Slashdot Mirror

See Daily Kos discussion here.

See Daily Kos discussion here.

Actually, you have a greater chance of dieing due to a non-prescription pain-killer overdose than suffering death or injury from a terrorist attack.

You're more likely to die by overdosing on non-perscription pain relievers like Advil or Motrin than in a terror attack by a factor of 24 to 1. (We had 7,600 deaths due to "Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin" in 2000.) Here's a handy chart.

If we count Oklahoma City and 9/11, plus the smaller terrorist attacks, we end up with something close to 3100 terror deaths in ten years. That's about 310 deaths by terror on US soil per year. By comparison, we lose about 400,000 people per year to tobacco, and 20,000 to homicide. Skeptical? Want more info? Feel free to shoot this down if you can by reading the source of this analysis.

>I don't think 2004 was fixed...

I used to think that, but now I'm not so sure.

source-http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/3/172 73/2941

Now, all political sentiments aside, lets not let our dislike for the president slip to accusing him of voter fraud. Almost every president has had allegation of voter fraud (oddly, only Repulicans get it widely broadcast in the media /sarc). The fact that there were problems with the machines mean they should be examined, but does not automatically point to voter fraud. Moreover, to prove that the error's difference would have changed things, you would have to move about 191k votes from Bush to Kerry (Bush won FL by ~381k votes).

source-http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/resu lts/states/FL/P/00/index.html

Now, slightly off topic, it is interesting seeing how the Democrats wanted a win by electoral college in 2004, considering how they considered Bush's win in 2000 'illegitimate' due to his lack of the popular vote. In 2004, Bush had the popular vote, but now the Democrats thought the electoral college was the greatest thing since the redefinition of the word 'is'.

As for me, I'm tired of witch hunts on both sides of politics. Clinton was a good president that enjoyed tomfoolery. Kennedy was too. Bush got us into a war that seemed like the right thing to do at the time, but turned out to be a big mistake. So did Kennedy. Terrorists are the new communists. As far as I know (I wasn't around then, please correct this if i am wrong) Kennedy was never lambasted as much as either president was. I wish we could return to the days where politicians had some respect for general decency.

I'm tired of the partisan bashing. The Democrats want you to beleive that Bush is both a redneck idiot and a brilliant deceptor of the public. I don't buy it. If anything, the President is too honest. When he says something, he really really really does it, no matter how much his opinion poll drops.

I am really proud of my Dominion (VA) though, since we are starting to push back against dirty campaigning. Recently, Tim Kaine won the Governership. The media spun it as Bush's appearance that led to his defeat, but it wasn't. In the month before the election, Jerry Kilgore ran a slew of ads that unjustly made Tim Kaine look like the devil, and Tim Kaine played a fair game, which led him to victory. (Admittedly, I have no valid sources but 'all my friends' and my step-sister that worked for the Kilgore campaign) I really wish this sentiment would pick up throughout the country.

Read this for some refutation. The article's statement about discovery vs. production since 1971 is so misleading I would almost call it a lie. Look at a graph, which tells a far different story than their 35 year "snapshot":
http://www.theoildrum.com/uploads/44/hirsch_reserv es.gif

September, 2005: A series of cartoons is published in the Danish newspaper Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten, depicting the Prophet in a number of unflattering ways. Nobody notices.

October, 2005: Nobody notices again.

November and December, 2005: Still no response. It's almost like nobody cares.

Early January, 2006: During the Hajj, an annual pilgrimage in which millions of people travel to Mecca, negligence on behalf of the organizers . Earlier that month a hotel near Mecca had collapsed, killing at least seventy people. Both tragedies were seen as being caused by the carelessness of the Saudi government, and the metaphorical poo-poo started to fly.

Nobody heard about it in North America because they were too concerned with more important things like Nick and Jessica's break-up and whether Angelina and Brad were likely to get back together.

Later That Same Week: The Saudi press, which is completely controlled by the government, discovers to its shock that a mere four months ago a foreign newspaper with a limited circularion had printed a few poorly drawn cartoons which nobody seemed to care about. Sensing a far more important story at hand the Saudi government drops all plans to criticize themselves for their fatal blunders at the Hajj and instead starts running up to four stories a day about the horrors of infidel cartoonists. The locals eat it up.

The European and American media sense a big boost to their circulation and ratings, eat it up with just as much fervor, and start reprinting the cartoons. This is a bit like throwing water on a grease fire, and it leads us to where we are today.

The dog is being wagged, folks.

This is "news for nerds" because it affects a nerdly profession, but it's "stuff that matters" more than anything else because of the effect the current economy is having on very basic freedoms of conscience. Corporate America has much greater leverage over employees than it once did partly because of economic factors that it had a role in manipulating, through lobbyists and Congress. The question might be weak in its phrasing but the issue is a strong one for many of Slashdot's readers. I welcome seeing this kind of question in Ask Slashdot.

Best reaction I've seen on this so far:

Oh...my...God. Bush thinks South Park is NOVA.

Oh, don't worry. You won't have to worry about the value of your dollar increasing if they print more of them. Quite the opposite occurs. Simple supply and demand there. That's the real problem with any monetary system not based on a relatively fixed supply of something like gold. Central bankers can just print to their hearts delight and make your savings worthless. When the US dropped the gold standard in 1971, gold was worth $40/oz. Now, it's worth $550/oz. If you had $10000 in the bank then, it was worth 250 oz. of gold. Now it's only worth about 18 oz. Needless to say, 250 oz of gold then is still worth 250 oz of gold today. Why would anyone save in greenbacks? They just keep printing more, making your savings worthless. So much so, that they are going to stop printing the M3 report. Can we say "Print money day and night, as fast as you can." Good... I thought you could.

• There is an administration in power that is heavily invested in oil.
• Said administration has a history of suppressing scientific data - in fact they have taken it to a new level. Ask the Union of Concerned Scientists what they think.
• Said administration has defined this man's science as policy. It never used to be policy to state such things.

It seems to me that the Bush administration is upset with this scientist because he is interfering with their policy of keeping the truth about climate change from the American public.

Of course, it doesn't help when those in power either don't know the Constitution or (more likely) simply lie about it. Here's an exchange between Gen. Michael Hayden and a reporter where Hayden claims the fourth amendment does not say there must be probably cause to issue a warrent, which is simply wrong.

Hayden is currently Deputy Director of National Intelligence and formerly the Director of the NSA.

Three days before the scheduled unveiling [of his anti-DLC campaign], Moulitsas wrote that he'd changed his mind. Hurricane Katrina, which had just struck, had made him realize, he said, that this was not the time for intra-party bickering. "We think someone got to him," a DLC staffer told me darkly.

Nah. What happened was this -- there was a heavy media component to what I had planned. However, when Katrina struck, all media attention was focused on Katrina and the aftermath. The effort would've been a failure and, really, would've seen quite petty considering what was happening in the Gulf Coast. Why not after? I had to write a book which took me to the end of the year. The window of opportunity has passed.

It doesn't mean I couldn't revist it next year, but we have bigger things to worry about than an increasingly irrelevant DLC.

You may think Jim Brady and Debbie Howell have nothing to hide, but it seems likely that they're lying and you've fallen for it. Like others have said, comments left were noticed by the posters themselves immediately after submitting them, much like on Slashdot or (more directly) your favorite flat-comment blog.

More analysis here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/21/11010/7038

For those still following this thread, an archived version of the page with the later-deleted comments has been put on Democratic Underground. Discussion about this at Daily Kos, including a list of which comments were specifically deleted.

Kind of a different point of view on it, though. It does sound like she has been parroting the RNC talking points, though. Y'all seen it?

Ahhh, OK, I get it now. The logic you're following from the Bush Administration is "if Clinton did it, it's OK."

Well, then, I guess we can expect the blow job to happen any time now. Oh, wait, that's right, this time WE, THE PEOPLE are getting FUCKED.

BTW, your points are taken from the WSJ opinion page, not the fact-based part of the paper. Nice try. It's a regurgitation of the same crap Drudge pulled out of his ass.

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/20/drudge-fact-ch eck/
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/12/21/8157/6595

I'd like to believe you value your civil liberties, but all you're doing is helping those who are taking them away. It's a shame. It also raises the question: If you don't value your civil liberties, why don't you leave America and go live somewhere else?

M3 includes the money held in foreign banks. This may be being discontinued due to Iran opening a Euro based oil exchange. Currently, the only two oil exchanges are the NYMEX and the British IPX (American owned), bot do business in USD. Countries must keep reserves of dollars in order to trade oil. If PetroEuros catch on, many countries may flush their USD reserves for Euros. After all, the Euro seems stronger at the moment. Such a flush would give a big hit to the worth of the dollar. Perhaps that is why the Fed will cease publishing the M3.

Yep, but they have to *want* to open *my* envelope.

It's true, I don't have anything to hide at the present time. But who knows when they might decide that I'm a target?

e.g.:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/20/9408/ 0642

Back in May of this year, the news broke regarding FBI documents obtained by the ACLU revealing domestic surveillance of political activist groups (environmental, animal rights, peace and social justice groups, etc.).

I know its Kos, but read it anyway.

Even then, all of the "but Clinton did it too" apolgists are basically saying that they're holding God Bush to the same standards as "Slick Willy" Clinton. I thought Bush was about restoring honor and accountability to the White House ... and here you go saying "but Clinton did it!"

A good number of them are beginning to find offense in the attempts to remove the Christian aspects of Christmas.

No one is attempting to "remove the Christian aspects of Christmas". As stated previously, there are damn few of them anyway, few enough that many of the popular "mega-churches" are closing on Christmas. But those who want those elements are welcome to them and no one is trying to stop them from celebrating Christmas in their own way - in their own time and on their own property.

But a few loudmouth kooks in the theocratic right are attempting to get people to act as if Christmas is the only holiday that anyone is celebrating this time of year, to act as if anyone not celebrating Christmas is in the wrong.

I didn't shop at Target this year because they excluded the Salvation Army from collecting at there stores.

That's a misleading statement. Target doesn't allow anyone to engage in solicitation or petitioning at their stores regardless of the cause being represented. They used to not enforce this policy on the SA. They've just made their policy consistent and non-discriminatory. And they've still partnered with the SA for Katrina relief, and many stores have made grants to local SA chapters.

Just as I have heard that the Homosexual community is suggesting that it's members shouldn't buy cars from Ford because Ford doesn't advertise in Gay media outlets the Christian community is deciding that should do it's Christmas shopping at stores that support there life style choices. It is no different.

Legally, they're on equal footing, certainly we can all choose who we do business with. Ethically, they're completely different. Ford has slapped the gay community in the face (and shot itself in the wallet) by caving to homophobes and withdrawing ads from magazines serving the gay community. Message: we don't want gays as customers. Ok, Ford can do that, and gays and their friends can say, "Well, fuck you then Ford, I'm buying a Toyota."

Target is declining to slap non-Christians in the face, declining an exclusive "Merry X-mas" in favor of an inclusive "Happy Holidays". Message: whether you celebrate Christmas, Chanukah, Kwanza, the Solstice, Festivus, Bodhi Day, Ramadan, New Year's Day, whatever holiday floats your boat, c'mon in and buy our stuff. It takes a twisted, bigoted mind to take offense at that.

(Though I'm still not shopping at Target until they stop allowing employees to deny women access to health care and guarantee access to prescriptions without discrimination or delay; medical care trumps holiday banners, Target.)

Yes, but there are also some serious blogs that cover material that the MSM won't. Several obvious examples on the democratic side are Daily Kos and Talking Points Memo. These are sites that have covered real stories in depth long before the MSM picked them up... often then quoting them liberally without attribution.

Source?

Health aides 138% Human service workers 136% Personal and home care aids 130% Computer engineers and scientists 112% Systems analysts 110% Physical and corrective therapy assistants and aides 93% Physical therapists 88% Paralegals 86% Teachers, special education 74% Medical assistants 71%

Most of these are service, part-time, contract or self-employed (i.e. "consultants") "workers". Explain to me again how is it that the employer pays their insurance?

Wal-Mart does in fact offer health covereage to it's workers. The problem here is that their pay rate is so low that about half of them decline coverage.

Oh yes! That makes all the difference! Phew! The end result is so completely different! Why, if Wal-Mart did not provide any coverage, that would be, like, they would have no coverage. As opposed to having no coverage. I am so glad that we have this clarified.

My insurance coverage, which I pay $25 a month for includes 100% hospital coverage, free prescriptions and $5 a visit copay to the doctor. Two years ago I needed an MRI for an ankle injury and was able to get an appointment in 3 days. Out of pocket cost was $0. I am definitely NOT a CEO class person.

Let me put you in touch with these people then (read all the comments from your fellow Americans). Enlighten them as to your wonderful insurance company. It seems they sure need it.

A Nobel Prize winning economicist, actually.

It seems to me that you are living in some sort of weird fantasy world not connected in any way to what the reality is.

That's the way to prove your grasp on reality! Nobel Prise winning economcists [sic!] are always guaranteed to be experts in everything. Like national medical care. Even if economics itself is considered "science" only by other economists (sort of like psychiatry). And the top Nobel Prize winning economists never get together to apply their "theories" to practice by forming world's most famous and largest hedge funds, which never, I mean never would fail completely and spectacularly to the tune of many billions of dollars, having the said geniuses scatter all over with their tails between their legs. It could never happen! They also never have agendas, oh no! Even if their theories have obvious, easily noticeable holes you could drive trucks through. But what counts for "reality" is only the things which agree with your ideology. Reality my ass.

Really? I thought the invasion rested on Saddam continuation to break UN resolutions time and time again. Should we just not invade and thus not inforce these resolutions? Do you prefer a nice slap on the wrist to and from a bunch of corrupt beurocrats?

You pretend that there were only two options: invade or ignore Iraq completely. In fact there was a much better option, to enforce the resolutions using sanctions and inspections. In case you haven't noticed, sanctions actually worked, and achieved their goal without producing huge number of flag-drapped coffins.

Second, Saddam (his party to be exact whome he was a part of) was implicitly allied with al Qaeda as he aided and supported them. Did you not listen to Bush durring his address to the nation?

Factually wrong, pure and simple. Saddam Hussein had no links with Al-Quaida, as was proven by 9/11 commision. Bush lied during his address to the nation (if you look at the video, you'll see that Bush's lips are moving, which means he is lying).

Third, we did not invade Iraq per say. We invaded Saddam and his supporters.

Bullshit. We murdered innocent civilians, like for instance these Iraqi children. I'm sorry, but 10 year old children aren't part of Saddam's government.

And wow! did they come out in droves to vote dispite the weekly car bombings and threats.

If you really take those "elections" seriously, read this.
And weekly car bombings means they hate us so much that they are actually willing to attack us with car bombs. I know that there's a lot of cultural misunderstanding going on, so let me clear this up for you: in Iraqi culture blowing up someone with a car bomb means you dislike them. It's not some form of holliday fireworks, but rather a statement that they want you dead - as expressed by their attempt to kill you. Similarly, the act of, say, shooting at you with AK-47 does not mean they tried to fire in the air to congratulate you and missed.
  To put it simply, if they try to kill you it means they want you dead, and that means they dislike you. I know it's kind of hard to interpret at first, but Iraq is pretty similar to Vietnam in this regard.

There are no links! It's a damned GIF image! Look here: http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/3/OSM.gif

Actually looking at OSM I find that maybe one out of one hundred stories has a XIN tag. If the Communist Chinese are funding OSM, they're a very minor player behind AP, UPI, Knight Ridder, PRN, Business Wire, etc, etc.

What are you talking about? Click on OSM to get their stories about OSM, with links. The Xinhua headlines filling their roster in the page to which I directly linked are their own featured content. "A few neocon sites"? Xinhua is the official Chinese Communist government propaganda office. Have you been hiding the vast rightwing conspiracy behind a "libertarian" smokescreen so long that you can no longer see it yourself, even when it signs its own headlines?

OSM is the rightwing American news source fronting for Xinhua, the official Chinese mafia government news agency. Now the "neocon" destruction of American integrity, wealth, labor and unity makes sense: they're selling us out to the Chinese.

I have to plug Scoop as a pain-in-the-ass powerful chunk of mod_perl that I've set up a few times. It apparently is capable of scaling up pretty well, handling the million+ hit days of dailykos.com

Yeah, they sure a bunch of losers. Not contributing a damn thing to society, just uselessly wanking about how much their dog ate and why their friends from high school don't write. Serious people only get their news and information, from trusted, reliable sources.

Seriously, what the hell is it about blogging that inspires such hatred in some people's hearts? Too many of you guys got ex-girlfriends with Livejournal accounts?

If you want to get off on dead civilians, then take a look at this.

Top Democrat bloggers discuss this setback for free expression.

The heading Democrats Defeat Online FOS Act and omission of the Why certainly colours this article.

I don't think the article poster or the editor did anything wrong at all. The article they were linking to was headlined Democrats defeat election-law aid for bloggers which is essentially the same thing as the Slashdot article.

like something has been attached which allows oil drilling in Yosemite National Park.

The whole point of submitting it the way it was submitted (suspension calendar) was to prevent exactly what you're talking about. The Republican leadership wanted the bill introduced a certain way and wanted to preclude anyone from adding other things. Don't believe me? Look at Nancy Pelosi's diary where she states:

This is an issue that must be fully discussed in open debate on the House floor through a process that permits amendments to be offered and voted on. The Republican Leadership brought this bill to the floor through the suspension calendar which does not permit such an opportunity.

Clearly, she didn't want this fast-tracked and wanted the ability to add whatever amendments she and her colleagues desired.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/3/112540/088

And Daily KOS supported the bill's passage. The actual story is *slightly* more complicated than the /. headline would suggest.

Daily Kos has an article on this with a bit more information. This one actually goes into reasons why the Dems voted againt it. Daily Kos disagrees with the Dem's reasons, and was in favor of extending the free nature of blogs.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/3/112540 /088

Note that the act can still be brought up for a vote under normal rules and passed. The defeat was under special rules intended to speed the process.

Replace them with a gender making 69 cents on the dollar
Outsource to the country d'jour at Latitude 69 degrees E
Move to 69th parallel and enjoy Alaska's natural cooling

Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is the junior senator from the same state as Hastert. He doesn't seem to feel the need to write at a 6th grade level. This post, "Tone, Truth, and the Democratic Party," was written for the crowd over at Daily Kos, and cross-posted on his own blog. The folks over at Daily Kos seemed to be up to the "challenge" of reading it; Obama's post generated over 800 comments.

I'm not saying that this is because the Kossacks are a "sophisticated" audience, like the New York Times or WSJ audience that you mention. It's just that they didn't seem to have any problem with it. Also, I'm not sure which style is ultimately better at getting one's message across to the people; Hastert's simple, direct style, or Obama's more sophisticated one. President Bush seems to have been very successful with a simple, direct style. Maybe, as you say, that is ultimately the best way to communicate with the "or'nary American".

I guess if people really don't want to read at more than a 6th grade level, Obama's got 'em covered with his podcast. If what you say is true, maybe political podcasts will become more and more common, since even a poor reader can just listen instead. Talk radio would be the example here...

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) has a blog that allows comments. I found that out while reading this Washington Post article posted on Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) site. According to the article, Tancredo is the only federal lawmaker with his own blog that accepts comments.

Even though a lot of lawmakers don't have their own blogs with comments, many will post at other blogs and receive comments there. Obama posted a diary about the Roberts nomination over at Daily Kos, and got over 800 responses. His followup diary got over 400 more.

I agree. There also is a cost to changing a time system that seems to be being minimized by these politicians. Since you're Canadian, I wondered if you could shed some light on the topic of bird flu being allegedly found in Canadian fowl?

I think Firefox usage is quite a bit higher than people think. A lot of blogs contain public Sitemeter information that includes browser share. For sites like Instapundit, Daily Kos, or Red State Firefox usage is anywhere from 25-40% of total browsers. My own site has IE just under 50%, Firefox with 35-40%, and Safari hovering around 10% depending on the time of the survey.

Granted, blog readers tend to be somewhat more ahead of the curve than Joe or Jane Sixpack, but they're also indicative of where the market will be a few years down the road. The problem IE and Microsoft faces is that while they have a very high marketshare, their mindshare sucks - everyone uses Microsoft products but only those who take return trips to the Kool Aid bowl particularly like doing it. When an alternative like Firefox comes along that doesn't take a CS degree to use, people start switching, and the stats on more technically-oriented sites bear that out.

Don't know your politics, and it actually doesn't matter, except don't be put off by the place the following info comes from. There is a woman who posted about her experiences in Slidell and Bogalusa here at DailyKos. She spent quite a while there, has many contacts, and has given advice to others about what's needed. I feel sure she would answer if you tried to contact her, and that her advice would be very relevant.

She(they) had a permit to protest under certain conditions. She(they) agreed. She lied about it from the get-go. She had every intention of being arrested. Did you see "Mother Moonbats" comment on Daily Kos http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/9/24/85619/4 714/25 The bitch realized she couldn't get the press she wanted because of Rita, so she made herself an oppurtunity on Monday. Look at me!!! Look at me!!!! Quote from the above link "i am watching cnn and it is 100 percent rita...even though it is a little wind and a little rain...it is bad, but there are other things going on in this country today...and in the world!!!!"

you want an example of american fascism in action? well here you go.

This is a page and video showing how the governent has eroded our right to peacefully gather, even when an event is fully legal.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/22/13030/ 7546 -article
http://homepage.mac.com/apexgrin/FileSharing2.html -video

ah the home of the free in-fucking-deed.

In an interview very reminiscent of that other fool, Ballmer struggles to stay 'on message', repeats his key words and phrases out of context ('Innovation! Innovation! Innovation!') and generally makes a fool of himself.

This is too insaine too believe....

(and even scarier, this 6 year old is the US president)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/14/18157/2068

Oddly enough in the official Anti-Ballistic-Missile-Treaty there is a clause that states that America is not allowed to use / deploy their weather changing weapons including HAARP against the old Soviet Union.
There is also a UN treaty circa 1976 that basically says the same thing but in more general terms, while again naming the US and Russia.

Actually, as long as the US only uses HAARP for mind control (rather than weather control) then it does not technically violate the ABM treaty.

Precisely my point, since she is of working age but not actively seeking employment, she is not participating and thus boosting the 35% figure.

I'm not making the case that she's unemployed; I'm making the case that her situation is included to make a number like 35% sound worse than it really is.

Also it appears your numbers came from the Daily Kos http://stevo.dailykos.com/story/2004/4/2/21018/295 20 (which, as most blogs do, has an agenda). He defines the Employment Participation Rate as "the number people either employed or looking for work divided by the number of potential workers". By most definitions my wife would be considered a "potential worker"; but she would tell you she is not.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying had Bush and FEMA got their acts together not one person would have died, or the hurricane would have missed NO. Whatever happens there would have been destruction, and people would likely have died.

However, when you've got the worst disaster in US history going, the army (and even National Guard!) are undermanned and bled dry from a protracted, possibly unwinnable (and certainly unpopular and ethically dubious) war, disaster-recovery funds will be harder to find because the economy's been run into the ground, the head of the federal agency responsible for dealing with exactly these kinds of disasters is a completely unqualified guy who only got the job because he's friends with the President, the president refuses all foreign aid for the disaster and delays any definite action for several days while he has a few rounds of golf on his ranch and sits and plays guitar, well... don't tell me that lives couldn't have been saved if he'd got off his arse, cut his vacation short and done something sooner.

I'm not even from the USA (I'm in the UK), and I've been outraged by Bush sitting on his thumbs for days, while people in NO too poor to leave die from lack of water, or from drinking water contaminated with toxic waste or raw sewage.

He was all over 9/11 when there was a clear enemy and political capital to be made from it. When it's merely a case of knuckling down and solving a problem, his true colours emerge - he's either dangerously incompetent or really doesn't give a fuck.

This just one of a growing number of complaints against the FEMA. It's so bad that some are calling for its director, Micheal Brown, to be fired. Apparently, he's had problems in prior positions as well, as described HERE

Also, to address your point, I'm guessing that people will be filing their claims OUTSIDE of those areas.

A hard day of defending the truth from a squad of freeper zombies repeating Karl Rove lies they heard on Fox news. Here's a short page of evidence which demonstrates that 1> Bush never called Mayor Nagin before Nagin ordered New Orleans evacuated (on 8/28/05, before the storm); 2> Bush called LA Governor Blanco as she was heading into her public announcement that she was backing Nagin's evacuation announcement; 3> FEMA chief Brown waited until after the storm was passed on 8/29/05 to start acting; and 4> LA Governor Blanco ordered evacuations and declared a state of emergency on 8/27/05, days before the storm hit, which means that Bush and his hirelings like Brown were responsible for sending in rescue, relief and all other federal assistance.

There are plenty of other pages out there that show that Bush and company are responsible for proactive action when such disasters strike. Even though Louisiana did what it was supposed to do, Bush didn't even need those formal actions - he's supposed to send in the force to help the people even if the state and city don't act. This is the Homeland Security plan that Bush himself presided over, after demanding $BILLIONS, years of effort, transforming America's security system after "everything changed" on 9/11/2001, and even running roughshod over our rights in the name of security.

There are still more pages out there that describe how Bush cut the budgets of agencies working to protect and mitigate New Orleans in the event of this absolutely predicted storm and its absolutely predicted consequences, like broken levees and devastating floods.

You won't hear much of those truths on Fox News. You will hear all of the lies Karl Rove is feeding them from his "treason bunker". And you'll get that witch's brew of lies and spin in all kinds of posts from Slashdotters using the Katrina catastrophe to spew their own prejudicial agendas in ignorant (or worse) Slashdot posts.