Millions of Tax Dollars Spent on Hotel Stays for Katrina 'Victims'
(BILOXI, Miss.) Oct. 30 -- For the bulk of American families, day to day life is strained by the rising price of food, gas and utilities. But, as you cutback, you're also paying for others day to day expenses. Hundreds of families are getting a free stay at a hotel, many with beach front views and free meals three times a day. But all of this is not free for you. In fact, you've paid millions for storm victims to slowly get their lives back together after Hurricane Katrina. NBC 15 is asking the question: has FEMA become the new welfare system?
It was the nation's worst natural disaster. Hurricane Katrina killed more than 1,800 people and caused $81 billion worth of property. It was the storm that brought the Gulf Coast to its knees. But in the days following the hurricane, a bungled recovery effort created a public relations disaster for the federal government and its emergency management agency. Soon thereafter came a solution: an almost endless flow of money to hurricane victims.
While many used hurricane relief to rebuild their lives and their communities, some never moved on. In part, because the hurricane relief keeps coming.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
well, no shit... you going to give someone a free gravy train then be surprised when they dont go back to the old life...
that is why the safety net always turns into a hammock for the under class.
Posted by: Abu do you love ||
11/01/2008 2:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
With all due regard, if you were a business owner would you want any of these folks on YOUR payroll? Heck, if I saw them just walking down my street I'd be making sure nothing stealable was laying around and that I had a gun handy.
Face it, there ARE lazy, feckless, worthless bastards laying around and they'll be happy to live off the fat of the land as long as the taxpayer will let them. Why do you think we have families who have been on welfare for three generations?
Face it, there ARE lazy, feckless, worthless ACORN registered voting bastards laying around and they'll be happy to live off the fat of the land as long as the ward healers can rob from you to support it taxpayer will let them.
Don't worry, in the near future the ward healers politicians will get judges to simply dictate that they are 'mandated' to do it.
#4
Why do you think we have families who have been on welfare for three generations?
Three? Please! I worked Katrina for the SBA-DAO. I had four generations sitting at the tables saying: "Where's my check?!". These people were stunned to hear that they had to pay the money back.
Most of them had never worked a day in their lives. However, a substantial number of them had been to Cosmetology School (the women) and Truck Driving School (the males), all on the tax payers dime. Parasites. Damn near all of them. And the ones I met that had worked for what they had, despised "them" to no end.
Way past time to make some dramatic changes in this country. Affirmative action, diversity, multiculti...etc. etc. has got to go.
#5
Illegal immigrants do the work Americans won't do, because the Americans get paid to stay in a hotel and eat free. Right after Katrina I saw Mexicans living six-to-a-motel-room (no hot water), eating canned beans and working clearing trees and gutting flooded houses for owners and tenants who were living elsewhere on my dime and doing nothing. nstead of deporting the illegal Mexicans can we deport the lazy Americans? I'll even make it a two-for-one offer.
#6
Three years of hotel and catering bills probably cost more than any of their (government provided) pre-Katrina houses were worth.
Posted by: ed ||
11/01/2008 11:29 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Define 'worth', ed. What it would cost you or me to buy something comparable on the open market? Not valid. These were mostly GOVERNMENT homes - so they are worth what it would cost you or me, the taxpayer, to rebuild or buy. At least double, plus the sweeteners to Bill Jefferson and half his family.
#8
Wow, Surprise Surprise Surprise...No doubt a lack of motivation only encourages...well, exactly what what we got, nothing. Its good to see people take advantage of the situation like that, because now I have zero desire to help them in the future. It must be wonderful (sarcasim) to not have a conscience. I didn't see this report on ABCNBCCBSMSNMCIlluminati Media, but why would we, it would make the target obama voters look bad. Free, Free, Free
Posted by: Joe Ordinary ||
11/01/2008 12:40 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Hey, Joe/Snake/Billy Bob/Illuminati memeguy
pick a nym and stick with it. And pick up the quality of your droppings,k?
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/01/2008 12:42 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Barnacle was certainly right about the "humorless" part. If someone wanted to give me an apartment in that part of town, the only way I would accept was if I could sell it.
#3
Why can't we just have the Obama voters pay more taxes?
You know, put their money where their mouth is.
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/01/2008 15:18 Comments ||
Top||
#4
This has been making the e-mail rounds and certainly applies to these idiots: "A taxpayer voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders"
#7
Give it a few years to wear out their welcome and they will call themselves something different. That's what the left does. Anarchist, Communist, Fascist, Socialist, Progressive, Liberal. It's been a long and sordid affair of self destruction.
Posted by: ed ||
11/01/2008 21:16 Comments ||
Top||
The Federal Government is under pressure to explain how an account of a conversation between Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and US President George W Bush came to be published in an Australian newspaper.
Last week, a newspaper reported that Mr Rudd had to tell Mr Bush what the G20 was during a phone call about global financial problems.
Both US officials and the Prime Minister's office have denied the exchange took place.
Mr Downer has told ABC1's Insiders program that despite the denials, it appears Mr Rudd leaked details of the conversation and as a consequence, damaged Australia's reputation.
He says there should be an inquiry. "Officials in the United States and in other countries would think [that] these people in Australia want to be very careful what you say to them in a private conversation," he said. "I think the smart thing for Kevin Rudd to do would be now to set up an inquiry into what actually happened here. I think that would help to clear the air a lot and I think officials would very much appreciate that." Mr Rudd's office has declined to respond to Mr Downer's comments.
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama paid a German company nearly $700,000 for staging, sound and lighting services at the time he delivered a speech this past summer in Berlin and declared himself a "citizen" of both the U.S. and the world.
Billed as a highlight of Mr. Obama's July trip to Europe, the speech -- delivered before hundreds of thousands of people in front of the historic Victory Column in Tiergarten -- was organized by the Berlin-based company Mediapool, opening much like a rock concert, with warm-up performances from the band Reamonn and reggae singer Patrice.
The German company, whose Web page says it specializes in theater and event management, is listed as a disbursement recipient on Mr. Obama's most recent campaign expenditures report, filed Thursday with the Federal Election Commission.
The company prominently displays pictures of the Obama speech and rally on its marketing pages and lists the event at the top of its projects page.
Brian: I am NOT the Messiah!
Arthur: I say you are Lord, and I should know. I've followed a few.
Barack Obamas senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next weeks election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harbouring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.
The sudden financial crisis and the prospect of a deep and painful recession have increased the urgency inside the Obama team to bring people down to earth, after a campaign in which his soaring rhetoric and promises of hope and change are now confronted with the reality of a stricken economy.
One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, so theres not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair.
The aide said that Mr Obama himself was the first to realise that expectations risked being inflated.
In an interview with a Colorado radio station, Mr Obama appeared to be engaged already in expectation lowering. Asked about his goals for the first hundred days, he said he would need more time to tackle such big and costly issues as health care reform, global warming and Iraq. The first hundred days is going to be important, but its probably going to be the first thousand days that makes the difference, he said. He has also been reminding crowds in recent days how hard it will be to achieve his goals, and that it will take time.
I wont stand here and pretend that any of this will be easy especially now, Mr Obama told a rally in Sarasota, Florida, yesterday, citing the cost of this economic crisis, and the cost of the war in Iraq. Mr Obamas transition team is headed by John Podesta, a Washington veteran and a former chief-of-staff to Bill Clinton. He has spent months overseeing a virtual Democratic government-in-exile to plan a smooth transition should Mr Obama emerge victorious next week. The plans are so far advanced that an Obama Cabinet has been largely decided upon, with the expectation that most of his senior appointments could be announced shortly after election day.
#2
"...many of his euphoric supporters are harbouring unrealistic hopes..."
Seems to me that "hope" was all he was selling... well that and "change".
how anyone could take him seriously is beyond me, but apparently there are a LOT of idiots out there.
Posted by: Abu do you love ||
11/01/2008 2:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
While it may be wishful thinking on my part, I'm beginning to see many signs that the Obama campaign is starting to make mistakes. I'll even go so far as to say that were the media to cover Obama events the way they cover Republicans, I can't help but to wonder if the Democrats are falling apart.
I have no doubt that Obama believes he will win. I'm just not seeing any evidence that there is true grass roots support for Obama. Credit card fraud, massive ACORN voter registration fraud, obvious media suppression of known facts. It's easy to despair over the ability for that to give Obama an edge and forget that what it really means is that Obama does NOT have it in the bag. If he had it in the bag, none of those "risks" would be necessary.
The easiest way to read what is going on in the Democratic party is to remember the "Education President". By that I mean that what they do is declare their biggest weakness as their strength. Think Arkansas ranking near dead last in education stats and how the dems simply annointed Bill with the title. That tactic works for them and they use it over and over again. But knowing that is their gig allows you to see what worries them most.
All the talk of election victory at this point is that type of hype.
But I digress. What I read in this article is that The Obama, convinced he will win, if finally figuring out that he can't deliver all that he promised. But the problem for Obama is that voters are beginning to figure that out as well.
#5
If he doesn't win, it's going to be a wild time watching them choke the decision down. If I could get someone to pay me $1 for every time we'll hear the word "racist," I'd be rubbing shoulders with Gates and Buffett. Hell, I'd probably be shouldering them aside...
#7
I trimmed this from the post for the sake of brevity, but as it more related to WOT, maybe I should have left it in. The early priorities being lined up if he takes power are a mixture of symbolism and substance. He plans to make a major address in a big Muslim country early in his first term. Having pledged on the campaign trail to close Guantanamo Bay, he is also determined to make early moves to rid America of the controversial prison. Yet what to do with the remaining inmates looms as an intractable problem, as many of their home governments refuse to allow them to return.
#8
If he doesn't win, it's going to be a wild time watching them choke the decision down.
I think the word "choke"is very important here. It describes the OU Sooners every year, the USC Trojans last year and could describe Obama this year if he loses.
#9
His real problem is going to be the press. When those whores can no longer be camp followers to The One, they will revert to their hyena like activity in Chicago, discovering that The Messiah has surrounded himself with disciples who have fallen the farthest. A corrupt pol from a corrupt town will be the story line after they finish trying it out on Murtha.
#10
Nimble, they probably won't get the chance. I suspect that instead they will be getting their own personal lesson in economics once this election is over. The papers shot their wads to win this election. Once it is in the bag, many of them will be getting their pink-slips.
#11
Betty: I'm just not seeing any evidence that there is true grass roots support for Obama.
It's there. Let's not make the mistake of thinking that everything about Obama and his campaign is phony. There are millions of people out there who truly believe in the guy, and thousands of those folks are working in his campaign.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/01/2008 10:06 Comments ||
Top||
#12
If Senator Obama wins this election, the following is what it has taken to get a very questionable, extremely inexperienced, very junior first time Senator past the mark:
1. Senator Obamas campaign is outspending the Senator McCains campaign 4 to 1 or more in some locations. This is due to Senator Obama backing out of an agreement he made with Senator McCain.
2. Senator Obamas campaign has opened up about 700 offices nation-wide versus less than 100 than Senator McCains campaign has opened up.
3. The mainstream media has been completely biased against Senator McCain.
4. Biased organizations, such as ACORN, have received contributions from Senator Obama, have been openly supporting Senator Obama, and are under investigation for committing voter registration fraud in multiple states favoring Senator Obama.
5 An enormous number of biased celebrities have been supporting Senator Obama and speaking out against Senator McCain.
6. Even though Congress is very unpopular, both sides are controlled by the democrats and have been making biased statements against Senator McCain.
7. Senator McCain is disadvantaged because of the unpopularity of the incumbent President.
8. All four of the debate moderators lean to the left and were not 100% fair.
Even with all of the biased and unfair things mentioned above that are running against Senator McCain, Senator Obama only has a narrow lead. Should he not be way out in front? I have heard people state that on the news from both campaigns. That should tell you something. Also, Senator Obama pulled a cheap shot on Senator McCain and the American public in regards to campaign financing. Both campaigns agreed to use public financing during the presidential campaign. At the last moment, Senator Obama backed out of his agreement and took private financing, giving Senator Obama a significant advantage over Senator McCain in financing his campaign. In addition, Senator Obama is not being totally open as to where all his contributions are coming from. But even though Senator Obama took a sucker punch and tricked Senator McCain and all Americans by backing out of his agreement, Senator McCain is keeping with his word and using public financing. This is severely disadvantaging Senator McCains campaign financing by putting much lower caps on the amount of money he will have available. This is the reason Senator Obama can outspend Senator McCain 4 to 1. This also shows that Senator Obama does not keep his campaign promises, just like his past campaign promises.
Just imagine what it will be like when you have both the House of Representatives and the Senate controlled by the democrats, and Senator Obama in the Whitehouse signing everything that comes across his desk from them. In other words, the person writing the check will also be the one cashing it. There will be no checks and balances, especially if the democrats pick up a few more seats in the Senate and it becomes filibuster-proof, which means they will have a monopoly. Again, there will be no checks and balances. We will have higher taxes, more government, and fewer rights. They have already promised all of those things. You will have a government that will tax the people that are creating the jobs so they can spread the wealth around. Who do you think creates the jobs in this country? Have you ever seen a business owned by a poor person? Are they the ones starting small businesses and creating jobs? Obviously not! So we have established the fact that the people that own the small businesses and create the jobs are NOT the poor. So lets talk about what is going to happen when they start taxing the people that do own the small businesses that create the jobs.
So what do you think will happen when they start taxing the small business owners? First, jobs will be lost. They will not be able to afford to keep the same amount of people they have now they will have to let people go. In addition, they will not be able to expand their businesses and hire more people. The second thing that will happen is that prices will go up. Do you think businesses will not raise the cost of their products and services to offset the extra taxes they have to pay? This should be obvious. The prices will go up on everything and will affect everybody to include the middle class and the poor. When you go to the grocery store, the food prices will be higher. When you go buy a car, the prices will be higher. When you go to the department store the prices are going to be higher. Put yourself in the shoes of a business owner; if your expenses go up, would you not raise the price of your products to pay for them? Of course you would! And taxes are an expense.
Now lets talk about presidential qualifications. When a federal employee or a member of the military has a need to have access to classified materials, they would need to get a security clearance. A security clearance attempts to certify that an individual is of high moral character and does not pose a security risk. If a federal employee or a member of the military admits to using a dangerous drug, such as cocaine, they will not be eligible for a security clearance. In addition, an admitted cocaine user would not be able to get in the military and if he or she is a federal employee, he or she would be moved to a position of lesser responsibility and not have access to classified materials. Senator Obama has admitted to using cocaine in his book that he wrote. As a candidate for president, should he not be held up to the same standards of a federal employee or a member of our military? As President, he is going to be exposed to an enormous amount of classified materials, have his finger on the nuke button, and be the commander in chief of the strongest military in the world. Would you not want someone in that position that can qualify for a security clearance?
Another point I would like to make is in regards to Senator Obamas experience, which is a drop in the bucket compared to Senator McCains. With the world and the economy in such a delicate position, I cannot imagine why anyone would not want the most experienced person in the Whitehouse. Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and even Senator Obamas running mate, Senator Joe Biden, have made statements to the fact that Senator Obama is not experienced enough to be President and that the presidency is not the type of job for on-the-job training. They also said that Senator McCain brings a lifetime of experience to the table. Senator Obamas running mate, Senator Biden, even said he would even be honored to run with his friend John McCain. These individuals are now claiming that they said that during the primaries when they were running against Senator Obama. Does that mean they were lying then, or now? Senator Obama claimed that he had more diverse foreign policy experience because he lived overseas as a kid. Living overseas does not give you foreign policy experience, unless you are an Ambassador, which he was not. If it did, then Senator John McCain would again best Senator Obamas record since he has lived overseas being a member of the military.
What issue or issues are you going to base your voting decision on? Will it be the economy? National defense? Education? There are so many out there. Because of the current economic situation, a large number of you are going to base your decision on who is best for the economy. I would hope that I have answered this question for you earlier on in this article. Such as pointing out which candidate has promised to raise taxes and spend more reducing jobs and raising the cost to live. But just in case I have not, I have a couple additional items for you to think about. If you look at all of the campaign promises on Senator Obamas web site, you will see hundreds of them. How is he going to pay for them? I think I answered that already. But, if you add of the costs of all of them, mathematically it is going to cost us a lot more than he will be able to raise in taxes. So many of these are going to be just like so many of his previous campaign promises they wont get done. Maybe the economy is not the best issue to use in making a decision for president. What about national defense? In my opinion, if you dont have a secure nation, the rest of the issues are moot. With Russia and China outspending us two fold to build up their military; with Iran and North Korea toying around with nukes and making threats; with Russia making friends and conducting military exercises not too far from our back door in Venezuela; with Russia helping Iran build nuclear processing material plants; and with the terrorist threat growing in Pakistan (a nuclear country), Afghanistan, Africa, and several other countries throughout the world, I want the most experienced and tested person in that office. Not some junior Senator that has absolutely no experience in national security. The economy is important, but national defense is a must. Remember, if our country is not secure, then the economy means nothing, our freedom is in jeopardy, and our lives as we know them today could easily be drastically changed in a moments notice. Just ask the citizens of the country of Georgia. One last point: Have you see who is openly supporting Senator Obama in the news? Iran and the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah have made public statements that they would prefer Sen. Obama to win. Go figure.
So after reading this, where do you stand? The differences in these two candidates are very apparent. On one hand, you have an individual with many years of applicable real world experience, has been a public servant and leader for about 50 years, has a proven record to reduce taxes and government spending, and is dedicated to growing the US economy and jobs. On the other hand, you have an individual with very little experience, questionable associations, has a proven record to increase taxes, government spending, and earmarks, and has promised to increase taxes and government spending. As I said at the beginning of this article, I cannot imagine why anyone in their right mind, after doing a real comparison of the two candidates, would vote for Senator Obama. I admit, he presents himself well and has a good appearance, as long as he has a teleprompter to read from. So the bottom line is what do you want in the next president, appearance or substance?
Posted by: Glen M ||
11/01/2008 10:11 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Oh, please he is simply going to waive his hand and all crisis will be resolved. The illuminati media will sing praises and their will be snacking upon breakfast cereal and fruits of other peoples labor.
#16
"Uh. These uh are not the uh campaign uh promises I knew"
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/01/2008 13:34 Comments ||
Top||
#17
sometimes I wonder if the Barack and the democratic party isn't a social experiement. Kind of like the one I saw on Third Rock From The Sun the other day where Sally conducts an experiement to see how mean she can be to guys and have them still come back for more.
He says he's going to raise our taxes for everyone who is wealthy - when the wealthy don't object, he lowers it to 250,000 (gross) then when they don't object, to 200,000 then to 120,000. Then they have his vice president come forward and say "Mark my words, he'll be tested". Obama received the 2nd highest lobby contributions to prevent McCain and the Republicans from fixing Fannie and Freddie and Acorn forced lenders to make bad loans causing the financial crisis. His political career is launched by a guy who bombed the Pentagon and wants to undermine the government. He is was an attorney an organizer and trainer for an organization that has registered possibly millions of fraudulent voters and is proud of it. He has allowed the use of state resources to investigate and intimidate TV stations, reporters, and even Joe the plumber for daring to ask questions. He has even refused to provide proof of the one requirement for the job - his birth certificate. Obama couldn't come close to a security clearance. He wants to end the war that we already won. I could go on and on.
It is almost like an experiment to see just how self-destructive they can make their candidate - just how much he can NOT stand for everything his voters claim they stand for, just to see how many idiots will still vote for him.
#18
it's like, if he wins, the TV crews and the universities who participated in this 30 year experiment are going to jump out and say, HA! You've been punked! This candidate is against EVERYTHING you claim to be for! Yet you voted for him - fool.
#19
IF the "Messiah" wins, it will be ugly beyond belief. He has never successfully governed anything - he will struggle and cast blame for all of his failures. "The One" will blame Bush and use these "troubled times" which clearly were not his fault don't ya know to attempt to seize unprecedented powers.
He will end up as either a martyr or a dictator. Obama's lack of humility, tremendous ego and pride almost ensure that this will happen.
#20
Even Clinton didn't renege on his "tax break for the middle class" until the middle of January 1993. Soon after his inauguration we learned that raising taxes on anyone making over $200,000 really meant tax increases for anyone making over $20,000.
Opponent Accuses Rep. Alcee Hastings of Threatening His Life
Posted by: Fred ||
11/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hastings is a waste of protein. if he lived in a district with a reasonable number of thinking people instead of democratic myrmidons, he would never be considered for his position.
Affirmative action and gerrymandering at the highest.
Posted by: Abu do you love ||
11/01/2008 2:17 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Another corrupt black politician. Surprise, surprise. And to think there are people who truly wonder why there is racial prejudice...
There must be some honest black pols somewhere. Unfortunately, judging from all we hear and see of them in the U.S., it's not here.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
