Relief Request Delayed for Hours

Meanwhile, back at Crawford Ranch...

if I hear ONE MORE TIME "Who could have predicted the levees would fail?"

Ahem...Blockhead. IT IS YOUR JOB TO KNOW. And, those whose job it is to inform you of this possibility did so.

Instead of being so gung ho to cover yourself in the false glory of a "WAR TIME" president and liken yourself to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan (who was not a war time president--don't care how you cut that one), get your HEAD out of your ASS and do what we pay you to do and what those who elected you, elected you to do. GOVERN.

Look it up. I know, it's a long word.

And no fair asking Daddy to tell you the definition either.

WORLD VIEWS: The world press weighs in on Katrina and its aftermath
- Edward M. Gomez, special to SF Gate
Tuesday, September 7, 2005

Don't think the rest of the world -- not just stunned Americans and even some conservative American reporters and commentators who have long served as George W. Bush's loyal mouthpieces -- failed to notice the president's inadequate response to Hurricane Katrina's devastation. What foreign observers witnessed from afar, with a combination of shock and awe: "sheer, maddening incompetence, from both the (notoriously corrupt) state authorities [in Louisiana and neighboring states] and from Washington." (Daily Mail)

In Italy, Corriere della Sera scolded the "world's greatest country," calling the United States "a land that can no longer get it together to work together."

"Superpower or Third World?" a headline in the Spanish daily Noticias de Álava declared, in response to Bush and his highest-level emergency-relief officials' inefficiency and seeming indifference to the plight of the tens of thousands who were left homeless or injured by Katrina.

"The scenes are reminiscent of a drought-stricken African state where starving refugees piteously cry for help," the British tabloid the Daily Mail stated, "yet this is a great city in the richest and most powerful nation on earth" in which "[b]odies lie where they drop ... marauding, armed gangs loot, rape and kill ... relief workers are shot at [and] people die for want of drinking water."

"The worst of the Third World," The Guardian echoed, had "come to the Big Easy."

Reporting for The Scotsman from New Orleans, Jacqui Goddard described a "plethora of grim tales of disaster," including one female hospital manager's decision to euthanize a 380-pound man who was stranded on an upper floor of her flooded building.

Katrina has put "America to the test," Le Figaro commentator Pierre Rousselin observed. He added, more matter-of-factly than optimistically, "Of course, America will bounce back." But he also wondered why Bush had taken so long to show up in person in the storm-ravaged zone and what his administration's tardy, seemingly unorganized response to the catastrophe may say about what the United States has become. "At the time of [last December's South Asian] tsunami, the American army was the fastest to mount the biggest operation in Southeast Asia since the Vietnam War. Is powerful America more sure of itself [when it acts] beyond its borders?"

"The devastation of New Orleans was perfectly predictable," columnist Margaret Wente wrote in Canada's Globe and Mail (registration required), sounding another theme that foreign observers were quick to note. "Everyone in authority knew [New Orleans] was a bull's-eye, and everyone knew what the consequences of a major hurricane would be."

Why did federal authorities under Bush's command "seem to be so little prepared in the face of a hurricane, the strength of which was known 48 hours in advance?" Le Monde asked. "Why did the [Bush] administration fail its first great [national-]security test since the September 11, 2001, attacks?"

The answer, foreign news media did not hesitate to point out, even if Bush and his handlers would never allow a member of his government to admit it, is that, with "4,000 members of the Louisiana National Guard and no fewer than 12,000 guardsmen from neighboring Mississippi serving in Iraq" (The Scotsman), the Republican president's "ill-fated excursion into the Iraq debacle left his own country exposed." (Daily Mail)

With the National Guard's absence from the hurricane-prone region it is meant to serve, "[t]he words 'homeland security' now have a terribly hollow ring in the anarchic [disaster zone]." (The Guardian)

"Is it well-advised to spend hundreds of millions" -- make that billions -- "of dollars to make war in Iraq when America is incapable of protecting its own citizens?" a Le Monde editorial asked.

The Scotsman noted that even former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Republican ideologue Newt Gingrich, criticized Bush's response to Katrina. Gingrich "says the disaster 'puts into question all of the Homeland Security and Northern Command planning for the last four years,'" the paper reported.

Now, after the hurricane, "it's a political storm that threatens to sweep over the United States," Le Figaro's Pierre Rousselin predicted. This new round of stormy weather will "test" George W. Bush and his ability to "mobilize all that's best about America," he added, noting that, this time, unlike after the 2001 terrorist attacks, Bush "doesn't have an enemy" to fall back on.

So far, dutifully following his public-relations handlers' lead, Bush has shown up twice in the storm-stricken zone for all-too-obvious "photo opportunities" and a "show of sympathy" designed to demonstrate that he cares about the region's injured and newly homeless. (Deccan Herald)

The Scotsman noted that even former Ronald Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan, "an influential conservative columnist" in the United States, had questioned Bush's post-Katrina behavior. "Does he know in his gut that the existence of looting, chaos and disease in a great American city, or cities, is a terrible blow that may have deep implications?" asked Noonan, a tireless apologist in the pages of the Wall Street Journal for the Republican administration's policies at home and abroad.

A reporter for Germany's ZDF national television channel, on the scene when Bush visited Biloxi, Mississippi, last week, exposed the fakery of what Le Monde called his "no-holds-barred communications campaign to counter increasingly virulent criticism" of the way he mishandled the immediate, post-Katrina period. ZDF's Claudia Rüggeberg recalled for viewers what a storm-battered Biloxi resident who had witnessed Bush's arrival in a long caravan of security vehicles had told her after the president departed:

His motorcade should have come loaded down with relief supplies, the woman told Rüggeberg, instead of stopping just long enough for Bush to pose for the cameras before being whisked away. (ZDF cameras caught Bush promising residents that they would "see compassion pour in here.")

"Each catastrophe ... instantly expose[s] the society that it strikes, and Katrina is no exception to this rule," an editorial in France's Libération observed. "Nice and dry in his mountain range," the paper added, "[Osama bin] Laden must be dying of laughter [as] the American civil-security helicopters make like ducks along the Mississippi."

In an online readers' forum sponsored by Germany's Die Welt, some contributors opined that it was "anti-American" to suggest that New Orleans got what was coming to it with Katrina because the United States, under Bush, had stubbornly ignored global-warming trends (which have helped make some storms more severe) and had failed to properly prepare the low-lying coastal city for such a blow.

To criticize the United States when it's down "isn't anti-Americanism, it's reality," a Greenville, South Carolina-based German contributor named "fretwurst" wrote. "Many people [will] always believe the U.S. is a super-developed country. That's true for some small fields of research, but in everyday life, there are many here who are living in a dream world" -- the kind of out-of-touch-with-reality people, "fretwurst" hinted, who would unquestioningly support a president who appeared not to have made their safety a top priority.

"Katrina has highlighted the worst and the most unjust [aspects] of the U.S. ... a superpower in decline," Spain's El Vanguardia (subscription required) sighed. The paper noted encouragingly, though, that Americans tend to "give the best of themselves in moments of crisis." It also predicted that, inevitably, "New Orleans will rise up from its ashes" (from its mud and debris might have been a more accurate description). Some bright day, the Spanish paper mused, the sweet smell of jasmine will once again waft through the jazz city's humid air -- along with the sounds of someone tapping out on a trumpet "the happy notes" of that old ode to optimism and well-being that Louis Armstrong made famous, "What a Wonderful World."

US disaster chief delayed for hours

The head of the United States disaster response agency waited five hours after Hurricane Katrina struck before sending workers to the area, it has emerged.

Michael Brown then suggested staff should be given two days to get to the devastated region, according to leaked internal documents.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has been sharply criticised for its slow response to the unfolding tragedy. Several politicians have called for Mr Brown's resignation.

In a memo to Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, he proposed sending 1,000 staff within 48 hours and another 2,000 within seven days.

The delay was attributed to the need for adequate training.

Mr Brown described Katrina as a "near-catastrophic event" but otherwise lacked any urgent language, the New York Post reveals.

On the same day, August 29 - the day the hurricane hit land - he urged fire and rescue services outside Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama not to send in emergency workers unless specifically asked for help from local authorities.

He told FEMA staff that one of their duties was to make the agency look good.

"Convey a positive image of disaster operations to government officials, community organisations and the general public," he wrote.

Meanwhile, patience is running out with New Orleans residents who still refuse to leave their homes.

I volunteer this man for some violent butt sexing.

Shameless Award I
-
Wednesday, September 7, 2005

IT'S NO secret that Hurricane Katrina has upended Washington politics, rightfully making relief efforts the top priority. So re-labeling old ideas as a part of disaster recovery is the new political game.

The first, though not last, Shameless Award in putting the hurricane to other uses goes to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. He's tapping the oil refineries shut down by Katrina and higher pump prices to advocate for drilling in Alaska's Arctic edge.

Never mind that these supplies are seven to 10 years away. Never mind that the reserves may amount to only 4 percent of this nation's energy needs. Never mind that conservation and higher highway fuel economy are better answers to oil dependence than invading a wildlife refuge.

Katrina's wind and waves did shut down refineries and drilling platforms, though this gas supply line is slowly coming back. The answer to this country's fragile energy infrastructure isn't opening up the pristine backcountry to derricks and pipes.

Frist's argument, daft as it is, is designed to repackage and sell a bad idea. Unfortunately, the Arctic drilling plan has advanced further than it should. It's jammed in a federal spending bill that, under parliamentary ground rules, can't be taken out or filibustered as can other Senate bills.

Washington's new atmosphere should lead Congress to rethink spending priorities in the wake of Katrina. If that happens, drilling in the Arctic should be tossed out.

Okay, I'm sorry...but this is an outrage

Barring the people we need to protect most of egregious Corporate excess and negligence makes sense to just WHOM, exactly???

September 7, 2005
E.P.A. to Bar Data From Pesticide Studies Involving Children and Pregnant Women
By MICHAEL JANOFSKY

WASHINGTON, Sept. 6 - Researchers will no longer be allowed to include children and pregnant women in studies examining the effects of pesticides to help set federal standards, according to the first regulations for human testing of pesticides that the Environmental Protection Agency plans to propose.

The regulations, to be proposed on Wednesday, would also establish an independent oversight panel to ensure that all studies submitted to the agency were conducted ethically and followed internationally accepted protocols for human testing.

Agency officials discussed the new regulations with reporters on Tuesday. They declined to make copies of the proposal available, leading at least one major critic of the agency, Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, to suggest that a close examination of the regulations might reveal weaknesses identified in an earlier version. Agency officials said those weaknesses were removed from a draft sent to the Office of Management and Budget last month.

In a statement, Senator Boxer said of the proposal: "One thing is clear. It must be changed dramatically from the version E.P.A. forwarded to O.M.B. just a few weeks ago. If not, it will be a direct attack on our most vulnerable citizens."

The proposed regulations, which would take effect in January after a public comment period, came several months after Congress put restrictions on human pesticide tests as part of an appropriations bill. Congressional concern grew after reports that parents in Florida would be paid to participate in a program, known as Cheers, by allowing their children to be tested to measure household exposure to pesticides.

"This proposed rule contains some of the strongest protections for human subjects ever proposed by the federal government," Jim Jones, director of pesticide programs for the agency, said Tuesday in a conference call with reporters.

Mr. Jones said the agency was so alarmed by public anger over pesticide testing involving humans that the new protocols would bar the agency from considering any tests that include pregnant women and children.

He also said the proposed regulations would apply to the 22 toxicity tests involving humans that are now before the agency. Two of them included children, though none involved pregnant women, Mr. Jones said.

Environmental groups expressed worry that the agency might blur the lines between past and future tests.

"This is a huge problem if they are going to accept studies already done," said Erik D. Olson, a senior lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Dozens of past unethical studies are now before the E.P.A. If they accept them, the new rules are plainly inadequate."

The leading trade organization for pesticide manufacturers, CropLife America, defended its testing practices, saying its members have always worked to ensure the safety of participants.

At the same time, the group's president, Jay Vroom, welcomed the new E.P.A. regulations, saying they "have the potential to establish ethical and scientific safeguards and uniform standards to protect research subjects and improve the risk assessment process."

Mr. Vroom also said future tests would "only involve healthy adult volunteers and exclude pregnant women."

In most cases, the tests are conducted by chemical manufacturers and the results submitted to the E.P.A. as part of a chemical's approval process. But critics in recent years have questioned the effectiveness of a system in which the companies have an enormous financial interest in winning approval.

Mr. Jones said an oversight panel to review tests involving pesticides would include medical ethicists and experts in chemical tests and would exclude anyone with connections to the agency or chemical companies.

Mind you, I don't care a lot for Nancy Pelosi...but...

Congress' top two Democrats furiously criticized the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina on Wednesday, with Sen. Harry Reid demanding to know whether President Bush's Texas vacation impeded relief efforts and Rep. Nancy Pelosi assailing the chief executive as "oblivious, in denial."

Full article here

from pecunium

a jaw dropping, first-hand account of a FEMA controlled camp in Oklahoma for Hurricane refugees.

Flashing on the Subway...

some people need a life :)

Dan Hoyt - the "smirking sicko" who exposed himself to a 22-year-old woman on New York's subway and became a net celebrity for his trouble - has been released on $5,000 bail after appearing in court on four charges of subway flashing. The fugitive from justice finally gave himself up last Wednesday and was picked from a line-up by four of his alleged victims.

Full article here.

And four hours later...

I'm glad now, that I wimped out last night and left that bookcase sitting in it's long, heavy IKEA box. I really needed the exertion tonight. I took a lot of my angst against the pseudo-ex on those boards of particle board. In essence, I beat the shit out of it with a hammer while putting it together (using card board to cushion blows so it didn't mar the veneer.)

Then, not satisfied yet, I did the next and more oft used physical therapy for my mood; I got into the kitchen and I cooked.

The methodical, purposeful motions of chopping food, stirring, combining, seasoning, kneading, forming...who am I kidding?

I pounded the hell out of a vegetable meatloaf. :)

Well...with a bit more finesse than the pounding I did on the bookcase earlier.

And so, now, I have a new bookcase for my plethora of books and to set off my bedroom, just slightly, from the living room without closing me off (it's a see through shelving bookcase...) and my house is filled with the smells of meatloaf cooking in the oven. Of course it will cook for a while...and really isn't for dinner tonight. I'll have it over the next several days actually.

( Read more... )

Anyway...if anyone wants the actual recipe, let me know and I'll create a recipe filter and post it.

Meanwhile, dinner for me tonight is some roast beast roll ups with munster cheese and a yogurt, swilled down with a diet dr. pepper.

It sure smells good in here!