New Orleans protestors....

SpoiledRotten · 06-19-2007, 12:30 PM

Did you notice on the news a very short time ago that Nagan was leading a protest of New Orleans people against the government somewhere and they had a line of the yellow buses being used in the transportation? It's strange that they can use the buses to get somewhere to protest against the federal government, but can't use them to save their lazy arses from a storm. Good grief!

kairo · 06-19-2007, 12:33 PM

I had just made some horribly racist comment, but it's neither the time nor the place. So I'll just

to myself and stay out of it

**Grewe02** · 06-19-2007, 12:35 PM

It's ok, kairo. I would probably laugh and post another racist comment if you did first. I'm a follower not a leader.

**Dr. Marneaus** · 06-19-2007, 12:36 PM

i hear ya'll

SpoiledRotten · 06-19-2007, 12:43 PM

I tried to keep mine unracial and bit my tongue several times. I made it so I'm proud of myself. I guess...

kairo · 06-19-2007, 12:45 PM

my comment alluded that do to the probability of the protesters being primarily african american, naturally some african americans would have to sit towards the rearword of the buses. Due to the current emphasis on political correctness and equal rights, how are some african americans relegated to the less desirable (rear) of the bus, where other african americans are able to sit on the (presumably) better seats towards the front.

FourbyFour · 06-19-2007, 12:56 PM

Well the first issue is that ...according to them...Bush has to stop making storms occur in the first place.

**Grewe02** · 06-19-2007, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kairo

my comment alluded that do to the probability of the protesters being primarily african american, naturally some african americans would have to sit towards the rearword of the buses. Due to the current emphasis on political correctness and equal rights, how are some african americans relegated to the less desirable (rear) of the bus, where other african americans are able to sit on the (presumably) better seats towards the front.

Is that a question or a statement?

kairo · 06-19-2007, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grewe02

Is that a question or a statement?

Little from column A, a little from Column B

Kerovick · 06-19-2007, 01:03 PM

I always prefered the back of the bus... it's bouncy!

chim · 06-19-2007, 01:09 PM

I have a problem with the whole idea that it's up to American taxpayers to foot the bill to rebuild anything that was in a location that shouldn't have been built up in the first place. If you're dumb enough to live below sea level, you're on your own.

Secondly, how can they expect to be back to "business as usual"? It took around 200 years to get everything developed to where it was when Katrina hit. It's not like there's a "fast forward" button on reconstruction efforts..................chim

**dmcanally** · 06-19-2007, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chim

Secondly, how can they expect to be back to "business as usual"? It took around 200 years to get everything developed to where it was when Katrina hit. It's not like there's a "fast forward" button on reconstruction efforts..................chim

Just FYI, the storm destroyed stuff... it didn't set us back to 1807...

And I agree... the city shouldn't be rebuilt at all.

atljeeplady · 06-19-2007, 02:01 PM

I don't understand the logic that it's OK to send most of our money and troops to a land that has been in complete tumoil for thousands of years, bomb the crap out of it every few years, then think it's OK to re-build their entire friggin country on our dime. YET - we get pissy even thinking about rebuilding ONE of our cities? It is on American soil, it is one of the most strategic places in the country, as well as one of the most historic. http://www.movermike.com/posts/1125856999.shtml

They may be riding around in buses, but they're not planting IED's on the road. I dunno, maybe I'm just naive, but a few bazillion spent and thousands of lives lost in the Mideast on a wasted effort for benefits that continue to elude me; or a few million with no lives lost to spruce up a city that IS RIGHT HERE.

And I'm not talking about charity or welfare - there are so many ways to get NO to where it needs to be without handouts, but to do these things we would have to divert attention away from the "war effort".

Quote:

If you're dumb enough to live below sea level, you're on your own.

That's the ticket.

: I would go further to add that if you're dumb enough to live in the entire state of California (earthquakes, mud slides, wildfires) then you're on your own.

SomeGuysName · 06-19-2007, 02:06 PM

Quote:

I don't understand the logic that it's OK to send most of our money and troops to a land that has been in complete tumoil for thousands of years, bomb the crap out of it every few years, then think it's OK to re-build their entire friggin country on our dime. YET - we get pissy even thinking about rebuilding ONE of our cities? It is on American soil, it is one of the most strategic places in the country, as well as one of the most historic.

Because, WE caused the destruction in the places we rebuild...and it's usually more than just one city.

But...I have no sympathy for New Oreleans...

leakytiki · 06-19-2007, 02:11 PM

New Orleans, from what I've seen, is 25% human beings, and 75% criminal animals. I could care less if they all had perished in Katrina! The country would be better without that **** hole anyway. Look how they acted during Katrina!! A bunch of animals, vandalizing, stealing, raping and murdering! Who gives 2 ****s about a place like that??? F 'em!