That's what happens when you have experience as an organizer and your organization is gigantic.

subby, why must you joke about mccain's position on the matter? he knows that the market will take care of it.

McCain's not worried about a little flooding like this. He remembers one time when that young whippersnapper next door built an ark.

does FEMA even know what's going on yet?

No tag?

This is simply yet another example of Obama thinking big government should intrude into people's lives.

Imagine if he were president during Katrina.

this?.

Atillathepun: This is simply yet another example of Obama thinking big government should intrude into people's lives.

Excellent. Short and to the point, but slightly awkward phrasing. 8/10

I like hope.

I want change.

I see nothing wrong with these things.

I proudly support Obama.

Two Dogs Farking: Atillathepun: This is simply yet another example of Obama thinking big government should intrude into people's lives.

Excellent. Short and to the point, but slightly awkward phrasing. 8/10

Were you using your sarcasm-meter or your troll-meter?

/O8ama!

It appears that Obama himself is manning the sand-bags in Illinois

Atillathepun: Were you using your sarcasm-meter or your troll-meter?

They aren't the same thing on Fark?

Barack Obama and his campaign are using the power of their e-mail list and website to help organize relief efforts for people in the Midwest devastated by the intense floods. I recieved an e-mail from the campaign asking me to help by donating to the Red Cross relief effort. When I went to barackobama.com, I saw that the home page is dominated by an appeal for the flood victims uinder the banner

So in other words, Obama is doing the exact same thing that many other organizations are doing, only difference is that he is running for president and his organization happens to be larger than all the others. The church I belong to is doing the exact same thing.

Why again is this so newsworthy? It's hardly a new thing.

Crosshair: Why again is this so newsworthy? It's hardly a new thing.

It is newsworthy because he is a Presidential candidate and he's doing more to help than the other candidate or the sitting president.

If McCain tries to handle it, we'll be in Iowa for the next hundred years.

GAT_00: It is newsworthy because he is a Presidential candidate and he's doing more to help than the other candidate or the sitting president.

All the campaign is "doing" is emailing everyone asking them to help support the efforts in Iowa. It probably took a whole hour to put everything together and click "send" for the email. It perhaps took a few more hours to get everything else setup on the website. So this whole bit of good publicity was done because lunch.

Not saying it isn't good to be trying to help others. I'm just failing to see how this is newsworthy. It might have been in 1994 when most people hadn't even heard of Email, but stuff like this is now an everyday thing.

Now if Obama was down there walking the dikes and sandbagging, then that might be newsworthy.

Snarfangel: If McCain tries to handle it, we'll be in Iowa for the next hundred years.

nice

Crosshair: All the campaign is "doing" is emailing everyone asking them to help support the efforts in Iowa. It probably took a whole hour to put everything together and click "send" for the email. It perhaps took a few more hours to get everything else setup on the website. So this whole bit of good publicity was done because lunch.

Then... why isn't every website doing this? I mean, it only takes 3 hours.

Crosshair: Now if Obama was down there walking the dikes and sandbagging, then that might be newsworthy.

Kinda like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdXKR25BtYM

ODDwhun: Crosshair: Now if Obama was down there walking the dikes and sandbagging, then that might be newsworthy.

Kinda like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdXKR25BtYM

That most certainly is Senator Obama in Iowa filling sandbags. And if it really is so easy to set up a website to get a list together to send out emails, why aren't you doing it?

Snarfangel: If McCain tries to handle it, we'll be in Iowa for the next hundred years.

A fate worse than death.

ODDwhun: Crosshair: Now if Obama was down there walking the dikes and sandbagging, then that might be newsworthy.

Kinda like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdXKR25BtYM

Now to be completely fair... that is him in Quincy, Illinois and not Iowa, but I think the sentiment is the same

clgrin: Now to be completely fair... that is him in Quincy, Illinois and not Iowa, but I think the sentiment is the same

Is it? Damn. There's only a giant banner at the bottom of the page I missed. And the text on the right. Anyone have any coffee?

GAT_00:

Is it? Damn. There's only a giant banner at the bottom of the page I missed. And the text on the right. Anyone have any coffee?

Yeah, but it has been sitting around for 24 hours

Good for him. I support wholeheartedly all private efforts to help.

I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

Not sure if Crosshair is coming back...

Churchill2004: Good for him. I support wholeheartedly all private efforts to help.

I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

Per usual, this kind of thinking forgets that the above two entities are the same thing. That's exactly what government is for -- it's the common contract we make with each other to ensure our common welfare.

There has been no greater threat to this country than the demonization of government -- and election of people that abhor it.

It's undermined the foundations of our nationhood.

ExJerseyGirl: Yeah, but it has been sitting around for 24 hours

Eh, it's caffeinated sludge.

robsul82: Not sure if Crosshair is coming back...

Considering that his points have been voided, probably not.

Bush replies to Obama, "You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie."

Churchill2004: Good for him. I support wholeheartedly all private efforts to help.

I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

Wow

Atillathepun: Churchill2004: Good for him. I support wholeheartedly all private efforts to help.

I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

Wow

Double wow.

DarnoKonrad: Per usual, this kind of thinking forgets that the above two entities are the same thing



This man would have a stroke if he knew how many people in the US actually believed that today.

Churchill2004: I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

What? Yes, let the people die. We didn't want them anyway.

Churchill2004: This man would have a stroke if he knew how many people in the US actually believed that today.

He'd probably have a stroke if he knew how many people in the US hold a "I got mine, get your own, I don't care about you" attitude.

We are a nation of individuals, but the grossly hyperbolic version of individualism that people believe in nowadays is destructive.

GAT_00: Churchill2004: I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

What? Yes, let the people die. We didn't want them anyway.

I might kind of agree with Churchy if circumstances warranted that there was plenty of warning and calls to get out of the way and such (a la Katrina). But flash floods?? That's too sudden to really do anything about, and too disastrous for some state governments to handle single-handedly, and so yes, help from the federal government should be expected.

/waits for inevitable "SO KATRINA WAS DIFFERENT CUZ THEY WAS BLACK?? RACIST!!!!ONE!!

Churchill2004: Good for him. I support wholeheartedly all private efforts to help.

I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

Brought to you by the kind of thinking that would advocate that the federal government let you die in a flu pandemic unless it was a biological weapons attack - then we can treat you.

Because we all know that a strong defense can only be mounted against a human enemy, the elements are only an act of God and the federal government cannot have anything to do with pissing God off.

WTF?

GAT_00: What? Yes, let the people die. We didn't want them anyway

That's not even remotely what I said. I said it's counter-productive to focus on the President and the Feds as the epicenter of disaster response.

Selector: I might kind of agree with Churchy if circumstances warranted that there was plenty of warning and calls to get out of the way and such (a la Katrina). But flash floods?? That's too sudden to really do anything about, and too disastrous for some state governments to handle single-handedly, and so yes, help from the federal government should be expected

I'm not saying in extreme circumstances the Federal government shouldn't help, but not in anything like the several dozen "Federal disaster area" declarations that occur every year. Miraculously, they occur more in election year swing states than anywhere else.

The Feds here should be focused on their actual role in this- as controller and maintainer of the waterways. States and localities are perfectly equipped to house the evacuated people.

Selector: I might kind of agree with Churchy if circumstances warranted that there was plenty of warning and calls to get out of the way and such (a la Katrina). But flash floods?? That's too sudden to really do anything about, and too disastrous for some state governments to handle single-handedly, and so yes, help from the federal government should be expected.

This is river flooding. It is hardly sudden. The flooding is worse than in 1993 for Iowa. This is not a sudden crisis.

Random Reality Check: Brought to you by the kind of thinking that would advocate that the federal government let you die in a flu pandemic unless it was a biological weapons attack - then we can treat you

What the hell? I said nothing of the sort. In a true, rampaging pandemic of the sort scare-mongered in the media about, of course the government could intervene. Of course, those sorts of things aren't nearly as likely as a lot of people seem to think.

Also, what difference would it make if it was a terrorist attack or not?

Random Reality Check: Because we all know that a strong defense can only be mounted against a human enemy, the elements are only an act of God and the federal government cannot have anything to do with pissing God off

I'm saying there's no good reason for disaster response to be Federalized. That's all. The Feds can still help in extreme scenarios, but not as the primary responder or over all "manager" of the disaster relief.

Churchill2004: DarnoKonrad: Per usual, this kind of thinking forgets that the above two entities are the same thing



This man would have a stroke if he knew how many people in the US actually believed that today.

We the People Government of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

there. you FTFY.

DarnoKonrad: here. you FTFY.

The theory elucidated by the preamble of social contract does not in any sense say that the people and the government are one and the same. It's saying that the people, in order to do these things, are establishing the Constitution, part of which creates the Federal government and defines its limits.

GAT_00: Selector: I might kind of agree with Churchy if circumstances warranted that there was plenty of warning and calls to get out of the way and such (a la Katrina). But flash floods?? That's too sudden to really do anything about, and too disastrous for some state governments to handle single-handedly, and so yes, help from the federal government should be expected.

This is river flooding. It is hardly sudden. The flooding is worse than in 1993 for Iowa. This is not a sudden crisis.

Regardless, the area was hard hit, and thusly, the federal government can do a hell of lot more to help than the state one can.

Crosshair:
Now if Obama was down there walking the dikes and sandbagging, then that might be newsworthy.



HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Don't come back.

It's been so long since we've seen a politician actual DO anything GOOD for this country that I'm kind of in shock, here.

I haven't watched the youtubes, but I mean, he's ONLY doing this to get votes, right? It's just a typical empty gesture, a photo op, correct? I mean, it's NOT as if he's actually getting tired or dirty or anything, right? Because politicians don't DO that.

Selector: Regardless, the area was hard hit, and thusly, the federal government can do a hell of lot more to help than the state one can

Where do you get that idea? FEMA is nothing more than a coordinating agency with relatively few immediately available resources and personnel.

The states already have the manpower they need to handle this, and the resources. Federal money will really only stop them from racking up a debt doing it, it won't really be the key enabler of them, though.

grxymkjbn: It's been so long since we've seen a politician actual DO anything GOOD for this country that I'm kind of in shock, here.

I haven't watched the youtubes, but I mean, he's ONLY doing this to get votes, right? It's just a typical empty gesture, a photo op, correct? I mean, it's NOT as if he's actually getting tired or dirty or anything, right? Because politicians don't DO that.

If you think that getting votes wasn't an ulterior motive of this, you're pretty naive. It may not be the main goal, but it most decidedly makes an appearance.

Churchill2004: Selector: Regardless, the area was hard hit, and thusly, the federal government can do a hell of lot more to help than the state one can

Where do you get that idea? FEMA is nothing more than a coordinating agency with relatively few immediately available resources and personnel.

The states already have the manpower they need to handle this, and the resources. Federal money will really only stop them from racking up a debt doing it, it won't really be the key enabler of them, though.

So the Louisiana state government had plenty of resources during and had total control of the Katrina situation??

Selector: GAT_00: Churchill2004: I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

What? Yes, let the people die. We didn't want them anyway.

I might kind of agree with Churchy if circumstances warranted that there was plenty of warning and calls to get out of the way and such (a la Katrina). But flash floods?? That's too sudden to really do anything about, and too disastrous for some state governments to handle single-handedly, and so yes, help from the federal government should be expected.

/waits for inevitable "SO KATRINA WAS DIFFERENT CUZ THEY WAS BLACK?? RACIST!!!!ONE!!

So if people make mistakes, or even when their local government falls down on the job, we should just walk away from our fellow Americans?

Jesus, I honestly felt good about when this country came together and worked to try help our fellow citizens. Apparently you didn't share in that joy.

More to the point, why would the federal government want to have anything to do with getting one of our largest seaports back online - screw them, right? After all, what the hell does Indiana or Iowa do for us - screw them if they can't rebuild their highways and bridges, they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps. This is America, we don't do charity - and certainly not for people who are too lazy to help themselves.

After all, those lazy assholes in the Midwest, they should have learned the last time they had those floods and either fixed their dikes or moved to somewhere they wouldn't have to deal with flooding - stupid bastards, living in a flash flood zone. Isn't that what you're saying? Because from here, it sure sounds like it.

What the hell has happened to this country?
What a bunch of selfish bastards some of us have become.
And let's try and make the claim that this is what the founders wanted.
If they were alive to day I swear they would vote to make the British take us back.

Selector:
If you think that getting votes wasn't an ulterior motive of this, you're pretty naive. It may not be the main goal, but it most decidedly makes an appearance.

For sure, but it's also putting his money where his mouth is re: Katrina. Where was Bush during Katrina? Cutting the cake with John McCain.

If anything, this is Obama playing defensively - no one will be able to accuse him of talking out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to disaster relief. Even if it was only a token gesture, he did more than his opponent and the sitting president.

cameroncrazy1984: That's what happens when you have experience as an organizer and your organization is gigantic.

Hey, that's just a rumor about black men!

Churchill2004: I still think it's absurd and counterproductive to expect the President and the Federal government to be responsible for saving people from cyclical bad weather.

You're right, we should expect JESUS to do it instead!

/_{Wasn't he supposed to come back by now? Lazy bastard!}