:37 PM
"Your implication that all the shareholders of these banks are white would be one. " You want to bet on the numbers? I'd be shocked if ownership weren't 90% white. Come on, give me your estimate.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 67 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 10:00:45 AM
"Locals failed to issue a mandatory evacuation " And please tell me where 2,000,000 people were supposed to go. You act as if America waited for us out there with open arms. We were just fresh carrion upon which to feed. Hotel rooms that has gone for 39.95 the week before were getting 200 bucks. Gasoline was 10 dollars a gallon. And the lines were hours long. Food water -- before the storm, was 5 and 10 times normal market. After the disaster, after America understood the magnitude of the disaster, America responded. But in the 48 hours before the storm -- we were the prey, we were the opportunity. I actually had a merchant in Alabama brag to me, "This storm is the greatest thing to happen to me -- I made a million dollars -- I sold everything -- stuff I've had for years."

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 66 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 9:51:54 AM
"I'm pretty sure the Corp of Engineers did NOT assume responsibility for a force of nature;" Yes they did. The Corps represented to the city and its inhabitants that the levees were built to withstand a force 5 hurricane. The Corps LIED. Do you even understand that? The US made representations to us. We believed them. We relied on them. The representations were lies. We were told we were safe -- by the the United States of America. It was a lie. I want to know what makes it acceptable to lie to the city of New Orleans. Why are we different. Why can you lie to us and then say, "Gee, you sure were fools to believe our lies,"?

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 65 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/25/2009 9:44:11 AM
"Okay... I've compared it. Now what? Do you think someone said "We can't give NOLA too much money cuz we're planning on having a financial meltdown caused by a buncha greed white men."? What's your point? How all this equates "violent racism" is beyond me. It has been my experience that those who holler "racist" are pretty reverse-racist themselves and you've made some racist comments yourself." No, I'm simply mentioning that when the victims were black, very little help was forthcoming. And when the "victims" were white, they couldn't send enough money. And the black people -- they were victims of the worst storm to hit North America in 1000 years. And the white people -- they were "victims" because they lent money to people who could not afford to pay it back. You have a different definition of "victim" when the "victim" is white. And please show me a racist comment I made.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 61 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/22/2009 2:42:41 PM
"I'll be d***ed! You learn something new every day! I didn't know the entire population of NOLA is black. LOL!" The portions of the city most adversely affected happen to be the predominently black neighborhoods. Uptown for the most part stayed dry.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 60 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/22/2009 2:39:28 PM
The violent racism on this site is appalling. The residents of the city of New Orleans have received less than 10 billion dollars for housing, "The Road Home Program". Compare this with 250 billion to the white shareholders and executives of Citifinancial 180 billion to the white shareholders and executives of AIG New Orleans got hit by the worst storm to hit the North American continent in 1000 years. Your white bankers made some bad loans.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 57 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/21/2009 7:11:28 PM
"sure didn't shore up the levees" My we know very little about that of which we write. Any simple internet search will disclose that a) the levees were the responsibility of the US Army Corps of Engineers. b) The corps has admitted that they completely failed in their mission, that they deceived local governments and citizens as to the status of the levees and have admitted that the entire debacle of New Orleans was their fault. c) At the present time there is a trial underway regarding the corps failure and the financial responsibility which the US should bear as a result of this total failure of one of its agencies. But let's not let facts and truth get in the way when we can bash a bunch of black people. The failure of Katrina did not start in New Orleans any more than the failure of 9-11 started in New York. Both disasters have a common origin -- George Bush and his company of incompetents that he brought to Washington with him.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 39 (view)

72 Hours -- Are You Ready????? Posted: 4/11/2009 2:07:47 PM
[You joke about it, but look what happened with Katrina.] What a bunch of nonsense. With the transportation, helicopters, whatever, the USA has the capability of resupplying any spot in the US in no more than 24 hours. The Katrina survivors got no help because we were too busy being preyed upon. In my hometown I paid 750 dollars for a tetanus shot at the local hospital at the same time the hospital was challenging the credentials of medical teams trying to get in and provide them for free. Contrary to what you may have heard, there was food water and gas everywhere -- for a price. There is great opportunity in disaster. That is the lesson of Katrina. Spend your time wisely choosing officials who will do their job and you won't need anything. The stores will be open. Supplies will be plentiful. Elect another slate of republicans and you can expect them to suck your blood.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 264 (view)

Welfare ? Posted: 2/18/2009 5:32:23 PM
Is it just me, or has everyone else noticed that 98% of the guys with big salaries around here work for companies that receive massive govt subsidies and bailouts and go around putting down people who are not so lucky as them to have such a sophisticated system of welfare.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 103 (view)

What is the best way to handle it if a date passes gas? Posted: 2/18/2009 2:36:17 PM
There is a standard way of handling this established by society centuries ago. He is supposed to say, "Excuse me." And you are to reply, "Think nothing of it, I thought it was the elephant."

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 306 (view)

The Toilet seat thing!!! Posted: 2/2/2009 9:57:41 PM
Down. When you flush it sends spray into the air. How disgusting. No one is allowed to use my bathroom a second time if they do not put it down before flushing. And I am a guy.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 28 (view)

Plan B Posted: 2/1/2009 9:28:52 AM
*No. This CAN terminate a pregnancy. This CAN prevent a fertilized egg from being attached.* Iansmom, you seem well schooled in this area, so perhaps you can answer a question that I have and I have never really got an acceptable answer. I live in a heavily religious area, divided about 40% Catholic and 40% Southern Baptist, and 20% among the rest. The general mood of the people here is very strong anti-abortion -- the common belief is that a fertilized egg is a human. And yet I have never been to a funeral for a miscarriage. If a fertilized egg is a human, why does the Catholic Church have no funeral mass for them, and why do the others have no funerals for them?

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 81 (view)

girl who wants to take it slow! Posted: 1/17/2009 7:12:49 PM
This goes along with the "be patient" group. I have learned that windows of opportunity open. And windows of opportunity close. Just as you can jump too early and hit the glass. You can jump too late. There is no magic formula. I am a fisherman. My favorite catch is redfish. When I go fishing I out catch my friends 8 and 10 to one. The key to redfish is when to strike the fish. My friends always want to know, how long do I wait after the fish takes the bait before I strike. Some catch on to the answer. Some never do. The answer pretty much is the same I would give to the op. I don't take things slowly. I am not patient. But I do not strike too early, nor do I strike too late. I strike when the moment is right.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 34 (view)

How would you manage this ongoing relationship? Posted: 11/1/2008 1:55:55 AM
"However, as soon as i see him, I know I still love him ~ however this is the last thing i will be admitting to him!" What? The last thing I will be admitting to him? Rosy, honey, this is a forum for losers. Don't listen to their nonsense. Grab him by the shirt. Tell him you are tired of all of this, that you love him, that you want him, that you are not a child who wishes to play these silly games. Go for it. There is no act two.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 30 (view)

Should I believe this Posted: 10/27/2008 2:46:09 AM
"I would live under a bridge in a cardboard box before I would move in with an ex-lover. At 56 this guy..." Three years ago I would have chuckled at this and moved on to the next post. Live with an ex? You can't be serious? But at age 55 my home washed away. My car and truck washed away. My boats washed away. My art collection and coin collection washed away. And I was left with a little money in the bank and I was not the young firebrand anymore. I don't judge anyone. I've slept in cars. I've slept on floors. Sleep at an ex's house? Can't say I wouldn't do it. And one other thing -- if what happened to me had happened to an ex -- I'd probably give them my bed -- and I'd sleep on the floor.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 138 (view)

Sure-Fire First-Date Killers Posted: 10/5/2008 9:27:40 PM
"I hate it when we stop at a convenience store for a pack of ciggies and he tells me to keep the car running, then comes dashing out waving his gun and jumps back in the car screaming Drive!! Drive!! I mean, I know cigarettes are expensive nowadays, but come on! " Don't try to convince these people you were a first timer baby. You drive like a Steve McQueen chase scene. And I hate it when you make me go back in and get your ticket punched for your coffee club. Next Friday?

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 122 (view)

Sure-Fire First-Date Killers Posted: 10/1/2008 2:45:30 PM
Not sure this is technically a first date deal, but it seems close enough. Met this lady one afternoon. Her friends knew my friends. The group gets to talking fishing, and she asked if I would take her one day. Sure -- tomorrow afternoon is fine. We went. A nice afternoon. Limited. Came in, saw her off. Nothing sexual at all. Seemed like a nice lady -- maybe I'll ask her out some time. The next day when I arrive home after work she is parked at my apartment complex. Moments later a furniture delivery truck drives up. her: "I bought us a new bed. I don't think it would be fair to either of us to be living together and sharing a bed we shared with another." Oh yea. I hope they gave her her money back.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 22 (view)

Do you think I was wrong?? Posted: 9/24/2008 9:07:21 PM
Couldn't get a loan. Needed money for smokes. Tried to borrow from a woman who makes less than he does. She has an infant at home. In spite of that she offers him money for a pack but it wasn't enough, he wanted more. Uhm. Did I miss something?

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 37 (view)

Men that have been single for a long time are looking for mostly intimate encounters! Posted: 9/23/2008 2:03:35 AM
"From my own un-scientific study, I am beginning to believe that the men over 40, that have never been married, or have been single for more than 5 years are looking at women who are older than 40, successful and or independent for intimate encounters only" Abosolute nonsense. I've looked at your profile. I've looked at your picture. Absolute nonsense.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 73 (view)

Joe Biden calls for prosecution of George Bush (maybe) Posted: 9/10/2008 11:07:05 AM
"In 1850, Chief Justice Taney, for the Court, said..." I don't know Sanderick, in that same year, 1850, Chief Justice Taney also wrote the decision in Dred Scott, and if my memory serves me correctly, that one didn't work out so well. Maybe the ending was fine, but getting there was tough.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 1 (view)

Joe Biden calls for prosecution of George Bush (maybe) Posted: 9/4/2008 6:00:07 AM
I picked this up on some lesser known news sources: Sept 3, 2008 Looking to the future but with one eye on the past, Biden also promised that an Obama-Biden government would go through Bush administration data with "a fine-toothed comb" and pursue criminal charges if necessary. "If there has been a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation," he said, "they will be pursued, not out of vengeance, not out of retribution - out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no one, no attorney general, no president, no one is above the law." __________________ Is this legitimate? Has anyone else seen this? What are your thoughts?

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 70 (view)

Gulf Coast(ers), are you ready????? Posted: 9/3/2008 8:15:19 PM
"But I'll tell you upfront that you'll have a tough row to hoe dear." Not really, check it out: Army Corps Is Faulted on New Orleans Levees Panel Says Studies Foresaw Failure, Urges New Scrutiny By Joby Warrick and Peter Whoriskey Washington Post Staff Writers Saturday, March 25, 2006; Page A06 An organization of civil engineers yesterday questioned the soundness of large portions of New Orleans's levee system, warning that the city's federally designed flood walls were not built to standards stringent enough to protect a large city. The group faulted the agency responsible for the levees, the Army Corps of Engineers, for adopting safety standards that were "too close to the margin" to protect human life. The American Society of Civil Engineers said the levees' collapse was predictable and that the Army Corps of Engineers failed to anticipate their breakdown. __________________________________ The most important thing to remember about the drowning of New Orleans is that it wasn't a natural disaster. It was a man-made disaster, created by lousy engineering, misplaced priorities and pork-barrel politics. ..." The Federal Emergency Management Agency (fema) was the scapegoat, but the real culprit was the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which bungled the levees that formed the city's man-made defenses and ravaged the wetlands that once formed its natural defenses. Americans were outraged by the government's response, but they still haven't come to grips with the government's responsibility for the catastrophe. Time Magazine August 13, 2007 ____________________________ And for your journalistic balance --the Corps response (which does not question the engineering criticisms, simply the size of the storm and its effects on the city, and an analysis of the effects of MRGO) WASHINGTON, Aug. 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- TIME magazine's August 13, 2007, cover story, "The Threatening Storm," contains many errors and misrepresentations of facts with respect to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hurricane Katrina, and ongoing efforts to improve hurricane and storm damage reduction for southeast Louisiana. __________________________________ New York Times By JOHN SCHWARTZ Published: July 11, 2007 Asked to explain its failure to protect New Orleans from flooding, the Army Corps of Engineers produced an answer yesterday: Bit by bit over some 50 years, the corps made a series of decisions based largely on dollars, politics and scheduling that inadvertently left the city’s hurricane protection system substantially weaker than it should have been. ___________________________________ Washington Post, New York Times, Time Magazine, American Society of Civil Engineers - and not one word about any levee boards or Louisiana politicians -- total agreement - it was the Corps.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 69 (view)

Gulf Coast(ers), are you ready????? Posted: 9/3/2008 7:03:35 PM
Katrina Report Blames Levees Army Corps Of Engineers: 'We've Had A Catastrophic Failure' NEW ORLEANS, June 1, 2006 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A new report released by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 1, 2006, admits failures in the hurricane protection system during Hurricane Katrina. (AP) (CBS/AP) A contrite U.S. Army Corps of Engineers took responsibility Thursday for the flooding of New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina and said the levees failed because they were built in a disjointed fashion using outdated data. "This is the first time that the Corps has had to stand up and say, `We've had a catastrophic failure,"' Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, the Corps chief, said as the agency issued a 6,000-page-plus report on the disaster on Day 1 of the new hurricane season. Many of the findings and details on floodwall design, storm modeling and soil types have been released in pieces in recent months as the Corps sought to show it was being open about what went wrong. But the final report goes into greater depth. The Corps, Strock said, has undergone a period of intense introspection and is "deeply saddened and enormously troubled by the suffering of so many." Katrina damaged 169 miles of the 350-mile hurricane system that protects New Orleans and was blamed for more than 1,570 deaths in Louisiana alone. Robert Bea, a University of California at Berkeley engineer and Corps critic, called Strock's comments and the report signs of "a leadership in growth." "They're catching up with the 1,000 years of progress of the Dutch," Bea said, referring to the Netherlands' long, and mostly successful, history of battling the North Sea. The much-anticipated report, prepared by the 150-member Interagency Performance Evaluation Task Force, assembled and headed by the Corps, is intended to serve as a road map for engineers as they seek to design and build better levees and floodwalls. Serious work began on New Orleans' hurricane protection system in the 1960s after Hurricane Betsy flooded the city in 1965. But over the decades, funding slackened and many parts of the system were not finished by the time Katrina hit. The result was a disjointed system of levees, inconsistent in quality, materials and design, that left gaps exploited by the storm, the report said. Also, engineers did not take into account the poor soil quality underneath New Orleans, the report said, and failed to account for the sinking of land, which caused some sections to be as much as 2 feet lower than other parts. Four breaches in canals that run through New Orleans were caused by foundation failures that were "not considered in the original design of these structures," the report said. Those breaches caused two-thirds of the city's flooding. Thursday's report urged the Corps to shift its formulaic cost-benefit approach on how it decides what projects are worthwhile. The agency was urged to look at potential environmental, societal and cultural losses, "without reducing everything to one measure such as dollars." The report did not directly address questions raised in other studies regarding the Corps' organizational mindset. Last month, a report by outside engineers said the Corps was dysfunctional and unreliable. That group, led by experts from the University of California at Berkeley, recommended setting up an agency to oversee the Corps' projects nationwide _____________________________________ Let's see. CBS/AP -- a Lt. Gen. making the statement. Pretty much ices it, doesn't it? Check out the paragraph about the "cost-benefit" approach, and "societal and cultural losses". This is a polite way of saying that New Orleans was too poor and black to justify spending a bunch of money getting it right the first time. By the way, this is old news (love that oxymoron), check the date. And I don't see where I attacked anyone. Don't you think the hundreds of thousands of people who virtually had their lives destroyed get tired of hearing about how it is their own fault? The NO politicians may be inept and corrupt -- but that had nothing to do with the levee failures as that wasn't there job. A basic concept of military command: you can delegate all the authority you want -- but the responsibility never moves from the primary obligor. That's the second lesson at officer's school. And yes, the US Army Corps of Engineers is a military component. They understand -- it was their responsibility -- it was their fault. I disagree with you about the duties of the levee boards, I think they had nothing to do with it, but it is all irrelevant now. The Corps has admitted that the levees are their responsibility. There is really nothing to debate -- the US Army Corps of Engineers has admitted the entire fiasco was their fault.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 65 (view)

Gulf Coast(ers), are you ready????? Posted: 9/3/2008 8:33:42 AM
"And, the breach that flooded NO was not due to bad corp planning nor construction but upkeep - why? see #2..." Catabrie, Do we have to keep beating this dead horse. The US Army Corps of Engineers, an entity belonging to the United States of America, has owned up to the responsbility for the levee failures as theirs, all theirs, and no one elses. Design, construction, maintenance -- everything. Complete total failure. Isn't it bad enough that my country has failed this city, has drowned this city, has killed thousands of people, and wrecked the lives of countless others, must we now lie and try to blame the victims for this disaster. I do not know who has begun this urban legend that the city of New Orleans is responsible for the maintenance of the levees there. The USA, through the Corps, has channelized the entire Mississippi River system, capturing all of the water from perhaps 40% of this continent and directing it to a choke point in New Orleans. It is not New Orleans' water, it is our water. We did it. We are responsible for it. And we failed them. Tell me, last year when there were the great floods in Iowa, did you see anyone telling the Iowans it was their own fault because they didn't maintain their levees?

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 78 (view)

Banned for Being Too Good Posted: 8/27/2008 9:58:10 AM
"There you go! Teach them how to whine and quit. Amazing" No, you missed the most important part of my post. The part about letting the children go to another field and play the game in the way that they enjoy it. The way the children enjoy it. Isn't that what this is supposed to be about. Or do you care about the children. You have let this become some power play deal among the parents. Let the children decide who they wish to play with. If they wish to play with the young man they will.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 73 (view)

Banned for Being Too Good Posted: 8/27/2008 8:37:58 AM
Simple solution. Everyone who does not wish to play against this pitcher can quit. He can pitch to whoever is left. The kids who quit can get themselves some balls and bats, find an empty field, and play baseball the way they wish to enjoy it. And if Scott shows up, tell him he's not welcome. Problem solved.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 67 (view)

Banned for Being Too Good Posted: 8/27/2008 6:10:55 AM
"I honestly think the coaches were told to forfeit if this kid was pitching," Maybe not. In the incident involving my child it was the parents who decided to not let their children play. But it matters not how they reach that decision. Once the opposing teams reach agreement that they will not play his team, no one can make them play. So his team will go 20 and 0 and win all the games by forfeit, while the other teams get to play games except when it is their turn to forfeit. But the team with the good pitcher never gets to play. They trade their entire season, never getting to play, for an opportunity to pick up a trophy that shows them undefeated. The point is this, and it seems no one wishes to grasp it -- you can let him pitch all you want -- but you can't make anyone go to the plate and bat. The night that it was my son's turn to play the cheating team we went to another park and played amongst our own team, then went to McDonald's for Happy Meals. Beat the hell out of watching your child get shoved down. And I imagine it would beat the hell out of watching as some kid whizzed fast balls by his head. So send him to the mound. Let him pitch his little heart out. With no one at bat. I'll have my son at at another park, helping him develop his skills in an atmosphere in which I feel he is safe.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 57 (view)

Banned for Being Too Good Posted: 8/26/2008 7:29:25 PM
I believe everyone is missing a very simple point: The issue came to a head when the other kids refusd to play against him. Let's follow this through. So, he shows up, takes the mound, and the other team picks up their equipment and goes home, forfeiting the game. Next game he shows up, takes the mound, and the other team picks up their equipment and goes home, forfeiting the game. Next game -- he shows up, takes the mound, and the other team picks up their equipment and goes home, forfeiting the game. Get it. You can't make the other kids play against him. For whatever reason, it doesn't matter. It takes two teams to play the game. If one team refuses to play then the game is a forfeit. So the choice is, have his team win every game with a forfeit and no body gets to play, or fashion another remedy to the problem. I ran into a similar situation when my son played T-Ball. One of the team coaches taught his players dirty tactics. For instance, when a runner was on base and a ball was hit, he coached his team to push the runners to the ground because in all the chaos of a 7 year olds T-Ball game the umpire couldn't be watching everything all the time. Within a few games into the season the parents of the other teams no longer allowed their children to play against his team. After his team won three or four games by forfeit, with his team never getting to play a game, his team began to fall apart. His players quit. I'll admit, this is a cheating episode and the boy is doing nothing illegal. But the practical effect is the same. You cannot make the other kids play against him, and if the other children's parents hold fast, the same thing will happen to this boys team as happened to the tball team my son had to play against. If this boy is allowed to contiue pitching in this league, how many of this boy's teammates will stay on the team if they figure out that everyone is going to forfeit against them and they will never get to play. You think maybe they will start looking for another team to play for? Perhaps they need to find another solution, but it is clear to me this boy isn't going to get to pitch no matter what the league says because the parents of the other children aren't going to allow their children to bat against him. And keep this in mind. The children on the other teams only have to miss a game everytime it is their turn to play the good pitcher's team. His teamates have to miss every game.

Uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 108 (view)

Controversyer over the confederate flag. Posted: 8/17/2008 11:36:20 AM
"the United States Government could have justly hung every Johnny Reb" Shield, the word is "hanged". I man can be "hung", but it has an entirely different meaning.

Uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 107 (view)

Contraversery over the confederate flag. Posted: 8/17/2008 11:34:34 AM
So much to work with here. First, the Stars and Bars and the Conderate Battle Flag are not the same. The Stars and Bars consists of a circle of stars in a blue field (like the Stars and Stripes), but in lieu of narrow stripes has three broad stripes, red, white and blue, hence the term "bars". The flag was easy to confuse with the Stars and Stripes on the battlefield, so the Confederate Battle Flag, a square flag with the X on it, was designed. Second, the procedural issue of the war was the right of the States to Secede, the so called states rights argument. The substantive issue that drove the controversy was slavery. The Mississippi Secession Resolution contains a reference to Slavery over 30 times in perhaps 300 words. Third, I don't believe there are truly any States Rights in the Constitution, the term in there being only allusory. Prior to 2000 I thought the one great State Right in the Constitution was the right of the several states to choose their representatives to the Electoral College free of Federal interference. That idea was shot down in 2000 in the case of Bush vs. Gore. Incidently, all of the states of the old confederacey voted for Bush. Did you hear any complaints about states rights? I guess it depends on whose ox was gored (like that, "gored"?) Fourth, the issue of treason: I think the US Constitution says something about waging war against the states, or something like that. My Great-great grandfather was a member of a Confederate Army (Army of the Rebellion, as Mr. Lincoln called them). He received a pardon after the war. My family has accepted it greatfully. Waging war. Treason. Pardon. Hmm, I think there's a trout in that milk. So this brings us to the free speech issue. I believe the neanderthal little creature should have the right to wear anything he wants. In the 60s I was denied the privilege of wearing a black arm band to school to protest Vietnam. Just because I am in the majority now doesn't mean I always will be. I cherish my right to wear my black armband. So much so that I am willing to tolerate the little creep wearing the swastika. I will ostracize him. I won't let him in my store. I won't talk to him. I won't hire him. I won't give him water when he's thirsty. I won't give him shelter from the storm. But I won't stop him from wearing it.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 11 (view)

Russia invades Georgia Posted: 8/8/2008 2:33:20 PM
"Let me know when they get to Atlanta...from there they could take I-75 north and I could be in trouble... " Not to worry. The Bulldogs are ranked number one in both the AP and the Coaches Poll. Probably LSU just stirring things up.

Uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 2 (view)

Do husband`s and fathers have constitutional rights like everyone else? Posted: 8/6/2008 8:19:48 AM
"but he cited a long line of cases holding that "clear and convincing evidence" is required in order to take away fundamental rights, such as a parent's right over the care and custody of his children." I'm not even sure that a parent has a constitutional right to the care and custody of his/her children. In the Troxel case out of Washington state several years ago the S.Ct split on that very issue, and were unable to get a majority decision. The court decided the case with a plurality of 4 on the constitutional issue and the 5th vote coming via an opinion that did not reach the constitutional issue. Oddly enough, Chief Justice Rehnquist found there to be a constitutional right to maintain the integrity of one's family, while Justices Thomas and Scalia found none. Unusual for these to split on such a fundamental concept. In the meantime Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice O'Connor (who voted with Rehnquist) have left the Court and have been replaced by a couple of justices who seem more closely alligned with the Thomas/Scalia group, so I'm not sure if there is a fundamental constitutional right to maintain the integrity of one's family. We are setting ourselves up for the new world order -- all children belong to the state. And before you laugh at me, read Troxel.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 99 (view)

Where should my loyalties be? Posted: 8/3/2008 8:52:54 AM
+++I don't care who you are or how you were raised. If a child / kid is smarting off to you in your house I promise you the last thing you're gonna do is just walk off.+++ Wanna bet? Whatever decisions are made in this matter I don't care, but we do have to understand something -- the conduct you described of your girlfriend is a criminal act as you described it. According to your statement, your girlfriend struck a minor in the face with her hand (or fist, I'm not sure which). Though I will admit that our law does allow a significant amount of battering to one's own children, it allows no battering to children not your own. So, do we understand? Your girl friend is a criminal. She beats children. And I'm not sure of your living arrangements, but if I were a child custody judge I would find it none to humorous that you had custody of a teenage daughter and lived with a woman who criminally struck teen age young ladies. If I were the judge, I might be looking for a safe place for your daughter.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 72 (view)

First Date Etiquette Posted: 8/1/2008 7:37:00 AM
"personally it would creep me out and have me running if anyone brought me flowers to a first meeting " The thing I find most "creepy" about this site are the number of people who jump in and claim "creepy" anytime someone displays anything that resembles proper etiquette or just basic human decency. Who are you people? Where were you raised? You find it "creepy" that someone would make a simple gesture of goodwill and bring you a bouquet of flowers? You can buy them at Walmart for 3 bucks. I find you people creepy. And incidently, this might come as a surprise to you, but not everyone on this site is some small minded little nebish who has never been out in the real world. Other people happen to have standards different than yours. You can continue to live your life in your little narrow minded world. Me, I want to live my life in a world where when I make a simple gesture of kindness and courtesy that the receiver of my gift simply smiles and says thank you, and not jump up screaming how creepy I am. Maybe I should put this on my profile, "I don't find it creepy if you have decent manners."

Uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 156 (view)

Why is McCain getting $58,000 a year in disability income? Posted: 7/20/2008 11:56:32 AM
"This is what a 100% disability rating means, it means that you cannot be gainfully employed because you are disabled." OK, I'm calling your hand. Give me the cite-- book and page, Title number, United States Code, article number. Let's see what you've got. Not Social Security or SSI or anything like that -- military retirement pay. Heck, you don't even know why Ted Kennedy needs to drive a volkswagen.

Uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 154 (view)

Why is McCain getting $58,000 a year in disability income? Posted: 7/20/2008 11:18:27 AM
Getmad, Sen. McCain spent 20 years in the US Navy and receives retirement pay. Everyone who spends twenty years in the US Armed Forces gets retirement pay. You need to ask yourself, why do you keep pretending that you don't understand this. We realize you know. No one can be that stupid. You have no credibility. You are doing untold damage to your candidate. Everytime you post your lie you point how silly you and your companions are. You need to get yourself an education. You need to get yourself a real job. You need to start contributing to your society, and maybe, just maybe, 20 years from now someone will take you seriously. Right now you are simply a charicature of the entire Obama movement, and by being such you are mobilizing the real people in this society to make sure you and your zero accomplishment ilk are shut out from doing us any damage. Life works like this: we can have many different opinions, but we have to live with the facts. Your thread is based upon a lie. You can accomplish nothing positive for your agenda when you begin with a lie. Do you even know why Ted Kennedy should drive a volkswagen?

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 174 (view)

How old is too old? Posted: 7/20/2008 9:30:40 AM
My youngest son is 20. He is a delightfully immature college junior who is about to spend his junior year at a university in Berlin. He is at least 5 years away from having the maturity to consider a long term relationship. His thoughts right now are on which school should he attend to receive his PhD, University of Chicago or Wharton. My oldest son is 32. His wife is 20. She has an associates degree and a professional license. She is an emotionally mature young woman who thinks she is ready to have a baby. She might be. Two 20 year old human beings in my life. Both wonderful. But different. Contrary to what so many of the posters on this forum (not just this category, all categories) seem to think, we do not live in a one size fits all world.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 150 (view)

Why is McCain getting $58,000 a year in disability income? Posted: 7/20/2008 9:13:23 AM
"Bullsh1t! You obviously have NO idea what you're talking about and just keep spouting utter nonsense because you either don't know the truth or (more likely) just want to ignore it. McCain gets EXACTLY what any other veteran with his service record and situation gets." Dallas, don't get so upset. This entire thread is based on a lie. You know it. I know it. And you know what -- GetMad knows it. His persistence in telling this lie over and over merely points to the fact that he has no integrity. Come November this will be one of McCain's greatest assets -- the fact that Obama and his minions are simply a bunch of inexperienced buffoons who think their lies will carry them to the White House. Guys like you and me, guys who have served their country in the armed forces, educated themselves, hold professional licenses, held political offices, served on school boards, formed companies, hired employess -- those of us who have driven the American dream need only prevail against the Getmads of Barrack Obama's campaign. Compare him to you-- he's a college drop out, he has zero accomplishments in his life -- nothing. And he is a standard Barrack Obama supporter. He has to offer what he has to offer -- absolutely nothing. So he must resort to lies. The Obama campaign is going to collapse after the Democratic convention -- when we are sure who our opponent is, when we can start threads with truth, something Obama can't campaign on. Stay involved man. We need you for the fight. Don't let this silly little buffoon and his lies get to you. Getmad doesn't even know why Ted Kennedy should drive a volkswagen.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 134 (view)

Why is McCain getting $58,000 a year in disability income? Posted: 7/19/2008 9:29:16 PM
"The guy's getting a sweetheart deal because he's a politician." No he's not. He's getting it because he served in excess of 20 years in the Navy. Everyone who serves over 20 years gets retirement pay. And you know what, I believe you know this -- and you are intentionally lying to the slander the man. And that's why you and Obama are going to lose. You have no integrity. You're dragging your candidate down with your lack of integrity. Keep it up. You're making it easy for us.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 129 (view)

Why is McCain getting $58,000 a year in disability income? Posted: 7/19/2008 1:19:17 PM
So he can lend it to Barrack Obama so he can afford to keep beating his wife. Sen. McCain does not get disability income and Barrack Obama doesn't beat his wife, but it sure sounds ugly when I write it that way doesn't it. Propaganda technics such as this only destroy your credibility.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 119 (view)

Why is McCain getting $58,000 a year in disability income? Posted: 7/18/2008 8:54:18 PM
I knew of Senator McCain's POW status of course, but I did not understand the complete honor and bravery that this man displayed until this thread was started. I am throwing my whole hearted support behind this wonderful patriot based on the things I have learned by reading this. Thank you get mad. You are right, Sen. McCain is the man for the job in Nov.

uptowner

Joined: 2/1/2007

Msg: 467 (view)

18 year old girl marries a 40 year old man? Posted: 7/18/2008 7:36:58 PM
"Will she not miss the oppurtunity of Post Secondary when she becomes older. Will she not feel that she missed out on the horrible dating sceen of your late teens and early 20's." What makes you think that those things were available to her? Maybe the guy provides financial security and safety. You don't know her situation. She may be giving up a wonderful career in the chicken plant to marry someone who can provide her a home and education. And if you think that is horrible, go work in a chicken plant. Too many people on this site live in Utopia. It ain't milk and honey for everyone. Whole bunches are fighting for their lives everyday.

Show ALL Forums