OK, so tonight on Fox News Brit Hume

[Larry Gude]

You did not mention 'diverse'...

My original post said "We". I used to participate in a "self insured" medical group when I was not part of a group. Worked well.

A group that is not diverse, i.e., "a bunch of new home owners" in a subdivision is not diverse.

..in the original post, you mentioned the 'community here'. If the community 'here' was New Orleans there would be a problem.

There are certainly all manner of ideas to combat insurance expense and I applaud and encourage then all and more but size, very large size and diversity as you say, is where it's at in terms of security.

 

[2ndAmendment]

..in the original post, you mentioned the 'community here'. If the community 'here' was New Orleans there would be a problem.

There are certainly all manner of ideas to combat insurance expense and I applaud and encourage then all and more but size, very large size and diversity as you say, is where it's at in terms of security.

"here" is SOMD. Even those of us that really live in Southern Maryland do not live close enough to be geographically detrimental barring a nuclear explosion.

 

[2ndAmendment]

...but we, the people, have moved to the point where we see FEMA as a good thing, OSHA as a good thing and so forth.

In time of emergency, civil war, Abraham Lincoln threw the Constitution out the window arguing that, in war, there is no point in observing the letter of Constitution in order to protect it if in doing so it will no longer exist in word or spirit. His faith was in that in times of peace the people would accept some rule bending and breaking for the noble cause and then expect a return to the letter when peace returned.

Jeff Davis and Co. the most hardocre interpreters of states rights of all time did the same things and sometimes worse.

So, in time of emergency, why wouldn't a nation rally it's massive power to assist a part of itself in distress that it can not handle on it's own?

It that makes me 'liberal' I can accept that.

Then we, the people, should amend the Constitution to give the feds that power. Do it the right way. The Constitution is the foundation for the rule of law and should not be ignored. It is not a living document; that is "liberal speak".

My opinion of Lincoln is he was one of the worst presidents in history.

 

[2ndAmendment]

If the feds were within the delegated powers then they would not be collecting income taxes at all since the 16th Amendment was not passed according to the terms of the Constitution (the feds ignored that too for expediency). Everyone would keep the majority of what we earn. We would know that we have to be self reliant and provide for our own emergencies. Remember mortgages are a relatively recent financial agreement. Homes were bought for cash as recently as the 1900s.

 

[Larry Gude]

So...

Then we, the people, should amend the Constitution to give the feds that power. Do it the right way. The Constitution is the foundation for the rule of law and should not be ignored. It is not a living document; that is "liberal speak".

My opinion of Lincoln is he was one of the worst presidents in history.

...everytime there is an emergency, we start a Constitutional amendment process to respond to it? The 9/11 Amendement. The Hurricane Andrew Amendment. The Mississippi Flood of Year X Amendment. Or just let whomever is locally affected by the emergency deal with it?

The Constitution is very much a living document; it is amendable, it can be changed. That also means it is subject to interpetation which is what the Federalist Papers were all about; Hamiltons and Jays interpretation of what it meant.

You and I are both way more pro 2nd amendment than the average citizen yet that agreement has limits. The paper can't just sit there. It needs to be read and discussed and, maybe, amended some times. Other times we accept what the court says it says. But it's still our paper. It means nothing wihtout us.

I'd argue that it's writers would not object to a pooling of national resources to address a catastrophe like this hurricane. I'd argue they'd see no need for an amendment to use federal resources in an emergency.

 

[Larry Gude]

Ok...

If the feds were within the delegated powers then they would not be collecting income taxes at all since the 16th Amendment was not passed according to the terms of the Constitution (the feds ignored that too for expediency). Everyone would keep the majority of what we earn. We would know that we have to be self reliant and provide for our own emergencies. Remember mortgages are a relatively recent financial agreement. Homes were bought for cash as recently as the 1900s.

...where would you like to start?

Do we repeal income taxes first?

Or FEMA?

Or mortgages?

 

[2ndAmendment]

...everytime there is an emergency, we start a Constitutional amendment process to respond to it? The 9/11 Amendement. The Hurricane Andrew Amendment. The Mississippi Flood of Year X Amendment. Or just let whomever is locally affected by the emergency deal with it?

The Constitution is very much a living document; it is amendable, it can be changed. That also means it is subject to interpetation which is what the Federalist Papers were all about; Hamiltons and Jays interpretation of what it meant.

You and I are both way more pro 2nd amendment than the average citizen yet that agreement has limits. The paper can't just sit there. It needs to be read and discussed and, maybe, amended some times. Other times we accept what the court says it says. But it's still our paper. It means nothing wihtout us.

I'd argue that it's writers would not object to a pooling of national resources to address a catastrophe like this hurricane. I'd argue they'd see no need for an amendment to use federal resources in an emergency.

No! Are you being a devil's advocate? I know you are not dense. A Constitutional amendment to allow the feds to have FEMA and all that that entails.

The founders did reject the first bills in Congress that were to provide "benevolence" for individuals and even for countries - aid to France was rejected when a relief effort was proposed.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents...." --James Madison [1794] (Pertaining to Congress' appropriation $15,000 for relief of French refugees)

 

[2ndAmendment]

...where would you like to start?

Do we repeal income taxes first?

Or FEMA?

Or mortgages?

Hard to close Pandora's Box once opened, but it can be done slowly. All government programs and agencies should be reviewed for Constitutional authority. If they do not pass the test of delegated powers, then the program or agency should be either the subject of an amendment that would delegate that power or the program or agency should be phased out over a two to three year period in order to allow the private or state sectors re-assume the authority.

I think we should repeal the 16th Amendment after it is used for what it was designed, pay off the debt from World War One. I guess we should include the rest of the debt too.

If we get government out of the business of the states and the private sector, prices will probably go down substantially. Look at the medical industry. When Medicare was instituted there was a rapid increase in the cost of medical care. After all it was "free" money from the government.

 

[sleuth]

Of course there is my favorite issue when it comes to the Federal government. Can someone please show me in the Constitution where the Federal government is given the power to do any of the FEMA stuff? Rhetorical. There is no place. It does not have the power. This is another area the Feds have no authority but have taken it anyway. FEMA is another example of FDR socialism at its best (Yes, I know FDR did not start FEMA, but he did push the U.S. far down the road to socialism.).

Couldn't you consider FEMA Constitutional in terms of its role in "national security"?

In part because of FEMA, our capitalist society can rest assured that natural disasters will not interrupt our way of life, at least for very long.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Couldn't you consider FEMA Constitutional in terms of its role in "national security"?

In part because of FEMA, our capitalist society can rest assured that natural disasters will not interrupt our way of life, at least for very long.

No. The only departments authorized for national security are the Navy, Coast Guard, the Marines under the Navy, and the Army for two years at a time. The Air Force is not authorized and was originally formed under the Army as the Army Air Corp. Other organizations that are not authorized include NASA, NIH, HEW, HUD, Social Security, FEMA, Homeland Deffense, FBI, NSA, CIA, the list goes on.

 

[Bogart]

I was not talking about the types of disasters like the LaPlata tornado. form what I understand tornado's of that type are truly random and not predictable.

If I remember correctly the Post ran a piece about how tornados tear through the LaPlata area on a regular basis.

 

[Kizzy]

If I remember correctly the Post ran a piece about how tornados tear through the LaPlata area on a regular basis.

That was the 2nd tornado in 100 years. There was one in 1926 that killed 14 school aged children. Both took the same path of destruction.

 

[czygvtwkr]

If they don't want anyone to live in NO then who is expected to work at the largest port in the US? The fact is that it is a very economically valuable city to the entire country.

 

[2ndAmendment]

If they don't want anyone to live in NO then who is expected to work at the largest port in the US? The fact is that it is a very economically valuable city to the entire country.

Not any more. Water is still rising. They are now completely evacuating the city.

It may be cheaper to let it go and build elsewhere.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Not scary. Stating the obvious.

 

[ylexot]

It may be cheaper to let it go and build elsewhere.

I wonder if it would...that would have to be some pretty hefty damage to essentially "total" the city (like a totaled car that costs more to repair than it's worth). Then we could design and build a port city ABOVE SEA LEVEL! Also, think of the tourist revenue...we'd have our very own Atlantis! Bota, submarine, and scuba tours of the city...could be pretty cool.

 

[2ndAmendment]

I wonder if it would...that would have to be some pretty hefty damage to essentially "total" the city (like a totaled car that costs more to repair than it's worth). Then we could design and build a port city ABOVE SEA LEVEL! Also, think of the tourist revenue...we'd have our very own Atlantis! Bota, submarine, and scuba tours of the city...could be pretty cool.

The levy that broke has a 400 foot section missing. The governor of Louisiana said the water depth at the break point may be 100 feet deep. That is a BIG hole if she is right; tough to near impossible to plug.

The Big Easy has been sinking for years and the levies have been made higher and higher. Levy broke and let the water in and the level is still rising. Every building in the city has suffered at least water damage. The old masonry buildings mortar is probably being weakened more everyday it is under water. Even the old bricks and block will get soft as they sit in water. The wood buildings are probably a total loss.

 

[SamSpade]

Turn it into America's "Venice".

 

[2ndAmendment]

Just heard on Fox that the governor thinks it will be 16 weeks or longer before they get New Orleans pumped out and have some electric power and water. That is not good news for the entire country since the majority of our oil imports come through New Orleans and Baton Rouge. Talk about having our eggs in almost one basket. Gas is about $3/gal nationwide and headed higher and some stations are as high as $6/gal already.

 

[Steve]

...where would you like to start?

Do we repeal income taxes first?

Or FEMA?

Or mortgages?

I would suggest all of them? :shrug: