November 8, 2007

"Instead of destroying the president, the ongoing public hostility has only made him stronger."

Spiegel Online:
Bush, the man who has become firmly ensconced as a wartime president, has scored three successes recently. One can either welcome them or feel threatened by them, but to ignore them would be a mistake.

First, there has been noticeable improvement on the Iraqi war front.... Americans are not against war itself, they just don't like losing.

Second, Bush dominates his party's search for a suitable presidential candidate, and he does so without voicing a preference for any of the candidates. Instead, he exerts control by dictating the job description. According to Bush, the right man for the job would not be an economic expert or a seasoned diplomat, but a sheriff, a man with nerves of steel, a man who can lead. Of course, for Bush being a strong leader means, first and foremost, leading the nation into war.

All of the Republican candidates are going to great lengths to display at least a minimum of toughness and boldness, along with a healthy dose of lunacy...

The issues important to the Democrats -- poverty, healthcare reform and the looming climate catastrophe -- pale in comparison to the Iraq war.

The Bush agenda -- wage war! -- is the country's agenda. His goal -- victory! -- sets the tone for the 2008 presidential race. And the mood he has created -- fear of further terrorist attacks -- has taken hold among the majority of voters. For the American public, even a narrow-minded view of reality is still a reality.

ADDED: My son John emails:
"Second, Bush dominates his party's search for a suitable presidential candidate, and he does so without voicing a preference for any of the candidates. Instead, he exerts control by dictating the job description."

Seems to me that this German newspaper has it backwards. Most of the Republican candidates are running as the anti-Bush, though they can't say so explicitly. The big subtext of the Giuliani and Romney campaigns is that it's all about competency. The obvious implication is that we're desperately in need of competency because there's been so little of it in the Bush administration. The only candidate who's really trying to fit Bush's "job description" is Thompson, who doesn't seem to be doing very well.

Also, I can't believe you excerpted this without comment:

"The issues important to the Democrats -- poverty..."

Huh?! Edwards is the only Democratic candidate who has emphasized poverty. The other Democratic candidates notably did not follow his lead. And even Edwards hasn't really talked about it in the last few debates.

173 comments:

Paddy O. said...

So Bush is exerting control by defining the Presidency as requiring a man who can lead? Lead like a guy in charge of enforcement?

Such influence! No more of those follower/passive types generations past kept electing.

Pastafarian said...

God. It's still a year away, and I can not wait until this election is over. Maybe I just have to stay away from all of these (most of them anyway) foaming at the mouth, left and right political blogs. I admit to staying away for a week or so, and I actually did feel better.

Gotta put away the newspapers, turn off FoxNews/CNN et al., and just stop listening for a while. I need some peace in my head.

christopher said...

New CNN poll, today.


Support for the war in Iraq has dropped to 31 percent and the 68 percent who oppose the war is a new record.

Despite the drop in violence in Iraq, only one quarter of Americans believes the U.S. is winning the war. There has been virtually no change in the past month in the number of Americans who believe that things are going badly for the U.S. in the war in Iraq.

The public also opposes U.S. military action against Iran. Sixty-three percent oppose air strikes on Iran, while 73 percent oppose using ground troops as well as air strikes in that country.


Spiegel's obviously one of those Bush sycophants Annie derides all the time.

rhhardin said...

They're wildly wrong on a climate of fear.

It's a climate of they started it, we'll finish it.

That certainty of Bush's, that is supposed to be pig-headedness, is determination. Which is how it comes to look like certainty.

The NYT, not having any of the determination, is baffled.

``Finish it'' means no gangs of jihadists can grow large enough to do serious damage with modern weapons, owing to their relentless pursuit around the world.

MadisonMan said...

One must ask: stronger relative to what? How many Republican Presidential candidates are trying to ride Bush's coattails into office?

SGT Ted said...

I see lots of leftwing projection in the Spiegel article.

Pastafarian said...

See what I mean? Just look at the above posts. Don't you just get tired of being mad all the time?

Bissage said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bissage said...

The link is broken.

Here, this one works.

(And there's not much there to get made about, either.)

Simon said...

Apropos of Chris' post, I thought we'd decided that Chris was another username for Freder, but the posting of material unattributed by link or citation seems more characteristic of LucyOldSon, and the use of the belittling nickname seems reminiscent of AJD. Of course, this assumes that all four of those users are not, in fact, the same person. Still, it's a puzzle, and we might tip a hat to Ben Folds and call it the battle of who could care less.

MadisonMan said...

Bissage, that made me laugh

Bissage said...

Good!

Glad to be of service.

Joseph Hovsep said...

This theory has been advanced before, but didn't turn out so well. See, e.g., 2006 elections. To the extent GOP candidates are modeling themselves after Bush-- which I'm not convinced they are--it may help win the GOP primary but is more likely to hurt the GOP nominee in the geneal election.

Sisyphus said...

I hope this was just some nefarious translation problem: "For the American public, even a narrow-minded view of reality is still a reality."

Unless you are a brain in a vat or a simulation, there is but one reality. Or does Der Spiegel somehow exist in a different universe from ours? It would explain a lot.

Ann Althouse said...

Sorry about the broken link. Fixed. And Bissage, that was funny. I thought christopher's "Spiegel's" made it seem like he really thought it was the ladies' clothing store.

Luckyoldson said...

The only reason this idiot hasn't been impeached (lowest approval rating since Nixon?) is the Republicans control over Congress during the first 6 years of his two terms, rubber-stamping anything he wanted (not a single veto of ANY spending bill while the Republicans were in charge?) the constant "terrorists are coming" drumbeat (Cheney), Americans wanting to support out troops during the Iraqi fiasco, and the Democrats inability (and timidity) to get things done in Congress.

With a one vote majority, Lieberman very best doing his impression of a Republican and the 60 vote threshold on specific agendas, the Democrats can't do squat until they fill more seats...so America is trapped for another year or so.

I've said it before and will say it again: Bush will go down as one of the very worst President in our nation's history...period.

*Okay...pile on.

Luckyoldson said...

Simon,
Quite whining about people with whom you disagree. (This isn't a cheerleading squad.)

It's a BLOG...not your own personal discussion party.

Got something to say about the topic at hand...or anything else for that matter...just say it.

Zeb Quinn said...

24 months ago Bush won re-election with a record-breaking number of votes. It went south on Bush in less than a year after that with the perception that things were going poorly in Iraq and with the MSM's preposterous meme that Bush was personally at fault for Katrina and its aftermath.

But those things are in the rearview mirror and fading, and by November 2008 people may be chanting, "Eight more years!! Eight more years." Not saying they will be, just saying they could be.

The point is that a year may as well be eternity when it comes to presidential politics.

Robert Cook said...

"Americans are not against war itself, they just don't like losing."

I'll agree with this, sadly; we don't object to committing war crimes, but to not pulling them off.

Henry said...

LucyOldSon, he mentioned, not you, Lucky. All the time, it's about you.

Anyway, you said: With a one vote majority, Lieberman very best doing his impression of a Republican and the 60 vote threshold on specific agendas, the Democrats can't do squat until they fill more seats...

This is more or less true. The question is ... why can't the Democrats fill more seats? Why are the scared to do the things that will make them wildly popular?

Sloanasaurus said...

I've said it before and will say it again: Bush will go down as one of the very worst President in our nation's history...period.

Lucky, maybe you should go read some books on history so you can get an understanding about how the world works. You may find out that pre-emptive war might actually have saved a lot of lives in the past.

Bush will go down in history as a great president. As someone who learned from history and acted on it.

Hoosier Daddy said...

The only reason this idiot hasn't been impeached (lowest approval rating since Nixon?)

Lucky, this may come as an utter shock to you but you can’t be impeached for having a low approval rating.

BTW, why pick Nixon? Truman left with the lowest rating of all.

Luckyoldson said...

Zeb Quinn said..."...MSM's preposterous meme that Bush was personally at fault for Katrina and its aftermath."

That's not true. No one "blamed" Bush for the hurricane; they blamed him and his administration for their inept and atrocious handling in providing aid and comfort to the people of New Orleans AFTER the hurricane and flooding. Are you actually implying FEMA did a GOOD job??

"...by November 2008 people may be chanting, Eight more years."

Yeah...that'll happen...when pigs can fly.

Hoosier Daddy said...

New CNN poll, today....

Did anyone ever notice that the left loves to cite polls over American dissaffection with Iraq yet when someone shows them polls showing things like 70% of NYers opposed to giving illegal immigrants driver's licenses or amnesty all of the sudden the hoi polloi don't know what they're talking about.

Luckyoldson said...

Hoosier Daddy said..."Lucky, this may come as an utter shock to you but you can’t be impeached for having a low approval rating."

I never said anything of the sort. I merely provided one aspect of the reasoning behind an impeachment.

Do YOU think Nixon was on the verge of impeachment...because he was highly regarded by the American public?

As for Truman...people here continually try to compare Bush with Harry...right up to the point where someone quotes Truman saying: "the buck stops here"

Then you run like the wind...

Luckyoldson said...

Henry said..."The question is ... why can't the Democrats fill more seats?"

Well...first of all, there has to be an election.

Instead of whining about the Democrats, why not post the high points of the Bush years.

Luckyoldson said...

Sloan says this...and with a straight face?

"Bush will go down in history as a great president. As someone who learned from history and acted on it."

What world are YOU living in??

And what is it about Bush that YOU know...that almost 70% of America doesn't?

Are you implying that the American public is stupid? Naive? Not as informed as yourself? Just doesn't get it?

Oh, wait...I know...it's the MSM that's somehow H-Y-P-N-O-T-I-Z-E-D America. Is that it?

Sloan, you and everybody here knows that you do nothing more than spit out the same right wing drivel everybody here can hear every day from Rush, Sean Ann and the gang.

Try reading a newspaper or...hey, how about a book?

Joe said...

All polling of actual voters in 2006 showed that the Iraq war was not the most important issue. As always, it was the economy and corruption amongst Republicans in congress. (In spite of my deep cynicism about politics, even I was surprised at how quickly the democrats squandered their victory.)

Nothing has really changed.

Bob said...

Lucky, the Truman anology fits well with Bush. Bush has made his decision around Iraq and he has held firm just as Truman did. Bush has changed commanders and war strategy, just as Truman. Both suffered low approval ratings. If Iraq continues to improve and US forces draw down then iraq will be judged a costly success instead of a failure. Bush's assessment by historians will rise if its a success. Especially, if he can keep that economic slowdown away till January 09.

Simon said...

Luckyoldson said...
"Got something to say about the topic at hand...or anything else for that matter...just say it."

Given your frequent spamming of comment threads with off-topic stories that you find of great moment, you're the last person on Earth who could assert some sort of germaneness rule.

jeff said...

How do you say "load of crap" in German?

"Well...first of all, there has to be an election."

Lucky, there was an election in 2002, 2004 and 2006.

While it is possible to impeach a President just because you don't like him, (high crimes and misdemeanors are whatever the house says they are) I don't think that is something you should strive for. There is an election for that office every four years.

Zeb Quinn said...

Are you actually implying FEMA did a GOOD job??

The problem there was woeful if not criminal responses by the local and state governments.

FEMA's job meanwhile is to come in after the fact and spread money around. Which they did, and you're right, to a fault.

Luckyoldson said...

Bob,
If you want to put Bush in the same category as Harry Truman, that's up to you...and if you want to compare Korea to Iraq...well...

Personally, I don't think Bush has the intelligence, fortitude, morality or political moxie of President Truman.

I think George W. Bush has been in over his head from day one...and as we ALL know by now...about 70% of America agrees with ME...NOT...YOU or others here.

*If only a majority of American could be as smart as the locals on this blog...

Duh.

P.S. Jeff, Suck off. The next congressional elections aren't until 2008...and the Democrats did as well as expected in the last one...remember?

Luckyoldson said...

Zeb Quinn said..."The problem there was woeful if not criminal responses by the local and state governments."

Yeah, that's it.

It was the "locals" who screwed things up.

The feds have absolutely nothing to do with "national emergencies" relating to floods, fires, earthquakes, bridges collapsing, etc.

*I wonder why New York "locals" didn't handle everything after 9/11??? Hmmmmmm...

Luckyoldson said...

Simon,
I keep telling you; I don't care what YOU think.

Just keep on sucking up to others here and leave me out of your bullshit.

And please...could you hold off on the W-H-I-N-I-N-G?

My ears are ringing...

Luckyoldson said...

Bob said..."Especially, if he can keep that economic slowdown away till January 09."

Too late...Bob.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I never said anything of the sort. I merely provided one aspect of the reasoning behind an impeachment.

A president's polling has absolutely nothing to do with impeachment.

Do YOU think Nixon was on the verge of impeachment...because he was highly regarded by the American public?

No and if you do then take your own advice and read more.

As for Truman...people here continually try to compare Bush with Harry

Actually I don't think Bush is anything like Truman. All I am doing is pointing out to folks like you who put oh so much stock in opinion polls when citing Bush's low polling is that Truman's was worse. Aside from that, I don't see much similarity.

Tell me, what did Truman's low opinion polls say to you about how the American people perceived his job performance?

Paddy O. said...

Having just lived through a national emergency (did you see the California fires on the news? I saw them from my house), it's absurd to expect the Feds to have the burden, especially the first couple of days.

The Feds step in when the locals exhaust their resources. My firefighter neighbor fought the fires for days straight, was exhausted and by that time firefighters from all over were pouring in. The local sheriffs managed the mandatory evacuations, the local governments arranged all the local immediate reaction.

I know the Feds stepped up after a few days, but can't imagine expecting them to have managed everything on that first day or two. It's absurd. To do so is using a disaster for purely political reasons, and that's obscene.

Our local governments were amazing in their orderly response and emergency management. Those in New Orleans weren't so amazing, and they and others blame whoever is already their political enemy for their scandalous lack of planning.

Simon said...

Lucy:
"The next congressional elections aren't until 2008...and the Democrats did as well as expected in the last one...remember?"

Historically-speaking, they did okay for an opposition party in a President's second midterm election. Okay, but hardly the sort of thing to set the world on fire that would suggest that Bush is particularly unusual.

Hoosier Daddy said...

it's absurd to expect the Feds to have the burden, especially the first couple of days.

It is not absurd if you cherish the belief that the Federal government should be waiting in the wings ready at a moment's notice to swoop in and save the day.

There is an expectation that the government is there to help in disasters but the problem with LOS and others is that the state and local governments in New Orleans completely dropped the ball. Forget about the aftermath, they did absolutely nothing with 3 days head start warning the damn thing was going to hit them. Blanco and School Bus got a complete pass. Go figure.

Revenant said...

According to Bush, the right man for the job would not be an economic expert or a seasoned diplomat, but a sheriff, a man with nerves of steel, a man who can lead.

You can tell a foreigner wrote this article. Few American columnists would be dippy enough to claim that Bush is setting the expectation that the Republican candidate should be "a sheriff, a man with nerves of steel, a man who can lead" rather than a diplomat or a policy wonk. Every successful Republican candidate since World War II has followed that pattern.

Giuliani isn't selling himself as a tough guy because of what Bush wants. He's selling himself as a tough guy because tough guys win elections, especially during a war.

Simon said...

Paddy O. said...
"Our local governments [in the California] were amazing in their orderly response [to the wildfires] and emergency management. Those in New Orleans weren't so amazing, and they and others blame whoever is already their political enemy for their scandalous lack of planning."

To say nothing of the Mississippi coast, even taking into account the greater scale of damage in New Orleans.

Paul Zrimsek said...

Jeff, if my memories of high-school German ring true the word you want would be Scheißenladung. I plan to use it from now on.

Freder Frederson said...

Our local governments [in the California] were amazing in their orderly response [to the wildfires] and emergency management.

That's not even true. San Diego relied heavily on federal crews to do its firefighting because taxpayers in San Diego explicitly rejected paying for improved and expanded fire services. Contrast the over 1500 homes destroyed in San Diego to L.A. county where only a couple dozen were destroyed.

FEMA is a response agency. True they are not first responders, but they they are supposed to be on the ground providing emergency relief (food, water, shelter, medical services) within 72 hours of disaster declaration--which came Sunday morning before the storm in the case of Katrina.

Cedarford said...

Der Spiegel pile of Leftist Euroweenie crap. No one is lining up behind Fearless Leader except "Bush+" Rudy and his Neocon Team. On the other hand, it would be helpful if the Germans grew a pair again...not a big pair...but enough of a set of brass ones that they don't go to Afghanistan and insist on doing anything, anything other than work with NATO nations that are putting their troops in combat with AQ and the Taliban.

Meaning the Germans have conducted themselves cravenly in Afghanistan, as opposed to the French, Aussies, Canadians, Italians, Poles...

*****************
Zeb and Lucky - Zeb Quinn said..."The problem there was woeful if not criminal responses by the local and state governments."

Yeah, that's it.

It was the "locals" who screwed things up.

The feds have absolutely nothing to do with "national emergencies" relating to floods, fires, earthquakes, bridges collapsing, etc.


The main responsibility in disasters is not on the government, but on individuals and community doing their responsibilities and rising to meet the disaster challenge. The Feds had little to do with hurricanes, fires, floods until recent decades.

The approved Media metanarrative was that masses of angry, complaining underclass sitting in their own garbage and demanding someone come to pick up the garbage and get them into a free and nice hotel was all the fault of government. Particularly Bush. The media narrative avoided asking why people living 6 feet below sea level didn't have any plan to help themselves, why they demanded levee money be diverted into more direct forms of welfare goodies for them....why they behaved so poorly.

Feds always arrive many days into a disaster - and taxpayers want the State to be funded and resourced more to pick up briefly for the needs of overwhelmed locals in a disaster - and take care of the few who couldn't take care of themselves. Not furnish every thing demanded by badly behaved and hopelessly dependent 3rd world parasites taking up half a large city in America.

One reason the Cali fires were handled well was communities had substantially ramped up fireproofing homes, doing brush clearance, and pitching in to help. New Orleans had packs of looters, people demanding their three hots and cable TV ASAP - along with diapers, new sneakers, and lapdances.
The State people in Cali had effective leadership, and worked with the Feds, but they weren't saddled with 200,000 parasites effectively sitting on their asses demanding government address their every demand.

The aftermath of Katrina showed that the Coast Guard and Guard were the most effective in rescuing the parasites who wouldn't or couldn't evacuate, and the most effective relief was by CHristian Charities that cared for the parasites but didn't put up with the NOLA trash wrecking quarters. (70% of the temporary housing FEMA provided was made a total loss by the vandalism of New Orleans underclass).

America looked much better in the eyes of other nations seeing how well the California fires were handled - people who wondered if America had devolved into the Congo - watching the Katrina response.

Luckyoldson said...

Paddy,
I never said the feds have the "burden" especially in the first few days.

I happen to live right in the middle of many of the recent fires (spent three days packed up and ready to evacuate) and our locals firefighters did a spectacular job, but the assistance via the feds was certainly appreciated, and it was a hell of a lot better than the people in New Orleans, etc. got from FEMA.

If YOU and others think FEMA did a bang-up job (or even an adequate job) in New Orleans...I think you're out of your minds.

And again...I think a majority of Americans are on MY side of the argument...an NOT yours.

*Does anybody here read newspapers or do you just get up every day and start commenting?

Freder Frederson said...

To say nothing of the Mississippi coast, even taking into account the greater scale of damage in New Orleans.

Are you saying emergency response was better organized on the Mississippi Coast after Katrina? If so, you, as usual, are sadly misinformed and do not know what the hell you are talking about.

Freder Frederson said...

Hey Cedarford,

You forgot to blame the Jews for something in your rant.

Freder Frederson said...

Not furnish every thing demanded by badly behaved and hopelessly dependent 3rd world parasites taking up half a large city in America.

Pray tell Cedarford, who are you calling "3rd world parasites"? I daresay that most of the citizens of New Orleans trapped by Katrina have much deeper roots and can trace their families back further in this country than you can. I bet your dad ditched his SS uniform, stole one of the prisoner's uniforms, and came over as a displaced person shortly after the war (and lied about his Nazi Party membership to get into the country).

Luckyoldson said...

Freder Frederson,
You're full of shit. Can you provide links or articles relating to how many of these "federal crews" were here, compared to the locals. The feds helped out, but the local and state firefighters did 90% of the fire fighting, containment and clean up in the aftermath.

San Diego has problems in the tax department, but in this case most of the blame has to be assigned to homeowners who have brush near their homes, the developers building where they shouldn't and the city municipalities for approving the building permits.

FEMA did a better job here, but compared to how they handled New Orleans...how could they do any worse?

Luckyoldson said...

Cedar,
Are you familiar with the term: National Disaster??

It doesn't sound like you are.

Luckyoldson said...

Cedar,
When you say "parasites"...are you referring t American citizens who live in the disaster areas?

Parasites...??

jeff said...

"P.S. Jeff, Suck off. The next congressional elections aren't until 2008...and the Democrats did as well as expected in the last one...remember?"

Ah, the finally honed logic that is Lucky. You said that the democrats couldn't impeach Bush because there was no election in which they could win the seats to allow them to do so. I point out there were three elections in which they could have. Your blinding rebuttals is that they did last time. Well, then impeach him. I know when the next elections are. Turns out there is another one 2 years after that. WHo knew. This would be a lot more interesting if you kept the goal posts where they are.

jeff said...

"It was the "locals" who screwed things up.

The feds have absolutely nothing to do with "national emergencies" relating to floods, fires, earthquakes, bridges collapsing, etc.

*I wonder why New York "locals" didn't handle everything after 9/11??? Hmmmmmm..."

Your kidding right? You do understand the Feds do not have people and supplies stashed in every neighborhood across the country, right? And who were the first responders in NYC? And could you still drive there or were the roads impassible like in NO?

Freder Frederson said...

LO,

Check this this out.

Luckyoldson said...

Jeff,
You sound like a small child.

When you say; "...the Feds do not have people and supplies stashed in every neighborhood across the country..."

What is it you're trying to communicate? That they have to wait for the call? There are no local agency locations. They're ALL in a building somewhere in Washing, D.C.?

Are you implying the feds have NO responsibility when local governments can't handle the immensity of the situation? That they can wait until the locals cry uncle or are so buried they'll just have to help out? (Floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, drought, disease, attacks, etc?)

Where the fuck do you live that you don't need federal assistance from time to time? (A mental facility perhaps?)

As for your inane election comments, the Democrats won the last round, will win the next round and you can place much of the blame on President George W. Bush and his administration's thoroughly inept and abysmal performance over the past 7+ years.

And once again: a vast majority of Americans agree with ME, Jeff...NOT YOU.

How do YOU explain that?

Paddy O. said...

The problem in New Orleans as opposed to California was that FEMA had not only to do the secondary work but the primary work. They are not first responders, so when the first response gets screwed up FEMA is put into a position where it can't function as it should. Of course, there were problems with the Federal response in the Gulf States, but the problems were started and then continued by utterly incompetent local officials.

It's like someone who over-extended themselves way too far blaming the feds for not bailing them out when the loans default.

Oh, and I don't read the newspapers every morning. Living in an evacuation zone, but not evacuating, I had to field phone calls from countless panicked friends who were watching the news and reading the papers. The media was, without question, inciting a panic with massive misinformation and bad reporting.

If you trust the media you are trusting corporate desire for media frenzy, not learning about what's really happening. The problem is that there really was a disaster, so it's not right to say that nothing was wrong. But it's almost criminal to report significantly more wrong than what is actually happening.

Luckyoldson said...

freder,
I read the same article, and I agree...but I didn't see anything about massive federal fire fighting assets providing assistance...did YOU? (People in California have a real problem with taxation being necessary for services. Prop 13 has created many of the problems over the past decades.)

Oh, and did you read what I posted at 2:30??

"San Diego has problems in the tax department, but in this case most of the blame has to be assigned to homeowners who have brush near their homes, the developers building where they shouldn't and the city municipalities for approving the building permits."

jeff said...

"How do YOU explain that?"

By you shifting the goalposts every single time you get into a corner. We started out talking about impeaching Bush. You said you couldnt because there had been no elections yet where you could get the majority. Now that I poked hole in it, you have decided what we are REALLY talking about is Bush wining the election next year. Or something. Hard to keep track.

"You sound like a small child."

right. I sound like a small child. The guy thinking the feds should descend immediately during a disaster is the voice of reason. The guy thinking that if the locals had done ANYTHING other than throwing up their hands saying woe is me, woe is me and sitting around waiting for said feds is thinking like a child. Had the locals shown a small amount of competency the disaster could have been mitigated. Got it. And I live 100 miles East of Greensburg, Kansas. The night they were wiped out by that tornado, the people living a few miles away were in that town minutes afterwards, pulling people from the rubble. Much the way the Navy, the LA fish and game agency, and tons of assorted private individualizes and companies did with their helicopters minutes after the storm cleared. The NO local government did nothing.

Luckyoldson said...

Jeff says: "You said you couldnt because there had been no elections yet where you could get the majority. "

You're lying, Jeff.

This is exactly what I said: "The only reason this idiot hasn't been impeached (lowest approval rating since Nixon?) is the Republicans control over Congress during the first 6 years of his two terms, rubber-stamping anything he wanted (not a single veto of ANY spending bill while the Republicans were in charge?) the constant "terrorists are coming" drumbeat (Cheney), Americans wanting to support out troops during the Iraqi fiasco, and the Democrats inability (and timidity) to get things done in Congress."

Where is the part where I say anything about there being "no elections yet where you could get the majority"??

You mentioned something about why they don't have more seat, and I said this: "The next congressional elections aren't until 2008...and the Democrats did as well as expected in the last one...remember?"

Jeff, if you want to discuss or argue a point, at least have the guts to tell the truth.

Freder Frederson said...

The problem in New Orleans as opposed to California was that FEMA had not only to do the secondary work but the primary work

Before pontificating about what you think FEMAs role should be, you might want to find out what it's charter says it actually is. Otherwise you just come off as an ignorant fool (of course the picture doesn't help much either).

FEMA, once activated, is supposed to be providing real aid on the ground to real people within 72 hours. They didn't even come close in the case of Katrina.

As for the complete stupidity of trying to compare Katrina to the San Diego fires. Exactly how many houses were destroyed in the fires (300,000 in the case of Katrina)? how long was your power out? (the first neighborhood to get power back in New Orleans--just a three block area--was four weeks after the storm. Power was not fully restored until the middle of February. It was May before all utilities were restored citywide. What was the total area impacted by the fire? 90,000 square miles for Katrina (and a second major hurricane hit Louisiana less than a month later).

Luckyoldson said...

Jeff says: "The guy thinking the feds should descend immediately during a disaster is the voice of reason."

Again, you're lying.

Where did I say that?

But, since you evidently know little if anything about FEMA, educate yourself:

DISASTER. It strikes anytime, anywhere. It takes many forms -- a hurricane, an earthquake, a tornado, a flood, a fire or a hazardous spill, an act of nature or an act of terrorism.

It builds over days or weeks, or hits suddenly, without warning. Every year, millions of Americans face disaster, and its terrifying consequences.

The primary mission of the Federal Emergency Management Agency is to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, by leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation.

Jeff...FOCUS IN ONE THIS: "leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation."

"LEADING AND SUPPORTING THE NATION"...not FOLLOWING AND HOPING FOR THE BEST.

jeff said...

"The only reason this idiot hasn't been impeached (lowest approval rating since Nixon?) is the Republicans control over Congress during the first 6 years of his two terms,"


"Henry said..."The question is ... why can't the Democrats fill more seats?"

Well...first of all, there has to be an election."


You still have a little space over to the right to move those goalposts again.

Luckyoldson said...

Freder,
The fires don't even compare to Katrina.

Maybe 1,500 homes lost, billions in property losses...but nothing like what we still have in New Orleans.

I have a brother-in-law who is a professor at the University of New Orleans and you should hear what he has to say about what we're discussing.

He lost his home, spend months elsewhere, and has little if anything good to say about FEMA or the locals.

Luckyoldson said...

Jeff,
As I said before: You sound like a small child.

Try to organize your thoughts and eliminate the flat out lies...then get back to me.

*Oh, and try reading my responses to your lies.

jeff said...

You need to work on your dictionary. I think if you check "Liar" does not equal "people who disagree with me".
I am starting to think that whole "I used to own a restaurant" thing of yours is crap and am tending back to thinking your either some kid, or someone in a tenured profession that doesn't interact with anyone outside of your own echo chamber.

jeff said...

"Well...first of all, there has to be an election."

So your denying you said that. I think that small child stuff of yours is projection.

Joe said...

Luck, You don't seem to get that FEMA is not a first responder and was never intended to be one.

I find it rather telling that Alabama and Mississippi have been recovering at a much faster rate that New Orleans. When devastating hurricanes hit Florida, the state managed the crisis with great competency.

All this would indicate serious problems with New Orleans and Louisiana government. But this is no mere speculation; New Orleans has long been an extremely corrupt city with highly incompetent leadership.

(Frankly, I think FEMA is too big and tries to do too much. Regardless of the intentions of it's leaders or anyone in government, as a huge federal bureaucracy, it will be slow and inefficient. It's stands as one of the strongest arguments against the feds running just about anything.)

Luckyoldson said...

Joe,
When did I say FEMA was a "first responder?" Like many government agencies, they're supposed to help out when local governments can't handle the situation.

Correct?

FEMA is expected to do what it's charter or mission calls for, as stated here:

The primary mission of the Federal Emergency Management Agency is to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, by leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation.

Where am I wrong?

Luckyoldson said...

Jeff,
Are you daft?

When I say "there has to be an election"...I'm referring to ANOTHER ELECTION.

We just HAD ONE...do you remember?

The Democrats picked up seats, but not enough to control Congress in a meaningful way.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT??

In the NEXT election, I think they'll pick up enough MORE seats to get things they want accomplished...ACCOMPLISHED.

The Republicans controlled Congress for 12 years, Jeff...DID YOU KNOW THAT?? Seven of those years, they rubber-stamped everything Bush wanted.

He VETOED NOTHING during those seven years...no spending bills...NADA. (See: deficit/debt)

Does that compute?

Luckyoldson said...

Joe said...FEMA "...stands as one of the strongest arguments against the feds running just about anything."

As in building interstate highways, medicare, medicaid, veteran's hospitals, justice department, FTC,
FDA, etc.??

EVERYBODY'S got something to say about the federal government, but if you were to eliminate their contributions to our everyday lives...we'd be fucked.

jeff said...

"When I say "there has to be an election"...I'm referring to ANOTHER ELECTION."

YOUR LYING!!!!!!!! Clearly if that was what you were referring to, you would have said ANOTHER. Such a liar. And a baby.

Hey, this is much easier than putting together a coherent argument. Thanks, Lucky. Wait, this doesn't mean I have to start voting democrat does it?

Freder Frederson said...

I find it rather telling that Alabama and Mississippi have been recovering at a much faster rate that New Orleans.

First of all, Alabama was barely touched by Katrina (although it is still recovering from Ivan in 2004). Secondly, have you been down here? What makes you think that Mississippi is recovering at a "much faster rate" than New Orleans. They are sure building their Casinos back faster and if you are a friend of Haley Barber or one of his cronies there is plenty of money to go around. And the federal government has certainly thrown a disproportionate share of money at Mississippi without implementing the kinds of oversight they are imposing on Loiusiana (even though Mississippi politicians are every bit as corrupt, albeit less colorful, as Louisiana ones). But everyone else is running into to the same problems and difficulties those of us in Louisiana.

Luckyoldson said...

Jeff,
Since you think I'm lying about owning specific businesses, restaurants/bars, etc. (Which is really nothing more than a bullshit charge to counter your own lies.)

Let's send Ann or anyone we mutually agree upon, $1,000.00 apiece, and when the dispute is resolved either by:

Me proving it's the truth, or
it becomes apparent that I'm lying...and whoever is right...
gets all the money.

NOW...Put up of shut up.

jeff said...

"We just HAD ONE...do you remember?"

ANOTHER LIE!!!!!!!! WHERE DID I SAY I DIDN'T REMEMBER THE LAST ELECTION??? Why must you lie so much ?

Luckyoldson said...

Jeff,
Where do you want to send the money?

jeff said...

"Jeff,
Since you think I'm lying about owning specific businesses, restaurants/bars, etc. (Which is really nothing more than a bullshit charge to counter your own lies.)"

Where did I say the word "Lying" regarding the ownership of specific businesses? Jesus Lucky. YOUR SUCH A LIAR!!!!! I NEVER SAID THE WORDS YOU LIED ABOUT OWNING A BUSINESS."

Hey, this is kind of fun. And no thinking involved. No wonder you can post all day in here.

Revenant said...

San Diego relied heavily on federal crews to do its firefighting because taxpayers in San Diego explicitly rejected paying for improved and expanded fire services. Contrast the over 1500 homes destroyed in San Diego to L.A. county where only a couple dozen were destroyed.

Wow, what amazing ignorance.

jeff said...

"Jeff,
Where do you want to send the money?"

And just for fun, we can also bet about whether or not I have a job, what kind of place I live in, and what my windows are like. Three things just in the last few days you have implied my being untruthful about. Whoooohooo!! We make the bet $3K on those, since those are three "lies".

Luckyoldson said...

rev,
I never said the feds didn't help, I said that the 90% of the fire fighters were locals.

Now, since we're betting on this and that, would you like to bet on the percentage of federal fire fighters that were here in San Diego, opposed to the local fire fighters?

I say that 9 out of ever 10 fire fighters were from San Diego and San Diego County.

Let's throw $100 into a Neteller account and winner takes all.

Lawgiver said...

“You’re lying,” Lucy mumbled as she reread what she had just typed. “They don’t read, they lie, they act like children, and are full of shit.” she continued. “Why do they keep responding when they know I don’t care about anything they say?” Lucy picked at the sore spot on the back of her hand, drew a little blood and repeated her mantra, “I hate them, I hate them all.” She had created a macro for SUCK OFF and publish. It saved her a few key strokes and she used it again.

From Chapter Sixteen of “Hate Me, Hate You, A Tale of Despair and Loathing in The 21stCentury.)

jeff said...

"I say that 9 out of ever 10 fire fighters were from San Diego and San Diego County."

WHAT??? Where the hell was FEMA? What part of their charter don't you understand?

"The primary mission of the Federal Emergency Management Agency is to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, by leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation."

Why are local firefighters handling this? Where the hell is FEMA?? Re you sure those firefighters aren't LYING???

Or perhaps they are handling this with local responders backed up by FEMA. No wait. Someone MUST be lying.

""LEADING AND SUPPORTING THE NATION"...not FOLLOWING AND HOPING FOR THE BEST."

christopher said...

Annie sez:

But what's worse is pushing the offensive notion that if we don't like her, we're sexist. It's hatred. Demons! Haunting our nation!


As usual, how true. No sexism involved. People only dislike her for rational, principled reasons. Absolutely else involved. Nothing to see here...

Move on....

And in related news, there is no racism in this country either...

Luckyoldson said...

Rev,
Because I want to save you money and face...I just spoke with Mr. Lee Swanson, Director of Public Affairs here in San Diego. He's emailing me over more information later, but if you want...why not give him a call at: 619-533-3780.

He said the latest figures on the fire are as follows:

8,000+ firefighters were involved in the fire fighting...and h knows of NO Federal Fire Fighting Crews that were utilized...with the possible exception of a few Forest Service people that came down from Northern California.

He said that the fire fighters were composed of people from San Diego, San Diego County, and volunteers from neighboring states such as Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico.

I certainly hope this helps.

jeff said...

"As usual, how true. No sexism involved. People only dislike her for rational, principled reasons. Absolutely else involved. Nothing to see here..."

Clearly true. And it then follows that you hate men. How else to explain your issues with GW Bush?

Luckyoldson said...

Jeff,
Read my comment at 4:07.

Oh...where do you want to send the money for our wager?

*And what the fuck are you talking about with the "windows?"

PUT UP OR SHUT UP, JEFF.

christopher said...


Clearly true. And it then follows that you hate men. How else to explain your issues with GW Bush?


Woo -- you sure told me. I'll never recover from that one.

Luckyoldson said...

lawgiver,
That masturbation thing just isn't working out for you, is it.

Call Jeff or Sloan...they my have some ideas for you.

*Oh, and I have to admit...even though it's a bit creepy that someone...thinks about me as much as you do...I want you to know that I'll do anything I can to fulfill any dreams (or fantasies) you may have about me. Post your address and I'll send you some pictures.

P.S. You, too Jeff.

Luckyoldson said...

Chris,
Jeffrey has some "men" problems.

He also lies.

Be careful.

jeff said...

"Woo -- you sure told me. I'll never recover from that one."

Not trying to tell you anything. Just pointing out the absurdity of your logic. It's fairly clear your problems with Bush have nothing to do with his sex. Just as its fairly clear a large portion of the electorate have legitimate problems with Hilary that have nothing to do with her being a woman.

jeff said...

"Jeff,
Read my comment at 4:07.

Oh...where do you want to send the money for our wager?

*And what the fuck are you talking about with the "windows?"

PUT UP OR SHUT UP, JEFF."

I missed the part where you get to dictate the terms of the bet. I suggested three things you have accused me of lying about the last few days to be included in this bet. I am not doing your research to remind you of what you said on them. Do it yourself. And then get back to me. Read my past comments of the last few minutes.
"PUT UP OR SHUT UP," LUCKY!!!!!!!

Extra exclamation points for your benefit.

Revenant said...

Lucky,

I never said the feds didn't help, I said that the 90% of the fire fighters were locals.

Well you finally got me to respond to a post for the first time in who knows how many months. :)

And my answer to you is... why are you responding to me as if I disagreed with you? I've made one comment in this thread, which was to accuse Freder of "amazing ignorance" for blaming the San Diego fires on taxpayer stinginess and claiming the Feds had to bail us out.

I never claimed most of the firefighters here were federal. I know they weren't. I *live* here. People who actually had to pay attention to the fires know that Freder's description of them is unadulterated horseshit.

jeff said...

"awgiver,
That masturbation thing just isn't working out for you, is it.

Call Jeff or Sloan...they my have some ideas for you.

*Oh, and I have to admit...even though it's a bit creepy that someone...thinks about me as much as you do...I want you to know that I'll do anything I can to fulfill any dreams (or fantasies) you may have about me. Post your address and I'll send you some pictures.

P.S. You, too Jeff.


I assume this entire post is to be filed under:
LUCKY-not lying.

Using those special, Lucky-shifting rules of yours.

Chip Ahoy said...

Der Speigel, immer mit die überdarstellung.

Whatever it takes to understand American voters is fine with me. So is an utterly pacifist Germany.

Lawgiver said...

Thanks for responding rev!

ROTFLMA

Reattaching ass then

ROTFLMA again.

Lawgiver said...

I was so tickled I forgot the final O!

ROTFLMAO!

Luckyoldson said...

rev,
I was also involved in the comments regarding the fires and thought your response was to me.

Sorry.

Joe said...

The primary mission of the Federal Emergency Management Agency is to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, by leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation.

Where am I wrong?


You are wrong in assuming that it is the sole provider of these services. You are wrong in placing the bulk of blame on the state of New Orleans on FEMA while ignoring the massive corruption in that city.

As in building interstate highways, medicare, medicaid, veteran's hospitals, justice department, FTC, FDA, etc.??

Thank you for providing a list of some of the most incompetent organizations ever made. They do the UN proud. You left off several other jewels like the Department of Education.

Reducing the size of the federal government by half would do more to advance the economy of this country and improve the well being of its citizens than anything I can think of.

(Do realize that the Federal Government mostly specializes in taking money from individuals and then redistributing in the most inefficient way possible. To believe they are the only ones capable of doing just about anything is absurd. For example, state governments build roads all the time.)

Luckyoldson said...

Chip,
Wie mit jeder.

christopher said...


Not trying to tell you anything. Just pointing out the absurdity of your logic. It's fairly clear your problems with Bush have nothing to do with his sex. Just as its fairly clear a large portion of the electorate have legitimate problems with Hilary that have nothing to do with her being a woman.


The percentage of people who won't vote for Bush because he's a white male is tiny to imperceptible.

The percentage of people who won't vote for Hillary because she's a woman is...according to polls what? Ten, fifteen percent? In an event, not tiny to imperceptible.

Get serious....

Luckyoldson said...

Joe says: "You are wrong in assuming that it is the sole provider of these services. You are wrong in placing the bulk of blame on the state of New Orleans on FEMA while ignoring the massive corruption in that city."

Where did I put the entire blame on FEMA? And where did I say that they are "the sole provider of these services?"

I never said anything of the sort, I only reiterated the opinion of many, and not just those in New Orleans, that FEMA reacted poorly and didn't do a very good job.

Are you saying they did?

Lawgiver said...

Lucy was not a bigot and she hated it whenever anyone accused her of being one. To be a bigot you had to be a republican which she was certainly not. Lucy’s hate was pure and sometimes even focused. Lucy’s hate was like crapping molten lava. It hurt like hell but she had to get it out or she would die. She hated the haters who hated her. She really did, she just hated them.

From Seventeen of “Hate Me, Hate You, A Tale of Despair and Loathing in The 21stCentury.)

rhhardin said...

I liked the Mayor Ray Nagin impersonations that Bernard McGuirk did on Imus, back when you could make fun of people. Bunch of audio clips here .

Joe said...

What makes you think that Mississippi is recovering at a "much faster rate" than New Orleans.

Unless what is being shown on various programs is incorrect--which it very well may be--New Orleans is barely recovering at all. The rate of recovery per dollar spent appears to rank among the worse in modern disaster history. From what I've seen and read, the New Orleans government is as incompetent and corrupt as ever.

Luckyoldson said...

Joe,
What's your point here?

That we need to disband th Federal Government?

That they do no good?

This is just an old bullshit argument and it makes no sense, unless you yourself have decided you'll never utilize any of what is provided.

Here's my suggestion: Quite using interstate highways, never apply for Medicaid or Medicare, if you're a vet, never ask for any assistance, and please...never ask for anything from the FDA...just eat or drink it and hope for the best.

Good Lord...

Luckyoldson said...

lawgiver,
You're back!! (Give the left hand a try)

Where do I send the photos?

Hurry...they're going fast!!

Luckyoldson said...

Jeffrey,
Are you putting up...or shutting up?

Do you have a $1,000?

We can make it $5.00.

Luckyoldson said...

rhhardin said..."...back when you could make fun of people."

"People?"

Right.

Chip Ahoy said...

Just read the comments. Mistake that, forces skippiness. To 80% of the commenters here, or to those few making 80% of the comments; how I'd love to kock your heads together, were I to fail in managing avoiding you altogether.

Luckyoldson said...

Chip Ahoy said..."...were I to fail in managing avoiding you altogether."

That's easy Chipper.

Just don't comment or visit the blog.

Somebody holding a gun to your head? (O.J. maybe?)

Sloanasaurus said...

If it wasn't for Bush and our military and the fallen in Iraq, we would today be facing a very wealthy totalitarian Iraq - headed by Saddam Hussein and funded with a $50 billion per year piggy bank to spend what ever he wants. Such expenses would no doubt include, nuclear weapons, funding Al Qaeda's war against us in Afghanistan, Hamas' war in Palestine, and greatly expanding the arms industry for our two largest "competitors," China and Russia.

Today, Iraq's resources are instead spent in Iraq either fighting our enemies Al Qaeda and Iranian groups, or on services for tyhe Iraqi people. This redirection of funds (and policy) is one of the greatest peace dividends to happen in the last 50 years.

If it wasn't for the war in Iraq, we would today be living in a far more dangerous world.

jeff said...

Ann said:
"But what's worse is pushing the offensive notion that if we don't like her, we're sexist. It's hatred. Demons! Haunting our nation!"

Which means the idea that anyone not liking her is a sexist.

You said:
"As usual, how true. No sexism involved. People only dislike her for rational, principled reasons. Absolutely else involved. Nothing to see here..."

Implying that she is wrong. It is all about the sexism.

Now you say:
"The percentage of people who won't vote for Bush because he's a white male is tiny to imperceptible.

The percentage of people who won't vote for Hillary because she's a woman is...according to polls what? Ten, fifteen percent? In an event, not tiny to imperceptible."

Which is a more or less defensible statement.

But not what you said first. Believe it or not, many things have a shade of gray. A nuance, if you will.

jeff said...

"Jeffrey,
Are you putting up...or shutting up?

Do you have a $1,000?

We can make it $5.00."

Can you not read now? I made my counter offer. Waiting for your reply. Or we could change the original one to taking your insightful comments (the ones calling people idiots, assholes, stupid, uneducated, etc) and present them to an unbiased board and have them vote if they came from a respected business owner, or some little kid hiding in his moms basement.

Back to you.

Luckyoldson said...

Sloanasaurus said..."If it wasn't for Bush and our military and the fallen in Iraq, we would today be facing a very wealthy totalitarian Iraq - headed by Saddam Hussein and funded with a $50 billion per year piggy bank to spend what ever he wants."

Were you on another planet from
April of 1991 - March of 2003?

We lost ZERO American lives in Iraq and spent about 5 billion dollars in that period of time...and Saddam couldn't take a crap without us knowing about it.

Today, since the invasion, we've lost 3,858 American lives, have another 28,385 wounded and have already spent about 750+ Billion in taxpayer dollars, with another 250 Billion in future expenditures.

Sloan, I suggest you call Lawgiver and Jeffrey. They need somebody to talk to. (And see about lending Jeffrey some money.)

Joe said...

Luckyoldson,

No, I clearly said "Reducing the size of the federal government by half would do more...."

Take the department of Education--sending tax dollars to Washington only to have Washington send them back with all sorts of conditions attached is both stupid and extremely inefficient.

(And why should the residents of Vermont help pay for the light rail system in my state's capital city?)

This doesn't mean the federal government isn't required, especially in cases of acting as mediator between the states. I'm not an anarchist. Furthermore, the federal government has ensured it's the only player in many fields. If I could have, I would have opted out of Social Security and put all that money in my 401k. I would have preferred keeping my Medicare payments as well. But I can't, so I'll take advantage of those programs THAT I HELPED PAY FOR.

In the meantime, I'll still champion for smaller government at all levels, returning many responsibilities to the states (and cities) and for the privatization of many government programs.

Luckyoldson said...

Jeffrey,
I understand.

You got caught insinuating that I was lying about my businesses.

You don't have the dough.

And now you're trying to weasel out.

Okay, okay...I'll let you off the hook...but from now on, if you want to talk the talk...walk the walk.

Joe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe said...

By the way, Lucky, since you own your own business, doesn't it annoy the hell out of you to make your [federal] payroll deposits knowing they'll give a very low return on the dollar? You pay a substantial amount to Medicare even though you don't see a dime of it. Doesn't it annoy you to buy health insurance for other people?

jeff said...

I assume that means your are defaulting on the bet? Wait, silly me. Your using the LUCKY argument technique. You pretend that you dictate the circumstances and pretend not to see any counter offer. Then declare victory. Pretty much like every other argument you have in here. You should trademark it before the elections. Get a nice chuck of change from the DNC in exchange for using it. In the spirit of reconciliation I offer you this:

I officially proclaim Lucky was NOT lying when he said he thinks about other men's masturbation technique and that he is willing to whore himself out via photographs doing pretty much whatever for free.

There. Are you happy now? I fully believe you when you said that. However, please stop thinking of me like that and I would appreciate it if you could keep those pictures to yourself. Think of the children.

Wait! Earlier you said I was a child, and now you want to send dirty pictures of yourself to me. Man, that is creepy. Seek help. Forget what I said about thinking of the children. Stop thinking about the children.

Sloanasaurus said...

We lost ZERO American lives in Iraq and spent about 5 billion dollars in that period of time...and Saddam couldn't take a crap without us knowing about it.

Heh... we also spent nothing fighting Hitler during the 1930s. Thats the point.

You forget your history (as usual). If you recall, the sanctions on Saddam were about to collapse. The only one who still supported the sanctions as of 2002 was Britain. France, Russia, and China wanted Saddam's money and many in the UN had been bribed by Saddam. Also, during the 1990s, oil was selling at $15 per barrel in contrast to $90 today.

Certainly, if Saddam hadn't blundered and actually let us interview his scientists without minders, and we still found no weapons, the sanctions would have for sure collapsed, and we would be in a world with Saddam and his $50 billion per year piggy jar. When the "crisis" prior to the war had advanced to the point where Saddam needed to either comply completely with inspections or defy them, the only outcome was going to be a collapse of the sanctions or war. If Saddam was found to be "clean" we would not have been able to sustain the sanctions at the UN.

Saddam had to be removed and Bush did a brilliant job getting the Congress to support it and getting it done.

jeff said...

Joe, there is no way for you to know this, but Lucky has already stated that at his restaurant, he pays a living wage to everyone AND insurance benefits. If anything, at this magical restaurant, he feels he isn't paying enough for Medicare. Or he is a little kid in his mom's basement. Or has tenure at some university somewhere and that's the way he WOULD run his restaurant. One of those.

Luckyoldson said...

Joe says: "In the meantime, I'll still champion for smaller government at all levels, returning many responsibilities to the states (and cities) and for the privatization of many government programs."

I'm with you, but you might want to fire off a letter to President Bush.

He said the same thing, just as our Governor here in California...and look at what it's gotten us.

*In California, we have more government and more debt than we had with Davis...and he was run out of town...for spending too much and running up the debt.

jeff said...

Well, it's been fun playing "pin the tail on the Jackass" but home awaits. We have come to the end of another business day.

Luckyoldson said...

Sloan says: "Heh... we also spent nothing fighting Hitler during the 1930s. Thats the point."

Here we go...again.

Comparing Saddam Hussein to Adolph Hitler.

Good Lord...

Luckyoldson said...

Jeffrey,
Talk is cheap.

Luckyoldson said...

Joe,
In my business (construction), it's the Workman's Comp and Liability insurance that's killing us.

I think it's the same with many "service" industry businesses. The only way to cut expenses is to lay off personnel, but it's personnel that provides the service.

*When I had my club and restaurant/bars, my partner and I used to always try to figure out a way to cut back on personnel, but then we always realized that if we did...WE would have to do the work.

That was a non-starter.

Luckyoldson said...

freder:

Thought you might find this interesting:

There were 8,315 fire personnel on the Harris, Rice, Witch, Poomacha,
Ammo and smaller related fires in San Diego County.

Of that number, CAL FIRE (the State Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection) estimates there were "a couple thousand" from outside the
county. This includes CAL FIRE personnel from elsewhere in the state, and firefighters from other fire department inside and outside of California. CAL FIRE is still tabulating that exact number.

There were NO federal firefighters in San Diego County.

The principal advantage to the City of San Diego Fire-Rescue Department
from the federal disaster declaration is that the City can ask the federal government to pick up the tab.

Regards,
Lee Swanson
Public Information Officer
San Diego Fire-Rescue Department
1.619.533.3780

Sloanasaurus said...

Comparing Saddam Hussein to Adolph Hitler.


Nice response Lucky. Like always, you have no reasonable response to my other point. You never have. You continue to deny the truth that we were right to take out Saddam.

steve simels said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John said...

Lucky- Have you ever been to San Diego? Blaming the fires on lack of brush clearing and developers? Most of the neighborhoods that burnt down were older. All the new developments lost exactly 0 homes. 0. As in your batting average. The were designed as "sanctuaries" that would not have to be evacuated, and guess what; it worked. As for blaming homeowners, that is equally pathetic. Defensible space has been huge political issue especially in north and east county. Guess which side the left is on. You Fail. Again.

Luckyoldson said...

Johnasks: "Lucky- Have you ever been to San Diego?"

Uh, yeah...I LIVE in San Diego.

Oh, and you're a complete fucking moron.

Many of the homes that burned were built within the last 1-5 years. My business deals with these people every day. And right now we're doing work on homes that weren't built in what you call "sanctuaries"...whatever that means.

We lost 1,500 homes, asshole...and if you think they were all "older"...maybe you should visit the area and talk to the homeowners.

Are you familiar with:

Rancho Santa Fe
Fairbanks Ranch
Rancho Bernardo
Poway
Scripps Ranch
Escondido
Carlsbad
Encinitas
Fallbrook
Bonsall

I didn't think so.

Luckyoldson said...

Sloan: "...we also spent nothing fighting Hitler during the 1930s. Thats the point."

Saddam...Hitler.

Duh.

Luckyoldson said...

Anybody watch Jim Lehrer tonight.

Waterboarding.

Luckyoldson said...

Anybody watch Jim Lehrer tonight.

Iraq.

Revenant said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sloanasaurus said...

What's odd Lucky is that you don't think Saddam is comparable at all to Hitler?? I guess you don't believe any of those stories about Saddam being a cruel dictator.

You are nearly worthless.

Maybe you should read a book.

John said...

I should of known better than to engage you, Lucky. I was raised in San Diego, I live in Scripps Ranch. We lost 317 houses in my neighborhood alone in the last fire. Where do you actually live? Let me guess, in a Condo in either the Gaslamp or Hillcrest. Ever seen the HUGE billboard when you drive to Ramona asking for the right to defensible space? Old neighborhoods and individual custom homes burnt. Whats right in the middle of all those communities you named? Thats right the biggest new development in San Diego, 4S Ranch. Practically untouched. You know it. Not surprising you resort to lies and goalpost moving. The single biggest reason We lost so many homes is crappy politics. Nice personal attack also, you are quite the piece of work. Why Althouse puts up with you, I have no idea.

christopher said...

Sloanasaurus said...

What's odd Lucky is that you don't think Saddam is comparable at all to Hitler??


Oh, absolutely. Saddam was especially comparable to Hitler in that he definitely had a genuine shot at conquering the world. Hell, the fearsome Iraqi war machine could have overrun the planet at any moment. In fact, if it hadn't been for George Bush's steely resolve, we'd all be speaking Iraqi by now...

You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Lucky. Go read a book....

John said...

...homeowners who have brush near their homes, the developers building where they shouldn't...

What a joke. To bad you are not capable of shame. Watching a 300 foot high wall of flame come off miramar and into my neighborhood at 25+ miles an hour was the scariest thing I ever saw. You name one modern development in ANY of those communities that burnt down.

Pathetic.

reader_iam said...

Well, now, Lucky's a contractor. So he contracts. By definition, assuming he's successful, or even functional, he also has skills in either developing or dealing with developers (or both). So he develops. Etc.

Which leads to a question or two:

Is his particular wielding of "I'm so pure, and you're just shit" politics a product of denial, cynicism, expiation or some personalized weird brew of his own?

And if he's doing his thang in a way that transcends All Of That, how come it's never, never, never reflected in the particulars of how he posts?

Only askin' ... .

John said...

Lucky Doesn't even know what A sanctuary is yet he feels smart enough to run his mouth about the subject. He must be A blast at dinner parties. Took me less than 2 minutes to dig up this. Bonus is it comes from the left's favorite newspaper.

Care to eat crow yet? I Didn't think so. A shameless troll you are. Totally incapable of honest debate. The minute Althouse bans you, things around here will improve significantly.

Luckyoldson said...

Sloanasaurus said..."What's odd Lucky is that you don't think Saddam is comparable at all to Hitler??"

Isn't it though.

John said...

HAH! Look at Lucky. I guess he had to "MoveOn".

reader_iam said...

Damn! Haven't checked in a while, but it appears it's still (still!!) impossible to link to--via YouTube, lyrics-"whatever," etc. etc.--to what I'm listening to in honor of Lucky, and what I would love to post a link to in some form or another:

"I See Thru You" by the Psychodots.

Can anyone help provide the missing link (so to speak)?

Luckyoldson said...

John,
Again...you're a fucking moron.

Here's what you sai dyour original assault:

"Lucky- Have you ever been to San Diego? Blaming the fires on lack of brush clearing and developers? Most of the neighborhoods that burnt down were older. All the new developments lost exactly 0 homes."

John, the "new developments" you mention include "five neighborhoods"...in ALL of San Diego and San Diego County.

Not an area that includes about 3,000,000 or more people, living in hundreds and hundreds of citie's and communities.

FIVE NEIGHBORHOODS.

Here's how the article you mention concludes its reporting:

"Still, after not a single home was lost last week in the shelter-in-place homes in the five neighborhoods — though the flames destroyed other swaths of Rancho Santa Fe and surrounding areas — the strategy was hailed as a success in some quarters.

Others said that because the residents were ordered to evacuate anyway, the concept remains untested in saving lives."

“It’s too soon to say whether such an approach would work here, its success is going to depend on a location’s fire weather patterns, the local home construction and siting, and whether culturally and legally we could make this kind of leap.”

You're an idiot.

John said...

Name a new neighborhood that burnt down. The reason the article talks about those 5 neighborhoods is that is the new development in north county. Not custom homes, but development. remember when you blamed developers? Name a new neighborhood that burnt down. Oh, and getting called "a fucking moron" by you? Badge of honor.

Pathetic little troll.

John said...

Just one. Name it.

John said...

1500 houses. A firestorm of epic proportions. By you own admission, home to 3mil. Name one new neighborhood that burnt down.

Remember Lucky blames developers and homeowners, but when I call him on his bullshit, he claims I launched an "assault". Not one word about defensible space either.

Troll.

Luckyoldson said...

John,
Your article refers to an 5 custom built neighborhoods experimenting with a fire prevention blueprint. It also stated that "flames destroyed other swaths of Rancho Santa Fe and surrounding areas..." This would include Rancho Bernardo, Poway, Scripps, Encinitas, etc. and if you don't think homes in these cities and communities aren't "new" you're even dumber than I thought already. And believe me, the people who lost everything would consider your comments hard to comprehend and hurtful.
(I'm bidding work on 3 homes, side by side, that were just completed less that 8 months ago.)

There are literally hundreds of communities, thousands of homes and at least 1,500 that burned throughout California, and using 5 experimental neighborhoods to lessen the impact of our loss is idiotic.

Much like yourself.

Luckyoldson said...

John,
Suck my dick.

Luckyoldson said...

Fire losses at $1B in San Diego County

Losses from the devastating Southern California wildfires are pegged at $1 billion in San Diego County alone, and the tally will only go higher as other areas add up the costs to rebuild.

About 1,500 homes and more than 410,000 acres have been scorched across seven Southern California counties plagued by the wind-driven fires.

Ron Lane, director of emergency services in San Diego County, the hardest hit area, said damage in that region alone has reached $1 billion. At least 1,200 homes had been destroyed in the county.

John said...

You have to be kidding. Escondido and RB are the oldest communities in North County. Ancient by SoCal standards. Wood siding, cedar shingles, no sprinklers. Now you have resorted to just making shit up.

Name one new neighborhood that burnt down.

When we watched Scripps Burn down in the cedar fire, on thing became painfully obvious. Wildfires burn hot, but houses burn even hotter. Look at the damage patterns. A few houses with shake roofs go up, and within hours, the whole street burns down, modern or not.

What neighborhood do you live in, Troll?

reader_iam said...

Right on cue.

It doesn't say anywhere close to all (even LuckyOldSon, like most people, is more complicated than that);--of course not: but it does speak volumes.

It speaks volumes, that choice of response. Oh, yes, it does.

(Personally, I'm trying to decide whether he's also a Moaner, again in the Psychodots sense, to which, again, it appears I can't link.)

John said...

Before I sexually gratify you, name a new neighborhood that burnt down.

Luckyoldson said...

John,
Why no profile?

Gutless.

Talk is cheap.

reader_iam said...

Oops, sorry: I thought John might be done (and also LuckyOldSon). So I'll now bow out altogether tonight (except for maybe watching for another half-hour or so), except to say that my 11:45 comment ("Right on Cue. ...") was in direct response to:

John,
Suck my dick.


(An altogether typical, considered, high-ground, superior luckyoldson response--and we are given to understand that luckyoldson responses are all those things, because ... well ... because ... well, because, he said so.)

Have it it, guys.

John said...

Reader, sorry for the threadjack. I know the rule: Don't feed the trolls. I made the mistake of taking his excrement seriously.

Like I said, The Cedar fire was the scariest thing I lived through. Stupid emotional responses.

reader_iam said...

No, no, no!

I think you should continue.

Threadjacks are what threadjacks do. And I think there are at least some of us who would like to see what this one can do, as it goes where it goes.

...

Luckyoldson said...

"Ignoring nature, we build our way into fire's path," Critic's Notebook, Oct. 30

Developers ignore common sense and build in canyons and on mountainsides where fire is sure to come. One aspect of the fires not covered well is the terrible toll on wildlife. Possums, skunks, deer, snakes, raccoons, birds and mountain lions perish when these wildfires rage on. All I read about is the terrible toll on property -- property that by some accounts should never have been built.

Bravo to Christopher Hawthorne for calling out modern wildfire disasters as mostly the creations of home builders, aside from the psychotics who start the fires. Further, money was only alluded to -- the other "fuel" that drives the emphasis on high-end housing projects, the campaign contributions that permit those housing projects in wild lands to be approved, the agreements that indemnify the developers once they've built, and the insurance benefits that push rebuilding on the burned, established lot.

And the insanity of allowing houses to be built in brush-covered hills -- not just because of fire hazards but because of the day-to-day costs of delivering water, electricity and gas. Ironically, local governments are often sued for not granting building licenses and then for damage caused by landslides and fire.

Wealthy developers seem to have no problems getting licenses to build houses in these areas. What would brush clearance cost compared to firefighting and lost homes?

reader_iam said...

Lucky's edge has been shaky here. I wonder why?

Luckyoldson said...

Reader,
John's an ignorant, uninformed prick. Why you would agree with his premise is rather strange, but...

...it's nice to see he has at lease one friend.

reader_iam said...

I don't know enough to agree with his premise either way, in terms of the premise to which you're referring.

My interest lies elsewhere.

reader_iam said...

My premises with regard to you are homegrown--that is, by you: the produce you put out for sale. If you need a clue as to what I'm referring to, in general terms, read--really read! (Reading's not just for books, you know, though I myself confess a weakness for them.)--my comments of late this evening in this thread.

Luckyoldson said...

I think you and John make a cute and evidently equally uninformed couple.

Enjoy.

Vous êtes manière à prétentieux pour mon goût.

reader_iam said...

Same old, same old. Apparently, and regrettably, you ARE that much of a fool.

Onward ho, and so it goes.

Joan said...

Vous êtes manière à prétentieux pour mon goût.

You are manner to the pretentious for my taste?

My French is way rusty but I think this is what you were going for: Vous avez des manières trop prétentieux de mon gout.

I will, of course, not refrain from pointing out the deliciousness of accusing someone else of being too pretentious... in French! Really, really lovely, unfortunately marred by the bad grammar. The être/avoir and à/trop mixups were particularly egregious. Nice work with all the foreign characters, though.

Revenant said...

Name one new neighborhood that burnt down.

I don't know if any new neighborhoods burned down, but I'm pretty sure some new developments in OLD neighborhoods did. There are plenty of new developments in Jamul, Ramona, etc. All of those areas were hit hard by the fires.

Sloanasaurus said...

Lucky, as people know and discover here, it is difficult to debate you because you have no analytical skills or ability to reason. You are just a mouthpiece for Moveon.

Luckyoldson said...

rev,
John is a dolt.

He thinks that because 5 experimental neighborhoods came through the fire okay, NO "new" neighborhoods burned.

I live in San Diego, travel throughout the communities extensively because of the business I'm in, and there are plenty of homes that were built in the past 3-6 months that were burned to the ground. (I just saw 3, side by side, two days ago that were built within the last six months, all 2-3 million dollar homes in newly developed areas of Poway, Ca)

He hinges his inane argument on "entire new neighborhoods" burning down.

Luckyoldson said...

Sloan,
Anybody who has the audacity to compare Saddam Hussein with Adolph Hitler isn't worth the time of day, and exposes themselves as less than informed.

It's more than insulting to the families of th 6 million Jews who died.

You should be ashamed.

Luckyoldson said...

Joan,
I find Readers comments to be pretentious and in general, unintelligible.

But I appreciate you throwing in your two cents worth...for whatever reason.

Ayez un beau jour.

reader_iam said...

Why, thank you LuckyOldSon.

Read any good books lately?

Luckyoldson said...

Reader,
Yeah.

Just read Ken Bruen's "Her Last Call To Louis MacNeice" (absolutely love the guy) and starting in on "Atonement."