How many bottles of water and food packets

• How many bottles of water and food packets - Paloma

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

donations are way down.

In this situation, people can't help other people if they can't help themselves.

Over the last few years, I think I know what it feels like to be a frog that's dropped into a pot of cold water, with the temperature rise of the water being so slow that the next thing he knows, he's DEAD.

I know I'm "there," but this "evolution" has been so subtle that I don't know exactly when it began and probably won't realize when it ends (if it ends).

For starters, this bill was apparently introduced on June 26, 2007, while Bush was still President.

The way it was being hyped, it seemed to be something that was designed to encourage public service in young people in exchange for financial assistance with college tuition, etc.  I thought it sounded like a good idea, something that might help to build character in young people and encourage and foster the kind of behavior we saw after 9/11, when Americans helped each other and showed the world what we're made of when it comes to helping each other.  To offer a young person financial help for college in exchange for some volunteer hours, I thought, was great.  Equally great, I thought, was the notion that this was voluntary and NOT mandatory.

Now, it's apparently for everyone, including seniors, which is still okay, I guess, if this is something that some seniors want to do.

However, one little sentence (shown below) is sending up a BIG RED FLAG into my little pea brain, copied below and bolded:

From:  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

OpenCongress Summary:
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, including those for seniors and veterans. It also establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer service program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.

In its current form, the legislation does not include a mandate requiring service.

Quite frankly, I have jumped (like a frog) from link to link to link trying to research this, so I'm not sure what its "current form" is today.  It apparently was passed by the House and now by the Senate just a few days ago (see http://loungedaddy.us/?p=725).

Yesterday, at first, when I heard of Rick Wagoner, GM's "sacrificial lamb," basically being fired by Obama, I felt very uncomfortable with that.  After I thought about it more, though, I do agree that ANY company that accepts financial aid from Americans should be scrutinized, including, if necessary in this manner (even if Wagoner's firing, in my opinion, was merely symbolic and not substantive).  What sticks in my crawl is the fact that Wall Street crooks have been treated like kings while auto industry workers are being kicked more and more every day while they're down.

I was never comfortable with any of the bailouts, and that was the one thing that Obama voted for that earned him a spot on the "negative" column of my pros and cons list.

I freely admit that my thought processes have been severely hampered recently (especially after two hospitalizations in less than a month).  It's much more difficult for me to concentrate and to word-find at times.  I had hoped that Obama would be the "people's" President (as opposed to Bush being the "corporation's" President.

I used to think (and frequently wrote) that the Clintons and the Bushes were merely opposite sides of the same coin.  I still believe that; however, I'm starting to think that Obama's face is on that coin now.

To sum it up, on this day and at this time, all I can truly say with certainty is:

RIBBIT!!!!

Over the last few years, I think I know what it feels like to be a frog that's dropped into a pot of cold water, with the temperature rise of the water being so slow that the next thing he knows, he's DEAD.

I know I'm "there," but this "evolution" has been so subtle that I don't know exactly when it began and probably won't realize when it ends (if it ends).

For starters, this bill was apparently introduced on June 26, 2007, while Bush was still President.

The way it was being hyped, it seemed to be something that was designed to encourage public service in young people in exchange for financial assistance with college tuition, etc.  I thought it sounded like a good idea, something that might help to build character in young people and encourage and foster the kind of behavior we saw after 9/11, when Americans helped each other and showed the world what we're made of when it comes to helping each other.  To offer a young person financial help for college in exchange for some volunteer hours, I thought, was great.  Equally great, I thought, was the notion that this was voluntary and NOT mandatory.

Now, it's apparently for everyone, including seniors, which is still okay, I guess, if this is something that some seniors want to do.

However, one little sentence (shown below) is sending up a BIG RED FLAG into my little pea brain, copied below and bolded:

From:  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

OpenCongress Summary:
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, including those for seniors and veterans. It also establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer service program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.

In its current form, the legislation does not include a mandate requiring service.

Quite frankly, I have jumped (like a frog) from link to link to link trying to research this, so I'm not sure what its "current form" is today.  It apparently was passed by the House and now by the Senate just a few days ago (see http://loungedaddy.us/?p=725).

Yesterday, at first, when I heard of Rick Wagoner, GM's "sacrificial lamb," basically being fired by Obama, I felt very uncomfortable with that.  After I thought about it more, though, I do agree that ANY company that accepts financial aid from Americans should be scrutinized, including, if necessary in this manner (even if Wagoner's firing, in my opinion, was merely symbolic and not substantive).  What sticks in my crawl is the fact that Wall Street crooks have been treated like kings while auto industry workers are being kicked more and more every day while they're down.

I was never comfortable with any of the bailouts, and that was the one thing that Obama voted for that earned him a spot on the "negative" column of my pros and cons list.

I freely admit that my thought processes have been severely hampered recently (especially after two hospitalizations in less than a month).  It's much more difficult for me to concentrate and to word-find at times.  I had hoped that Obama would be the "people's" President (as opposed to Bush being the "corporation's" President.

I used to think (and frequently wrote) that the Clintons and the Bushes were merely opposite sides of the same coin.  I still believe that; however, I'm starting to think that Obama's face has replaced Hillary's face on that coin now.

To sum it up, on this day and at this time, all I can truly say with certainty is:

RIBBIT!!!!

Over the last few years, I think I know what it feels like to be a frog that's dropped into a pot of cold water, with the temperature rise of the water being so slow that the next thing he knows, he's DEAD.

I know I'm "there," but this "evolution" has been so subtle that I don't know exactly when it began and probably won't realize when it ends (if it ends).

For starters, this bill was apparently introduced on June 26, 2007, while Bush was still President.

The way it was being hyped, it seemed to be something that was designed to encourage public service in young people in exchange for financial assistance with college tuition, etc.  I thought it sounded like a good idea, something that might help to build character in young people and encourage and foster the kind of behavior we saw after 9/11, when Americans helped each other and showed the world what we're made of when it comes to helping each other.  To offer a young person financial help for college in exchange for some volunteer hours, I thought, was great.  Equally great, I thought, was the notion that this was voluntary and NOT mandatory.

Now, it's apparently for everyone, including seniors, which is still okay, I guess, if this is something that some seniors want to do.

However, one little sentence (shown below) is sending up a BIG RED FLAG into my little pea brain, copied below and bolded:

From:  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

OpenCongress Summary:
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, including those for seniors and veterans. It also establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer service program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.

In its current form, the legislation does not include a mandate requiring service.

Quite frankly, I have jumped (like a frog) from link to link to link trying to research this, so I'm not sure what its "current form" is today.  It apparently was passed by the House and now by the Senate just a few days ago (see http://loungedaddy.us/?p=725).

Yesterday, at first, when I heard of Rick Wagoner, GM's "sacrificial lamb," basically being fired by Obama, I felt very uncomfortable with that.  After I thought about it more, though, I do agree that ANY company that accepts financial aid from Americans should be scrutinized, including, if necessary in this manner (even if Wagoner's firing, in my opinion, was merely symbolic and not substantive).  What sticks in my crawl is the fact that Wall Street crooks have been treated like kings while auto industry workers are being kicked more and more every day while they're down.

I was never comfortable with any of the bailouts, and that was the one thing that Obama voted for that earned him a spot on the "negative" column of my pros and cons list.

I freely admit that my thought processes have been severely hampered recently (especially after two hospitalizations in less than a month).  It's much more difficult for me to concentrate and to word-find at times.  I had hoped that Obama would be the "people's" President (as opposed to Bush being the "corporation's" President.

I used to think (and frequently wrote) that the Clintons and the Bushes were merely opposite sides of the same coin.  I still believe that; however, I'm starting to think that Obama's face has replaced Hillary's face on that coin now.

If I'm misinformed or otherwise wrong in anything I've written in this post regarding the links I included or statements, please tell me.  Seriously.  I don't want to argue or fight or name-call.  I just want to discuss because I'm beginning to feel almost as vulnerable and distrustful of Obama's presidency as I eventually became under Bush's.

I know discussions get heated on this board sometimes, but I'm not trying to be argumentative.  I'm much, much too tired for that. 

To sum it up, on this day and at this time, all I can truly say with certainty is:

RIBBIT!!!!

Over the last few years, I think I know what it feels like to be a frog that's dropped into a pot of cold water, with the temperature rise of the water being so slow that the next thing he knows, he's DEAD.

I know I'm "there," but this "evolution" has been so subtle that I don't know exactly when it began and probably won't realize when it ends (if it ends).

For starters, this bill was apparently introduced on June 26, 2007, while Bush was still President.

The way it was being hyped, it seemed to be something that was designed to encourage public service in young people in exchange for financial assistance with college tuition, etc.  I thought it sounded like a good idea, something that might help to build character in young people and encourage and foster the kind of behavior we saw after 9/11, when Americans helped each other and showed the world what we're made of when it comes to helping each other.  To offer a young person financial help for college in exchange for some volunteer hours, I thought, was great.  Equally great, I thought, was the notion that this was voluntary and NOT mandatory.

Now, it's apparently for everyone, including seniors, which is still okay, I guess, if this is something that some seniors want to do.

However, one little sentence (shown below) is sending up a BIG RED FLAG into my little pea brain, copied below and bolded:

From:  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

OpenCongress Summary:
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, including those for seniors and veterans. It also establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer service program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.

In its current form, the legislation does not include a mandate requiring service.

Quite frankly, I have jumped (like a frog) from link to link to link trying to research this, so I'm not sure what its "current form" is today.  It apparently was passed by the House and now by the Senate just a few days ago (see http://loungedaddy.us/?p=725).

Yesterday, at first, when I heard of Rick Wagoner, GM's "sacrificial lamb," basically being fired by Obama, I felt very uncomfortable with that.  After I thought about it more, though, I do agree that ANY company that accepts financial aid from Americans should be scrutinized, including, if necessary in this manner (even if Wagoner's firing, in my opinion, was merely symbolic and not substantive).  What sticks in my crawl is the fact that Wall Street crooks have been treated like kings while auto industry workers are being kicked more and more every day while they're down.

I was never comfortable with any of the bailouts, and that was the one thing that Obama voted for that earned him a spot on the "negative" column of my pros and cons list.

I freely admit that my thought processes have been severely hampered recently (especially after two hospitalizations in less than a month).  It's much more difficult for me to concentrate and to word-find at times.  I had hoped that Obama would be the "people's" President (as opposed to Bush being the "corporation's" President.

I used to think (and frequently wrote) that the Clintons and the Bushes were merely opposite sides of the same coin.  I still believe that; however, I'm starting to think that Obama's face has replaced Hillary's face on that coin now.

If I'm misinformed or otherwise wrong in anything I've written in this post regarding the links I included or statements, please tell me.  Seriously.  I don't want to argue or fight or name-call.  I just want to discuss because I'm beginning to feel almost as vulnerable and distrustful of Obama's presidency as I eventually became under Bush's.  I know discussions get heated on this board sometimes, but I'm not trying to be argumentative.  I'm much, much too tired for that. 

To sum it up, on this day and at this time, all I can truly say with certainty is:

RIBBIT!!!!

we discover that KBR (a subsidiary of Cheney's Halliburton) knowingly exposed United States soldiers to toxic materials in Iraq. 

Please watch this video.  It's only three minutes long, and it's heartbreaking.  Don't our troops deserve better from a commander-in-chief that claims to care about them?

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CBS_KBR_knew_dangers_of_toxic_1223.html

the onliest wun I C trashin' another board is U.  How bout them taters?

If you have men who will exclude any of God's creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow men.
St. Francis of Assisi

He who is cruel to animals becomes hard also in his dealings with men. We can judge the heart of a man by his dealings wtih animals.

Immanuel Kant

WASHINGTON, Sept. 28 — Democrats and their allies mapped out a strategy on Friday that they hoped would enable them to override President Bush’s expected veto of a bipartisan bill providing health insurance for 10 million children, most of them in low-income families.

Democratic leaders said they would highlight the contrast between the president’s request for large sums of money for the Iraq war and his opposition to smaller sums for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, known as Schip.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, said, “It’s ironic that in the very same week that the president says he’s going to veto the bill because we can’t afford it, he is asking, what, for $45 billion more over and above his initial request for the war in Iraq, money that we know is being spent without accountability, without a plan for how we can leave Iraq.”

Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said, “This is all a matter of priorities: the cost of Iraq, $333 million a day; the cost of Schip, $19 million a day.”

The campaign for the legislation will also include grass-roots advocacy and political advertisements, and will initially focus on about 15 House Republicans who voted against the bill. Supporters of the legislation hope to persuade them to switch.

But House Republican leaders said they felt sure they could sustain the veto, and two lawmakers on the Democrats’ list said that they would support Mr. Bush.

The bill passed this week by the House and the Senate would provide $60 billion for the program over the next five years, up $35 billion from the current level of spending. On Wednesday, the administration said it would seek $42 billion more for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, bringing its total request to nearly $190 billion for the 2008 fiscal year, which begins Monday.

In an interview on Friday, the House Republican whip, Roy Blunt of Missouri, said there was “a 100 percent probability” that the House would sustain the president’s veto.

But, Mr. Blunt said, the coincidental timing of the vote on the child health bill and the request for money in Iraq “was not helpful.”

The White House, on the defensive, is trying to bolster Republicans who fear they might be penalized by voters if they side with the president.

Dana Perino, the White House press secretary, said Friday, “It is preposterous for people to suggest that the president of the United States doesn’t care about children, that he wants children to suffer.”

Ms. Perino said the president had a policy difference with Democrats in Congress because he did not want “additional government-run health care, socialized-type medicine.”

Senator Charles E. Grassley, an Iowa Republican who helped write the bill, said he would reach out to House Republicans and urge them to override the veto.

“This bill is not socialized medicine,” Mr. Grassley said. “Screaming ‘socialized medicine’ is like shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater. It is intended to cause hysteria that diverts people from reading the bill, looking at the facts.”

The battle will be fought in the House, where the child health bill was approved on Tuesday by a vote of 265 to 159 — well short of the two-thirds majority that would be needed to override a veto.

Ms. Pelosi called Mr. Bush on Friday and said she was praying he would sign the bill.

But Mr. Blunt said: “I bet she’s praying for him not to sign it. The bill is all about politics. It’s pretty good politics for the Democrats.”

Still, Democrats face an uphill fight to persuade Republicans to change their votes. Supporters would need 289 yes votes to enact the bill over the president’s objections if all the members were voting.

The House now has 433 members and two vacant seats.

One of the Republicans singled out for special attention by Democrats was Representative Judy Biggert, from a suburban Chicago district. She was one of 16 Republicans who signed a letter to the speaker last week, urging her to take up the Senate version of the child health bill.

The compromise closely followed the Senate version, but Mrs. Biggert voted against it, saying, “It would push Americans one step closer to socialized medicine.”

In an interview on Friday, Mrs. Biggert said she would vote to sustain the veto.

Democrats said they would also focus their efforts on Republicans like Representatives Timothy V. Johnson of Illinois, John R. Kuhl Jr. of New York, Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan and H. James Saxton of New Jersey.

Mr. McCotter said he was a big supporter of the child health program, but would vote to uphold the president’s veto, even if critics ran television advertisements against him.

Under the bill, the federal excise tax on cigarettes would be increased to $1 a pack, from the current 39 cents.

“I vowed never to raise taxes on anybody, no matter how disliked they might be,” Mr. McCotter said in an interview. He said he would rather be voted out of office than go back on his promises to constituents.

Republican senators who worked on the compromise bill, like Mr. Grassley and Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, said they had tried in vain to persuade White House officials to join the negotiations.

Ms. Perino, the White House spokeswoman, said that after vetoing the bill, Mr. Bush would like to “sit down and come to a compromise” with Congress.

The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said the president should not hold his breath waiting for such a deal. Democrats, he said, have already made many concessions to keep the support of Senate Republicans.

A lot of times a "no" vote comes from some hidden provision that doesn't jive with the candidates' personal policies, i.e. it might not be that they disagree with the issue, but instead that they disagree with the strategy proposed to tackle it.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/god-constitutions.htm

I'm not sure if this website has any politicial affiliation (I couldn't find one), but I checked several of the states constitutions out and they were spot on.  Now, I'm not a Bible thumper (or even attend church regularly), but I thought this was interesting considering Obama's speech.  

Please note that at no time in any of these constitutions is anyone told that they MUST worship God.

Rescuers Race to Save Katrina Victims

Tuesday, August 30, 2005 NEW ORLEANS — Rescuers along the hurricane-ravaged Gulf Coast pushed aside the dead to reach the living Tuesday in a race against time and rising waters, while New Orleans sank deeper into crisis and Louisiana's governor ordered storm refugees out of this drowning city. As looters stripped stores of items, sometimes in front of police, violence broke out in the Big Easy. At around 11 p.m. EDT, two gunmen with AK-47s fired shots into a police station. No one was hurt, and the men fled into the city's French quarter section. Meanwhile, two levees broke and sent water coursing into the streets of New Orleans a full day after the city appeared to have escaped widespread destruction from Hurricane Katrina. An estimated 80 percent of the below-sea-level city was under water, up to 20 feet deep in places, with miles and miles of homes swamped. The situation is untenable, Gov. Kathleen Blanco said. It's just heartbreaking. One Mississippi county alone said its death toll was at least 100, and officials are very, very worried that this is going to go a lot higher, said Joe Spraggins, civil defense director for Harrison County, home to Biloxi and Gulfport. Several victims in the county were from a beachfront apartment building that collapsed under a 25-foot wall of water as Katrina slammed the Gulf Coast with 145-mph winds. And Louisiana officials said many were feared dead there, too, making Katrina one of the most punishing storms to hit the United States in decades. After touring the destruction by air, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour said it is not of case of homes being severely damaged, they're simply not there. ... I can only imagine that this is what Hiroshima looked like 60 years ago. New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin said hundreds, if not thousands, of people may still be stuck on roofs and in attics, and so rescue boats were bypassing the dead. We're not even dealing with dead bodies, Nagin said. They're just pushing them on the side. The flooding in New Orleans grew worse by the minute, prompting the evacuation of hotels and hospitals and an audacious plan to drop huge sandbags from helicopters to close up one of the breached levees. At the same time, looting broke out in some neighborhoods, the sweltering city of 480,000 had no drinkable water, and the electricity could be out for weeks. With water rising perilously inside the Superdome, Blanco said the tens of thousands of refugees now huddled there and other shelters in New Orleans would have to be evacuated. She asked residents to spend Wednesday in prayer. That would be the best thing to calm our spirits and thank our Lord that we are survivors, she said. Slowly, gradually, we will recover; we will survive; we will rebuild. A helicopter view of the devastation over the New Orleans area revealed people standing on black rooftops baking in the sunshine while waiting for rescue boats. A row of desperately needed ambulances were lined up on the interstate, water blocking their path. Roller coasters jutted out from the water at a Six Flags amusement park. Hundreds of inmates were seen standing on a highway because the prison had been flooded. Sen. Mary Landrieu (news, bio, voting record) quietly traced the sign of the cross across her head and chest as she looked out at St. Bernard Parish, where only roofs peaked out from the water. The whole parish is gone, Landrieu said. All day long, rescuers in boats and helicopters pulled out shellshocked and bedraggled flood refugees from rooftops and attics. Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu said that 3,000 people have been rescued by boat and air, some placed shivering and wet into helicopter baskets. They were brought by the truckload into shelters, some in wheelchairs and some carrying babies, with stories of survival and of those who didn't make it. Oh my God, it was hell, said Kioka Williams, who had to hack through the ceiling of the beauty shop where she worked as floodwaters rose in New Orleans' low-lying Ninth Ward. We were screaming, hollering, flashing lights. It was complete chaos. Frank Mills was in a boarding house in the same neighborhood when water started swirling up toward the ceiling and he fled to the roof. Two elderly residents never made it out, and a third was washed away trying to climb onto the roof. He was kind of on the edge of the roof, catching his breath, Mills said. Next thing I knew, he came floating past me. Across Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, more than 1 million residents remained without electricity, some without clean drinking water. An untold number who heeded evacuation orders were displaced and 40,000 were in Red Cross shelters, with officials saying it could be weeks, if not months, before most will be able to return. Emergency medical teams from across the country were sent into the region and President Bush cut short his Texas vacation Tuesday to return to Washington to focus on the storm damage. Federal Emergency Management Agency director Mike Brown warned that structural damage to homes, diseases from animal carcasses and chemicals in floodwaters made it unsafe for residents to come home anytime soon. And a mass return also was discouraged to keep from interfering with rescue and recovery efforts. That was made tough enough by the vast expanse of floodwaters in coastal areas that took an eight-hour pounding from Katrina's howling winds and up to 15 inches of rainfall. From the air, neighborhood after neighborhood looked like nothing but islands of rooftops surrounded by swirling, tea-colored water. In New Orleans, the flooding actually got worse Tuesday. Failed pumps and levees apparently spilled water from Lake Pontchartrain into streets. The rising water forced hotels to evacuate, led a hospital to boatlift patients to emergency shelters, and drove the staff of New Orleans' Times-Picayune newspaper out of its offices. Officials planned to use helicopters to drop 3,000-pound sandbags and dozens of giant concrete barriers into the breach, and expressed confidence the problem could be solved. But if the water rose a couple feet higher, it could wipe out water system for whole city, said New Orleans' homeland security chief Terry Ebbert. A clearer picture of the destruction in Alabama became to emerge Tuesday: cement slabs where homes once stood, a 100-foot shrimp boat smoldering on its side, people searching for swept-away keepsakes. The damage in some areas appears to be worse than last year's Hurricane Ivan. In devastated Biloxi, Miss., areas that were not underwater were littered with tree trunks, downed power lines and chunks of broken concrete. Some buildings were flattened. The string of floating barge casinos crucial to the coastal economy were a shambles. At least three of them were picked up by the storm surge and carried inland, their barnacle-covered hulls sitting up to 200 yards inland. One of the deadliest spots appeared to be Biloxi's Quiet Water Beach apartments, where authorities estimated 30 people were washed away, although the exact toll was unknown. All that was left of the red-brick building was a concrete slab. We grabbed a lady and pulled her out the window and then we swam with the current, 55-year-old Joy Schovest said through tears. It was terrifying. You should have seen the cars floating around us. We had to push them away when we were trying to swim. Said Biloxi Mayor A. J. Holloway: This is our tsunami. Looting became a problem in both Biloxi and in New Orleans, in some cases in full view of police and National Guardsmen. One police officer was shot in the head by a looter in New Orleans, but was expected to recover, Sgt. Paul Accardo, a police spokesman. On New Orleans' Canal Street, which actually resembled a canal, dozens of looters ripped open the steel gates on clothing and jewelry stores, some packing plastic garbage cans with loot to float down the street. One man, who had about 10 pairs of jeans draped over his left arm, was asked if he was salvaging things from his store. No, the man shouted, that's EVERYBODY'S store! Looters at a Wal-Mart brazenly loaded up shopping carts with items including micorwaves, coolers and knife sets. Others walked out of a sporting goods store on Canal Street with armfuls of shoes and football jerseys. Outside the broken shells of Biloxi's casinos, people picked through slot machines to see if they still contained coins and ransacked other businesses. People are just casually walking in and filling up garbage bags and walking off like they're Santa Claus, said Marty Desei, owner of a Super 8 motel. Insurance experts estimated the storm will result in up to $25 billion in insured losses. That means Katrina could prove more costly than record-setting Hurricane Andrew in 1992, which caused an inflation-adjusted $21 billion in losses. Oil prices jumped by more than $3 a barrel on Tuesday, climbing above $70 a barrel, amid uncertainty about the extent of the damage to the Gulf region's refineries and drilling platforms. By midday Tuesday, Katrina was downgraded to a tropical depression, with winds around 35 mph. It was moving northeast through Tennessee at around 21 mph, with the potential to dump 8 inches of rain and spin off deadly tornadoes. Katrina left 11 people dead in its soggy jog across South Florida last week, as a much weaker storm.

I just watched the video where he stated he was going to put such high caps and make the coal industries pay mucho dollars and hopefully bankrupt the coal industry. BUT, he also stated he would use dollars they must pay if they want to use coal, for clean energy policies like wind power, etc.

 So, that said, how does he intend to pay for all his other energy technology if he bankrupts the coal industry and businesses that use coal? After all, if he bankrupts the businesses that use coal which, by the way, is most electric power plants, whose pocket will he be dipping into for the money for his clean energy policies???

Talking out of both sides of his mouth again.

I just asked my son's girlfriend who works at a grocery store if you can buy soda with food stamps and she said yes-no wine or beer, no toilet paper, shampoo or other nonedible things and no cigarettes, but soda and candy, chips, yes.

able to have a garden? Don't you have a produce market? Can or freeze veggies and fruits in season. Buy meats in bulk and freeze. Our markets allow food stamps. Stock up on a sale and freeze. Most meats last 6 months frozen.

DH has relatives in western NY and they always had plenty because they did the above. There was no junk food bought with food stamps. In fact, they never even applied for food stamps even though they would probably qualified for them. They took nothing free from the government. There was no junk food in their home, either except on a "special occasion."

Please don't think I am accusing everyone who gets public assistance of this.  Many people who get the assistance really need it, and I have a friend who is an example. 

But there is also a subculture involved here.  People can qualify for food stamps who have undocumented income, under-the-table earnings, and even money from criminal activity.  They don't actually need the food stamps to eat, but they get them. 

Back when food stamps were actual coupons, there used to be a thriving black market in buying and selling food stamps for a percentage of their cash value.  Then the money could be used for tobacco, alcohol, drugs and other things.  Maybe the new debit card system put a stop to this, maybe not.  The money goes into your account every month.  All it would take is lending your card and sharing your PIN number with someone.  My friend has never been asked for ID.

And if the object of this assistance is to feed (and I think by that we mean nourish) people, is it right for parents to stuff their kids full of twinkies, chips and Pepsi with the food stamp money?  What the kids need is nourishment, not junk.  What we end up with is another poorly nourished, hyperactive generation that cannot  concentrate and learn in school, then cannot hold down an adequate job, and the cycle repeats itself. 

In the county where I live, if you are on public health assistance and get pregnant you have to comply with a whole host of requirements.  Parenting classes, classes on prenatal nutrition, classes on how to take care of an infant, regular checkups, drug tests, classes on contraception, etc.  You should consider this a job.  We are paying you to have a healthy baby, and these are your duties.  Women scream about this being degrading, and an invasion of their privacy. 

But honestly, if you accept the assistance, why would you assume there should be no strings?  Why would you assume you don't have to jump through some hoops to get it?  Do you expect to be left alone until the day of delivery, get a free stay in the hospital, and go your merry way?  Can't we assume that since this is your second illegetimate pregnancy, you don't really know what's causing it?  Or you forgot and need to repeat the class?

These types of assistance are supposed to be an investment society makes in improving the situation.  Used properly, they can be.  But often they are considered just another entitlement.  *Just gimme the money and get outta my face.*