Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Why do I have this feeling there is no proper over sight on the contractors.....

Relapse wrote:
You don't think 8 years along is horrible response time?

Of course it's terrible - but after like, the first 6 months, it's not really a federal problem. And it pretty arguably wasn't before that, either.

At some point it becomes Louisiana's fault, and I posit to you, that point has passed many years ago.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d-usa wrote:
Almost every thread goes full circle and eventually contains "blame the gun" "race-baiting" "Obama's fault" "Everybody hates the ACA" "Liberal Media" "Religion is evil" and "#YOLO".

We are almost there, keep it going!

I'm not complaining, my shift at work is just about over and I've almost got bingo.

That is an amazing game

 Ouze wrote:

Spoiler:

That is beautiful and I think I have a man-crush on you now.

He forgot the Fox News bash, though.

Petulant temper tantrum should go on there too.

Relapse wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Truly, Obama is history's greatest monster.

Just giving some possible reasons why people answered that poll the way they did. If there are now roughly 40,000 abandoned homes that are rotting to pieces in that city and being squatted in by 2x the number of homeless as pre Katrina, it would definitely make people think the current administration is dragging it's feet in aid.

How's on god's green earth is Katrina response/aftermath Obama's fault? If there's any fault to be thrown out, it's the State/Gov/Mayor of LA.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
Is this a new thing, or has this always happened and I just never really noticed?

Always been that way, but I'll admit we go 'round all the hot topics MUCH quicker these days.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Spoiler:

That is beautiful and I think I have a man-crush on you now.

Dude... I so fething STEALING THAT!

I guess we'd have to ask the people living there why they thought that. Back when Katrina first hit, Bush immediatly offered aid money on the condition it be accounted for, but the mayor of the city turned him down for three days.

Relapse wrote:
I guess we'd have to ask the people living there why they thought that. Back when Katrina first hit, Bush immediatly offered aid money on the condition it be accounted for, but the mayor of the city turned him down for three days.

Not yelling at you man... just thought why Nawlin's would blame Obama. As Ouze mentioned earlier... this is a local issue if anything.

 whembly wrote:

Relapse wrote:
I guess we'd have to ask the people living there why they thought that. Back when Katrina first hit, Bush immediatly offered aid money on the condition it be accounted for, but the mayor of the city turned him down for three days.

Not yelling at you man... just thought why Nawlin's would blame Obama. As Ouze mentioned earlier... this is a local issue if anything.

Naw, I didn't take it as yelling. There's a good Wiki article on the whole messed up deal that has blame enough for all parties involved. I feel bad for the regular Joes that live there, but don't care what happens to the gang bangers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think Ouze called it right saying this conversation could use it's own thread since we have wondered way far afield here.

Gotta love good old Oklahoma political football. I just wish our politicians wouldn't make us look stupid on a regular basis...

WASHINGTON — Gov. Mary Fallin, who said Sunday that it would be “a nice gesture” for President Barack Obama to comment on the Oklahoma killing of an Australian college student, is satisfied with a White House statement on the tragedy, a spokesman for the governor said Monday.

The White House issued a statement on Saturday — a day before Fallin's comments — regarding the killing of Christopher Lane, an Australian who was a student at East Central University. Lane was shot while jogging Aug. 16 in Duncan. Three teens have been charged in connection with the case.

The statement, which appeared in an Australian newspaper, was attributed to White House spokesman Matt Lehrich and said, “As the President has expressed on too many tragic occasions, there is an extra measure of evil in an act of violence that cuts a young life short. The President and First Lady's thoughts and prayers are with Chris Lane's family and friends in these trying times.”

Alex Weintz, spokesman for Fallin, said Monday, “The governor thinks the president did the right thing by reaching out to the Lane family and the people of Australia.”

Fallin had told Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday” that it “would be nice if our nation were to certainly express their condolences, how very sorry we are.”

We don't have time for your country's statements, we have a highly charged political campaign, including a debate between crocodile dundee's homophobic older brother and the guy building the titanic mkII

 Andrew1975 wrote:
Hasn't gun violence and violence in general in Australia actually risen since the gun ban? Banning guns isn't the answer, controlling them is.

Nope. There's some NRA dodgy bs out there claiming otherwise, mostly by focusing on really specific regions or cherry picking the start and end points for their figures, but the trend is actually down.

 sebster wrote:

 Andrew1975 wrote:
Hasn't gun violence and violence in general in Australia actually risen since the gun ban? Banning guns isn't the answer, controlling them is.

Nope. There's some NRA dodgy bs out there claiming otherwise, mostly by focusing on really specific regions or cherry picking the start and end points for their figures, but the trend is actually down.

Psst... guns violence is actually trending down in the US... with gun ownership at all time high.

Those surveys comparing countries are rubbish.

I'm going with Sebster on that. Last I heard of violence in Australia was the teen female taking an fire axe to someone vehicle in front of a court house there.

 whembly wrote:
Psst... guns violence is actually trending down in the US... with gun ownership at all time high.

Those surveys comparing countries are rubbish.

I know, gun violence is trending down all over the developed world, as part of a greater trend in a decline in overall violence. All of which is for social factors that are far more powerful than the number of guns in society.

Which is why the NRA claims about gun violence increasing in Australia are such total bs, not only because they're factually incorrect, but also because even if they were, the cause would likely be due to other factors.

That said - the comparisons aren't rubbish. Your rate of gun violence is crazy high compared to the rest of us, and has been for a long time. It rises and falls like everywhere else, for lots of reasons, but its always much, much higher. And over time you can pull out all those other local factors, and you get left with guns.

Now that doesn't mean you have to ban guns or anything. They kill 10,000, but alcohol kills 8 times that, so its perfectly okay to say the good is worth the harm - we don't have to make every possible sacrifice for the sake of safety. But you do have to recognise the reality of the situation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:
I'm going with Sebster on that. Last I heard of violence in Australia was the teen female taking an fire axe to someone vehicle in front of a court house there.

That was hilarious.

Get your hands on Underbelly - its a dramatic retelling of a gang war in Melbourne. It's really good. But make sure you get the first series, the rest drop off in quality fairly quickly.

There was also the fight between two neighbours, one had a chainsaw and one had a katana. But that was a little while ago.

 motyak wrote:
There was also the fight between two neighbours, one had a chainsaw and one had a katana. But that was a little while ago.

No wonder Thunder Dome takes place in Australia!

Relapse wrote:
No wonder Thunder Dome takes place in Australia!

Here's a story, might be an urban myth but it's good all the same. The first Mad Max film, where he gets revenge on the hoodlums who raped his wife, that was made as a straight movie, no post-apocalyptic elements at all. But when they shipped that movie to the US, Americans saw the outback towns it was set in and assumed society was collapsing and something had happened to make the place so run down and bleak.

Nope, that's just what towns in country Australia look like.

Anyhow, they ran with it and went on to make the sequel an actual post-apocalyptic thing.

 sebster wrote:

Relapse wrote:
No wonder Thunder Dome takes place in Australia!

Here's a story, might be an urban myth but it's good all the same. The first Mad Max film, where he gets revenge on the hoodlums who raped his wife, that was made as a straight movie, no post-apocalyptic elements at all. But when they shipped that movie to the US, Americans saw the outback towns it was set in and assumed society was collapsing and something had happened to make the place so run down and bleak.

Nope, that's just what towns in country Australia look like.

Anyhow, they ran with it and went on to make the sequel an actual post-apocalyptic thing.

How much of the first Mad Max film was fantasy? Which aspects? I'm not knowledgeable of Australia in that time.

The lack of killer drop bears in the movie. Thats clearly not accurate.

"Razorback" and "The Cars That Ate Paris" are a more accurate commentary on small town Australia of the late 20th century.