Your federal government working for you.
 

Since I'm the one who offered to match, yes, me.

Personally, I find your alleged efforts to bring people to Seattle, if true, quite admirable.

Perhaps, however, you might want to give a good think as to why I might be skeptical of your sincerity.

Your federal government working for you.
 

This is what you said:

"I have nothing more to say on the topic for now. Except that people who don't give money to the Red Cross are chumps."

That does not say I don't care what org you give to, it says if you don't give to the red Cross you are a chump. Or am I reading it wrong? I am not trying to be insulting, I just don't understand the tone of the message. Why is someone who gives to one of the many other charitable organizations doing good works in NO and the other hurricane zones a chump? Why am I a chump for trying to bring displaced children to Seattle so they can continue to go to school and have a home etc during the period of their displacement? Oddly when I made the offer the people I made it to thanked me. Apparently they didn't know they were involved in chumpery.

Or are you retracting the statement?

Your federal government working for you.
 

I for one do not think these children should be raised in Seattle, even for a few months. the rabble that frequents your public spaces present a very poor idea of how to behave in our country. Perhaps you can convince not bob to care for the child.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Fine. I am retracting the statement and replacing it with "People who don't give money or other donations, or volunteer time with an organization that provides relief to, in this case, victims of Katrina, but more in general, relief to those in need, in accordance with their resources, are chumps."

Happy now?

Your federal government working for you.
 

This? First Spanky admits that Bush was partly to blame for the situation and now you attack Penske. And Penske today saying he has doubts about crosses.

Please, Bitch.

We need a united front against the godless, against the homosexual, and against the liberal, the yankees, and the San Franciscans who seem to be all these things.

Your federal government working for you.
 

I would have liked to have donated to something other than the Red Cross, and I waited patiently for that charity to reveal itself to me. As Doctors Without Borders and animal charities have in the past. At the end of the day, I decided in this case that the Red Cross was the way to go. Many of the smaller efforts in this case have already maxed out. Which is good news, of course, but it left me with the Red Cross. They have costs associated with those long term shelters that are not small. So I'm reasonably optimistic that the money spent there in this case will actually benefit some of the hurricane victims. As opposed to other times I have sent donations their way.

I'm not a fan of the prodding to donate either. People will give or will not based on their own values and trying to guilt people into it is pointless and irritating to listen to. I donated to the Red Cross today finally (well, my household already gave to animal charities and to charities that receive matching funds from our workplaces), but it was not for lack of a plan to donate. Only for a lack of clarity as to how my donation will be best put to use. I've done the early donation thing after certain other disasters and later wished I could change the recipient, so this time I really thought it out.

If I were still in Dallas, I'm sure I would personally be doing more, as all my friends there and in Houston are. I feel a bit helpless being this far away despite the fact that people touched by the disaster are now congregating in my former city and so many friends of mine there have been personally touched by the devastation.

Your federal government working for you.
 

I'm not putting in for your matching so I guess we are even on that point.


Because knowing someone in a very limited and anonymous context on the internet gives you deep insight?

I have been involved in community service in each of the communities I have lived in for 25 years. I don't need you to validate me. Whatever great knowledge you think you have gleaned from my posts here is meaningless in the real world.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Yes. More so because you appear to be a stand up sort of chap (to the limited extent one can tell in this context) and I don't think you were meaning to come across in the way you came across.

Your federal government working for you.
 

I have come to believe you have great amounts of free time in your workday. Bullseye?

Your federal government working for you.
 

I don't disagree. Sadly it is the best and brightest of the modern day liberals.

Your federal government working for you.
 

You are not a chump.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Penske, you’re not from Banff? You dick. That plane ticket was $1300.00.

Touche, I guess. I should’ve suspected there was no 123 Goldwater Way up there.

Your federal government working for you.
 

I procrastinate a lot. Somehow I still manage to get 7 billable hours in to each day. 365 a year.

Your federal government working for you.
 

I believe the victims share in the blame. That is why I'm punishing the child by sending her to Penske.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Touche, indeed. Not banff, I am honourary citisen of Penticton.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Because either 75% of what you post here is insincere, or you are a very warped person (actually, those aren't mutually exclusive, I suppose).

As for validation, whatever.

There are dozens of people who read this board who both didn't feel the need to give through the board or in such a way as to benefit the board, but only you and Hank feel the need to be defensive about it. Why is that, do you think?*

*Genuinely curious. I don't mean to imply that you you and Hank are chumps. I mean, you are chumps**, but I didn't mean to imply it from the question.

**Not because of your charitible giving, just in general.

Your federal government working for you.
 

I'm not defensive, I am offended. Do you not think some people here might not be able to donate, and be somewhat troubled by your posts?

As to my own giving habits, I will leave it to any individual posters who may care to decide whether I likely am charitable. Think about what you know.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Exactly why I'm sitting this fight out.

It's buried in today's article about the new authorization for $50B or so for Katrina relief, but I was especially startled to see this quote:

• At a news conference, Pelosi, D-Calif., said Bush's choice for head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency had "absolutely no credentials."
  
  She related that she had urged Bush at the White House on Tuesday to fire Michael Brown.
  
  "He said 'Why would I do that?'" Pelosi said.
  
  "'I said because of all that went wrong, of all that didn't go right last week.' And he said 'What didn't go right?'"
  
  "Oblivious, in denial, dangerous," she added.

I'm at the point where I'm hoping this really isn't true, because the thought of Bush honestly being so cocooned that he doesn't think that FEMA has done something wrong is truly depressing.

Gattigap

Your federal government working for you.
 

If I think about what I know, you aren't going to like the answer.

I am sorry you are offended. Those who cannot donate should not be offended. When 9/11 occurred, I was in a financial postion that precluded me from donating anything above a token amount.

OTOH, had I seen at the time (and I did) people encouraging others to donate to some cause (or expressing dismay that others have not donated), I would have shrugged my shoulders, thought to myself "I've done what I can" and let it go.

And I'm still pretty.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Your prods have come off as a bit sanctimonious and self-promoting. IMO. I have no problem with the pledge to match (if that is what is was; I'm not fact-checking your offers here but this is my recollection), which is a great move and should be commended, but the Get Off Your Ass And Donate Already and the Anyone Who Hasn't Donated Is A Chump messages don't hit your best note. People are aware of the offer. Why not just leave it at that?

Your federal government working for you.
 

I apologize. I was presuming a minimum ability to reason with the suggestion, and of course in doing so I could have overly challenged some.


Ironic that my faux pas was included in a post suggestion that you might have offended the less well off. Mea culpa.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Are you posting this to defend Penske, or me?

Your federal government working for you.
 

Like Ty, neither of you need my defense, I'm sure.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Maybe, but Penske could do with a PR voice, and maybe a translator.

Your federal government working for you.
 

I stand here by Penske, as still and unmovable as Stonewall Jackson.

I'm having a hard time believing that Bush would bother responding to Nancy Pelosi.

Your federal government working for you.
 

Wait a minute. Did you go to the peach festival this year? That's good fun.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

Poll numbers out! Hank right/libs wrong. Pelosi and her ilk will be losing seats if they don't shut up.

You haven't seen this? http://politicalhumor.about.com/libr...lfredwbush.jpg

:confused:

Government Performance --
10% said George W. Bush has done a "great" job in "responding to the hurricane and subsequent flooding"
25% said "good"
21% said "neither good nor bad"
18% said "bad"
24% said "terrible"
2% had no opinion.

8% said federal government agencies responsible for handling emergencies have done a "great" job in "responding to the hurricane and subsequent flooding"
27% said "good"
20% said "neither good nor bad"
20% said "bad"
22% said "terrible"
3% had no opinion.

7% said state and local officials in Louisiana have done a "great" job in "responding to the hurricane and subsequent flooding"
30% said "good"
23% said "neither good nor bad"
20% said "bad"
15% said "terrible"
5% had no opinion.

Math is hard.

That's great! Oh, I hear the Dems have pretty much locked up the White House for another term on The West Wing. Can anyone here confirm?

Your federal government working for you.
 

Certainly some of my posts are partisanly rhetorical and the parodies are what they appear to be. Other than that if you have followed my posts I don't think my political philosophy is that far outside of the fiscal conservative/libertarian wing of the republican party, other than my philosophy about abortion is no longer libertarian albeit I am not against abortion , just for more limits, and since 9/11 I am more of an imperialist than I was before 9/11 (but probably equally imperialist as I was during Reagan's presidency through the fall of the iron curtain). I am usually directly in sync with views of the WSJ Editorial board.

I am not sure that is either warped or insincere.

I'm not defensive. I thought and stand by my position that it was an arrogant and off putting thing to say, i.e. call someoen who did not give to your designated charity a chump. If someone solicited me in person for money and said, if you don't give to my cause you are a chump, I would definitely opt for chumpdom. With that in mind I was offering up that if your goal is greater participation in your cause (included from people who give to other worthy causes of their designation), you may want to re-phrase your pitch.

He already said publicly that the initial performance was unacceptable. Who knows what the distress of being in the presence of a shrill and shreiking harpy like Pelosi would make him say and as such it has no bearing.

When is someone going to call for Nagin to resign? Or do you all still withhold criticism of his monumental failure?

56% have no negative opinion. Give that 40% of the country disagree with how the guy wipes his ass that is extraordinary. Plus, both here and in real life, the Dem's line has been the handling of the hurricane kills Bush in the public eye. I've have said it will be seen as an unavoidable tragedy, and the only the only politcal bump would come against the Dems if they try to make it an issue. So far I'm right on the first half. We'll see about the second half in next year's elections, because i know the Dems are too ignorant to shut the fuck up with the blaming.

This is a question, not an accusation, but do you ever refer to male politicians as "shrill and shrieking harpies"? (I'm sure there are some out there who fit that bill.)

Your federal government working for you.
 

No, but I would accept a lifting of the sanction, iykwimaittyd.

Nagin, Blanco, Bush and Cheney ought to all resign.

Now when will you agree, and call for Bush's resignation.

NUTS!


Thanks, it's good to be back to normal.