Why didn't Hollywood save New Orleans?

[Hemlock]

[quote=bargalunan]:
Meanwhile you're right : this example would be stronger if the two captions were written by only one news agency. (AP or AFP, that doesn't matter).

That is all I wanted to hear. I meant one will not "use" the word looter, not sue. It is a typo - I am sorry.

[Happy Monkey]

Salt Lake Tribune
Not long after some 1,000 firefighters sat down for eight hours of training, the whispering began: "What are we doing here?"
...
Many of the firefighters, assembled from Utah and throughout the United States by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, thought they were going to be deployed as emergency workers.
Instead, they have learned they are going to be community-relations officers for FEMA, shuffled throughout the Gulf Coast region to disseminate fliers and a phone number: 1-800-621-FEMA.
...
But as specific orders began arriving to the firefighters in Atlanta, a team of 50 Monday morning quickly was ushered onto a flight headed for Louisiana. The crew's first assignment: to stand beside President Bush as he tours devastated areas.

Is that Hollywood enough for you?

[Troubleshooter]

Ok, I'm back, and it seems that the catastrophe in my back yard has sparked some tremendously high-brow discussion.

To simplify...

New Orleans is approximately 65% black, most of them are poor.

Poor people have reduced access to resources.

Reduced access to resources reduces your survivability in a catastrophe.

Blacks are over represented in the body count.

It's not rocket science, and it's not just the white man's fault.

I welcome any aid the Hollywoodites can provide, but money is only a short term panacea.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

When using the metaphor "play the race card" only the first player to play the card can be said to be "playing the card", or the metaphor fails. The first player to play the card was tw.

Again, UT, you want a pissy fight because you cannot tell the difference between 1) accusations of racism based in emotion VERSES 2) the politics of spin using the race card. The first is what you are doing to promote a pissy fight. I don't know why. Others sometimes blame this type of reactions on not getting laid. The second is pure logic: how politicians could play the spin game to cast blame elsewhere - to even prosper politically. Based upon how the administration and FEMA reacted, the race card has to be played. The games of politics dictate it.

The first demonstrates that UT cannot separate his emotions from a logical discussion. The second is about what people like Karl Rove are experts at accomplishing. The second interpretation is how a UT would have posted without emotional outbursts and insults.

The question was simple.

Show me where George Jr did anything last week to dispell the rumors of racism.

The answer was simple. The only examples provided are staged press photo opportunities. However UT has made numerous assumptions to add more to that question and start a pissy fight.

The point was to step slowly towards discussing the game that Karl Rove, et al will play. Slowly because so many people will attach personal baggage; modify the question before answering it. UT does that repeatedly here. Somehow UT wants to turn this into a race war rather than point out how the spin game is being played. This 'reading only what you want to read' problem is why I slowly stepped towards the point. It demonstrates how some cannot just read a question without taking that question out of context.

Meanwhile one paragraph in the very first post said I did not believe the President was racist. That little paragraph put there to keep UT types from starting a pissy fight. The question was never about a racist president. The question was 100% about perception and how politics will be played. UT could not keep 'pissy' emotions out of a logical discussion. And that is a shame.

UT cannot see the difference between playing the race card - a political game - verses outright pissy accusations of promoting racism. His pictures demonstrate how a politician would 'play the race card' - to stay ahead of racist accusations. Especially since George Jr's poor PR performance on Friday left him exposed to accusations of racism. Somehow UT thinks those pictures prove everything we need to know. And so UT gets pissy when I suggest a bigger picture behind those pictures.

I am suggesting a logical response that spin doctors are performing. Somehow UT has that confused with outright accusations of racism. If that were true, then this paragraph (that he did not read) would not have been in the very first post

At no time did I say George Jr is racist. You would never know that from UT's repsonses. But show us one action this last week that can dispell rumors. George Jr's actions this past week are what a racist would have done.

There remains a big difference between what I have posted and what UT is accusing me of. He is reading his own biases into the original question and the following discussion. I am demonstrating why some people, such as UT, can be so taken by spin. Why those spin doctors are so successful. And what I suspect they are doing this minute.

[Pie]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

It's not rocket science, and it's not just the white man's fault.

But would the "white man" have reacted differently if it was po' white trash left behind in NO? That's the only question that's relevant to this race issue.

The only real question is was this a colossal cock-up by the Powers That Be?
The answer is left as an exercise to the student.

[Elspode]

Before the discussion goes any further...we're all very happy that you are alright, TS. How did you and yours fare? Home damaged? Impact on your employment? Etc?

[warch]

No cards, I'll just report some more unfortunate statements.

Former first lady Barbara Bush on visiting Refugees/evacuees/survivors in the Houston Astrodome remarked to reporters:

"And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this (she chuckled slightly)--this is working very well for them."

[mrnoodle]

Maybe the people in NOLA are poor because it's a welfare city that encourages hanging from the govt teat over getting a damn job. Look it up.

/generalization

[Undertoad]

Right, tw, and similarly, I didn't say you were a moron, I just said your discussion makes you seem like one. Then you got all emotional and it took you 8 paragraphs to get over it. Calm down lad, you'll burst a blood vessel trying to run this weird hidden agenda of yours.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Right, tw, and similarly, I didn't say you were a moron, I just said your discussion makes you seem like one. Then you got all emotional and it took you 8 paragraphs to get over it. Calm down lad, you'll burst a blood vessel trying to run this weird hidden agenda of yours.

UT, you are using the same logic that you used to promote the "Mission Accomplished" war and the myths about those aluminum tubes. Again, you miss the entire topic to instead post insults. Not a single useful fact; just insults. What so changed in you from 10+ years ago? Those are eight plus paragraphs trying to get you back to the subject. Instead you only want to insult?

[Undertoad]

The topic of the thread, is "Why didn't Hollywood save New Orleans?" You don't get to set the topic, you don't own the agenda, you and I are just players at the table. You didn't establish any facts with your silly racism question either; you only wanted to post insults within a frame of your own hidden agenda.

Now, I told you that every time you bring up the aluminum tubes again, I would find another place on the Cellar where you were mistaken.

In this post, you said:

Sharon knows nothing of the kind. Clearly you don't know the man who as Brigader General lead Israeli divisions into daring missions to take Sinai from Egypt, from nearly bringing the US and USSR into direct nuclear war (the closest the world ever came to nuclear war) in direct and intentional disregard of UN and international agreements, from invading Lebanon even in contadiction to order from both his Prime Minister and Pres Reagan, ....

Sharon has only one objective - taking land for the greater glory of Zionism. He has no change of heart. As a shrewd general, he is simply changing tactics again. The strategic objective has never changed. Changed again is the tactical objective - and how that campaign is portrayed to us.

Sharon remembers with grea personal shame that the Israeli Army forcefully removed Israeli settlement from Sinai. Likud has promised that national disgrace will never happen again. As long a Sharon and Lukid are in power, all tactics are for the conquest of occupied territories - ethnic cleansing of the land.

Until you can say - with Israeli settlement building foundations actually being removed - that right wing extremist Israelis have given up their ambitions - only then is that a reasonable speculation. For as long as any of us have understood world politics, it has always been the objective of right wing extremist Israelis to ethnic cleans the land they regard as theirs - as god has decreed.

Now that Sharon has defied his own political party to withdraw unilaterally from Gaza, wouldn't you have to agree that either your characterization of the man was too extreme, or your understanding of the situation was faulty?

[lookout123]

Now that Sharon has defied his own political party to withdraw unilaterally from Gaza, wouldn't you have to agree that either your characterization of the man was too extreme, or your understanding of the situation was faulty?

UT obviously can't separate emotion from his arguments or he would realize [1,297 words] 7 minutes.... [848 words] mental midget... [78 words] 98% of all problems are... [1936 words] because of christian extremists... [738 words] where is Bin Laden?

just trying to save TW some time and UT some bandwidth.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by lookout123

just trying to save TW some time and UT some bandwidth.

You are obviously making excellent and efficient use of your reduced access to The Cellar.

[NICOTINEGUN]

This is what I'm getting from all this: If W. helps Black people he's doing it for spin and he's a racist. If he doesn't do anything to specifically help black people he is a racist. So, either way W. is a racist? Is that correct?

Now, we must focus on the issue at hand, Gentlemen. Hollywood is always so quick to jump on helping other countries out of a jam. Additionally, many Hollywood actors are quick to place blame on our government while doing so. So why weren't they there on the drop of a hat when all this started to begin with? Do these actors have to wait for political motivation to do what they do? It appears that they waited until the Political bullshit started hitting the fan until any of the big hitters came into play. Of course, I could be wrong. I am limited on news sources.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by NICOTINEGUN

So why weren't they there on the drop of a hat when all this started to begin with?

Why do you think they weren't?