<p>“The difference between who makes money outta this and who doesn’t is going to be stark.”</p>
<p>Easy solution … do not dedicate any money to what is so gently called … gentrification. I am shaking my head at the notion that we SHOULD help the displaced people revert to their previous conditions. </p>
<p>The quicker we conclude that NOLA will and should never be the same, the better off we will be. Is helping the poor to get or stay out, find decent -in all sense of the word- jobs, and have a fighting chance at a better life really that hard of a concept? Putting a bandaid on a cancer-stricken patient is all we will do. A very expensive bandaid, but one nonetheless.</p>
<p>“Nagin didn’t say that the New New Orleans should make room for the return of it’s displaced black and brown population. He didn’t point to the fact that current redevelopment plans work to exclude of as many of the aforementioned as possible.”</p>
<p>No, he didn’t say this…perhaps he should have since this was the issue he was speaking to. As TheDad said, his choice of words was a clumsy one. But the man was not speaking to whites, about whites or trying to insult whites. NOR was he speaking to anything as despicable as segregation. Not a fair comparison.</p>
<p>What is wrong with this world is people who stand around waiting to be wronged, ready to jump on any perceived slight with an unwillingness to recognize the fallibility of humans and the need for all of us to cut each other a break. Frankly, I like to think George W. wasn’t trying to insult gays with his uncomfortable remarks about Brokeback Mountain and that Nagin wasn’t trying to insult whites when he made the ‘chocolate NO’ comment. I just think that there are certain people who don’t express themselves well. And that’s all there is to it…nothing sinister, nothing malicious.</p>
<p>“It is completely correct to say that our logistics capability in Katrina was woefully inadequate. I was astonished to see we didn’t have the capability most 21st century corporations have to track the flow of goods and services,” Chertoff said, promising remedies by the start of the 2006 hurricane season in June.</p>
<p>(He admits the FAILURES of the government were his responsiblity- yes HE used the word faiure)</p>
<p>And this is the man in charge of Homeland Security</p>
<p>I don’t get it CGM. The man came clean—before God, congress and national television cameras. He ADMITTED FAILURE in no uncertain terms, as you have already stated. Still you’re hell bent on busting the man’s ba**s, as if his admitting responsibility means absolutely nothing. I’d almost bet money that, if he was a Democrat, you would have at least given him credit for taking responsibility for his agency’s lack of preparation and action. You probably would have acknowleged the virtue of this rare spasm of political honesty in Washington. And you would have been right. But you know, Republicans, Democrats—they’re all POLITICIANS (an especially unsavory brand of human being), and as such, are immanently fallible.</p>
<p>We probably both agree that the man is not fit to serve as head of Homeland Security. And I’m sure you have no quarrel with my belief that the man ought to resign. But dam*, can’t you for once try not to be so baldly and hypocritically partisan?!</p>
<p>I am just pointing out that the word failure was not used before, that the Bush adminstration was talking about what a swell job they, and finally, someone stepped up and admitted it was lousey.</p>
<p>I do give him credit for speaking up. Where did I bust his balls,…I said he used the word failure,something his bosses never did.</p>
<p>I quoted him made a comment on his own words and then made a statement about his job</p>