billvon 3,096 #1701 May 24 25 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said: Oh, come on, Bill; we all know she was promoted because she screwed her way to the top. I mean, they all do it. You know them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,465 #1702 May 27 "If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." ~Samuel Adams Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,131 #1703 May 27 1 hour ago, BIGUN said: "If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." ~Samuel Adams Don't seem to be too many of those in the House GOP right now. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 883 #1704 May 27 8 minutes ago, kallend said: Don't seem to be too many of those in the House GOP right now. Thanks to the anti-American movement in the republican party, the meaning of "patriot" isn't the same as it was when those words were spoken. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,096 #1705 May 27 "The primary targets of the Hitler tariffs—the Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands—were outraged by the sudden suspension of favored-nation trading status on virtually all agricultural products, as well as on textiles, with tariffs in some cases rising 500 percent. With its livestock essentially banished from the German market, Denmark, for example, was facing substantial losses. Farmers panicked. The Danes and Swedes threatened 'retaliatory measures,' as did the Dutch, who warned the Germans that the countermeasures would be felt as 'palpable blows' to German industrial exports. That proved to be true." - Austrian historian Timothy W. Ryback, from a book he wrote on the rise of Hitler. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,454 #1706 May 27 Hi folks, Does this really surprise anyone: President Trump pardoned Paul Walczak, . . . one month after his mother attended a major fundraiser for the president Trump's pardon of Paul Walczak follows to mother's fundraising: report Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,584 #1707 May 27 “In early April, the Floridian was sentenced to 18 months in prison and two years of supervised release, and he was ordered to pay more than $4 million in restitution. His pardon spares him both from serving time and paying the fees.” Son of a bitch. Nice to see that Trump’s commitment to reducing the deficit is as strong as ever. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 604 #1708 May 30 I guess god’s used talking donkeys, plagues of frogs and killing the first born before, so he fits the profile Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,454 #1709 May 30 14 hours ago, nigel99 said: I guess god’s used talking donkeys, plagues of frogs and killing the first born before, so he fits the profile Hi Nigel, And, he is the most God-less President in my lifetime. Sheesh, Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,131 #1710 May 30 18 hours ago, nigel99 said: I guess god’s used talking donkeys, plagues of frogs and killing the first born before, so he fits the profile Why do so many self-styled "Christians" support a man who violates Commandments 1, 3, 7,8,9,and 10? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,454 #1711 May 30 18 minutes ago, kallend said: Why do so many self-styled "Christians" support a man who violates Commandments 1, 3, 7,8,9,and 10? Hi John, Ever read the book or watch the movie Elmer Gantry? Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 604 #1712 May 30 2 hours ago, kallend said: Why do so many self-styled "Christians" support a man who violates Commandments 1, 3, 7,8,9,and 10? Most evangelicals I know do. I’ve got no idea how they rationalise it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,266 #1713 May 31 1 hour ago, nigel99 said: Most evangelicals I know do. I’ve got no idea how they rationalise it. It is not hard to understand, it’s rather simple. They like his policies better than those of any alternatives. It’s not like they actually have to personally interact with the man. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 883 #1714 May 31 1 hour ago, gowlerk said: It is not hard to understand, it’s rather simple. They like his policies better than those of any alternatives. It’s not like they actually have to personally interact with the man. The only policy he's ever had was two weeks! and the destruction of everything while stealing and grifting constantly. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,465 #1715 May 31 11 hours ago, nigel99 said: Most evangelicals I know do. I’ve got no idea how they rationalise it. Follow the money. Conmen are manipulators. Conmen have no discernible skills other than words. Conmen getting conned. Conmen think they are the greatest conmen on the planet, so much so that they can't even recognize when they are being conned, even when someone points it out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,096 #1716 June 3 So quick summary on FEMA: Trump appointed Cameron Hamilton, a former Navy SEAL and businessman, as head of FEMA. A day after his appointment, he praised the men and women working at FEMA, saying they are "one of the greatest workforces in the entire federal government." He also stated his support for FEMA - "As the senior advisor to the President on disasters and emergency management, and to the Secretary of Homeland Security, I do not believe it is in the best interest the American people to eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency." This, of course, was intolerable to Trump, who wants to eliminate FEMA. So he had him fired. Kristi Noem then searched for a yes-man to replace Hamilton, and found David Richardson, a former Marine and college professor. He has done well so far by Trump, announcing the cutting of programs and talking about how they will do far less. Yesterday at a meeting he mentioned that he did not know the US had a hurricane season. A few hours later the DHS sent out a press release claiming he was joking. However, a few hours after that, Richardson finally did release a plan for hurricane season - but it is last year's plan, apparently just copied over. Good luck to all you people living in hurricane areas. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,465 #1717 June 3 1 hour ago, billvon said: I do not believe it is in the best interest the American people to eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency." Let's talk about this. Elimination - no. Since Katrina, Wilma, Ike, etc. The static budget for FEMA grew to an approximate 80 Billion. It should only take 20 Billion to run FEMA with supplemental appropriations during major catastophic events. As with any federal empire; it's based on budget. So, once they started getting a static budget for the empire - they tried to hang on to it. That empire is too bloated. In my opinion, the insurance companies are trying to offload their responsibilities and dump on FEMA. On that note, I think that Homeland security, FEMA and several other agencies that overlap in mission and budget should be re-engineered. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dogyks 13 #1718 June 3 26 minutes ago, BIGUN said: Let's talk about this. Elimination - no. Since Katrina, Wilma, Ike, etc. The static budget for FEMA grew to an approximate 80 Billion. It should only take 20 Billion to run FEMA with supplemental appropriations during major catastophic events. As with any federal empire; it's based on budget. So, once they started getting a static budget for the empire - they tried to hang on to it. That empire is too bloated. In my opinion, the insurance companies are trying to offload their responsibilities and dump on FEMA. On that note, I think that Homeland security, FEMA and several other agencies that overlap in mission and budget should be re-engineered. A zero-based budget would be a start. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 883 #1719 June 3 1 hour ago, BIGUN said: Let's talk about this. Elimination - no. Since Katrina, Wilma, Ike, etc. The static budget for FEMA grew to an approximate 80 Billion. It should only take 20 Billion to run FEMA with supplemental appropriations during major catastophic events. As with any federal empire; it's based on budget. So, once they started getting a static budget for the empire - they tried to hang on to it. That empire is too bloated. In my opinion, the insurance companies are trying to offload their responsibilities and dump on FEMA. On that note, I think that Homeland security, FEMA and several other agencies that overlap in mission and budget should be re-engineered. We're still fighting over about $100,000 in hurricane damages. America is going to get significantly worse as we stop helping each other. FEMA and SBA have been useless to most of us suffering from hurricane damage Fuck the Felon and his destruction of America.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,454 #1720 June 3 58 minutes ago, BIGUN said: Let's talk about this. Elimination - no. Since Katrina, Wilma, Ike, etc. The static budget for FEMA grew to an approximate 80 Billion. It should only take 20 Billion to run FEMA with supplemental appropriations during major catastophic events. As with any federal empire; it's based on budget. So, once they started getting a static budget for the empire - they tried to hang on to it. That empire is too bloated. In my opinion, the insurance companies are trying to offload their responsibilities and dump on FEMA. On that note, I think that Homeland security, FEMA and several other agencies that overlap in mission and budget should be re-engineered. Hi Keith, Re: In my opinion, the insurance companies are trying to offload their responsibilities and dump on FEMA. IMO no insurance company can afford to insure houses in known disaster areas. The continual costs are simply too much. Either build houses that can better withstand what comes at them; or, move elsewhere. Jerry Baumchen PS) I bought my current house about 30 yrs ago, it was built in 1983. A number of years after I moved in, a house east of me flooded; he had a daylight basement that filled with water from a creek behind his house. There was a berm there to protect the house; but, the water came over the berm. At the time I thought, 'You poor, bugger.' He repaired the house. Then a number of years later, once again, the water came over the berm and flooded his daylight basement again. Then, about 5 years later the house was being torn down. Since I am the curious type, I stopped and asked the demo crew what was going on. Turns out the home-owner was an attorney. After the 2nd flooding, he sued the city for issuing a building permit in a flood zone. The city capitulated and bought him out. He was not the original owner so he claimed he did not know about the problem when he bought the house. Sometimes moving is the better option. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 883 #1721 June 3 (edited) 49 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said: Hi Keith, Re: In my opinion, the insurance companies are trying to offload their responsibilities and dump on FEMA. IMO no insurance company can afford to insure houses in known disaster areas. The continual costs are simply too much. Either build houses that can better withstand what comes at them; or, move elsewhere. Jerry Baumchen PS) I bought my current house about 30 yrs ago, it was built in 1983. A number of years after I moved in, a house east of me flooded; he had a daylight basement that filled with water from a creek behind his house. There was a berm there to protect the house; but, the water came over the berm. At the time I thought, 'You poor, bugger.' He repaired the house. Then a number of years later, once again, the water came over the berm and flooded his daylight basement again. Then, about 5 years later the house was being torn down. Since I am the curious type, I stopped and asked the demo crew what was going on. Turns out the home-owner was an attorney. After the 2nd flooding, he sued the city for issuing a building permit in a flood zone. The city capitulated and bought him out. He was not the original owner so he claimed he did not know about the problem when he bought the house. Sometimes moving is the better option. The best part is when the Army Corps of Engineers should get involved to work on improvements to reduce future damage. But no, that effort is stopping. Seems smart, it should help to significantly increase the costs of major disasters, which the Feds want to push off to the States. When can I stop paying federal taxes? It's rapidly becoming the feed lot for oligarchs and working hard to NOT help Americans as a whole. Edited June 3 by normiss Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JoeWeber 2,901 #1722 June 3 44 minutes ago, normiss said: We're still fighting over about $100,000 in hurricane damages. America is going to get significantly worse as we stop helping each other. FEMA and SBA have been useless to most of us suffering from hurricane damage Fuck the Felon and his destruction of America.. Was that $100K an uninsured loss? I confess that a lot of the damage from natural disasters that we all pay for seems somewhat self inflicted. My boat is insured and if it sinks I will receive the insured amount minus deductibles. To stay insured I need to be outside of described hurricane/cyclone areas between certain dates. If I don't want that limitation I can find another insurer, pay a huge risk premium, or self insure. There isn't any government slush fund to bail me out which seems reasonable to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 883 #1723 June 3 11 minutes ago, JoeWeber said: Was that $100K an uninsured loss? I confess that a lot of the damage from natural disasters that we all pay for seems somewhat self inflicted. My boat is insured and if it sinks I will receive the insured amount minus deductibles. To stay insured I need to be outside of described hurricane/cyclone areas between certain dates. If I don't want that limitation I can find another insurer, pay a huge risk premium, or self insure. There isn't any government slush fund to bail me out which seems reasonable to me. Without taking the rest of your day to explain .... some is. Claim was closed when one of our bidding contractors failed to respond to insurance. We were being ghosted by our insurance company. So I started making daily calls opening new claims. Finally we got n agent that seems to be properly handling the claim now - I expect them to complete all of the repairs. Hopefully without taking them to court. FEMA helped some, as did SBA. FEMA had advised the need for ACE to come in to make repairs to restore waterways. The Felon says no. Hopefully insurance picks up the rest, or at least enough to not have to spend our money on. That IS why we buy insurance. Damn near impossible to get specific hurricane coverage. In North Carolina. Given the way the flooding rearranged things on the mountain we're on, it may not matter at some point. One of my new beer drinking preferences is sitting on the porch when it rains, watching the water find new paths down due to the failure of the old path and the complete lack of resources to repair it. I'm collecting rocks to create paths now and wishing I owned a skid-steer or backhoe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,266 #1724 June 3 4 hours ago, billvon said: Kristi Noem then searched for a yes-man to replace Hamilton, and found David Richardson, a former Marine and college professor. He has done well so far by Trump, announcing the cutting of programs and talking about how they will do far less. He needs a nickname. How about Brownie? Works on a couple levels. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,465 #1725 June 3 2 hours ago, normiss said: The best part is when the Army Corps of Engineers should get involved to work on improvements to reduce future damage. But no, that effort is stopping. After Katrina; one of the solutions I proposed to FEMA regarding the homes in New Orleans was to use the Corps of Engineers to rebuild the city. It could have been a capstone project for MOS classes. Evidently, there is a law that the corps, nor the military can help individuals; only the general population. It was interesting to go to FEMA, cause every time I walked in one whole side of the table was attorneys. I suggested someone write a bill to change the law. It fell on deaf ears. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites