It's a flawed viewpoint, basso. There have been outsiders lending a hand BEFORE the levees broke in Iowa, as opposed to Katrina where days went by; people realized they were on their own and went into survival mode. I don't think any police have abandoned Iowa... nor did Iowa have a pre-existing crime problem that would preclude people from trusting each other. Most importantly, the scale of the disasters isn't remotely comparable...
It may not be racist, but it's certainly ridiculous given the drastic differences in the two situations.
Well, it is true that the Democrats, and those sympathetic to Democrats, were the ones who politicized Katrina, despite the Democratic local government in New Orleans that was primarily responsible for matters. And yes, there are vast cultural difference between some whites and some blacks, and this contributes to much different responses. This comparison was just a matter of time...and yes it does strike a nerve with AA's, by the looks of things.
AA's? OK. If it is a common abbreviation I haven't noticed before, my bad, in the parlance of our times. (or some other time) Impeach Bush.
In the interest of fairness, I have seen that abbreviation used in this context from time to time in this forum by people on both sides of the aisle. T_J may be brash and sometimes intentionally offensive, but I don't think it is fair to rail against him on this one.
The article that I posted was from 4 months after that upon which you rely. The figures I posted were from the hurricane center's final report on the hurricane. Yours were estimates from right after landfall. You found an article that disagrees with what I posted, and you ran with it regardless of its accuracy. Pretty telling.
WHIFF. AA's is a common abbreviation for African Americans. You must not reach much. and grammar has two A's in it. (two A's -- AA) I point that out at the risk of offending all grammarians out there, who Deckard may try to say are being conflated with alcoholics by the abbreviation. ...and if you are going to run smack about my grammar, at least spell 'grammar' correctly... man, if only people were as smart as me. I'd spend so much less time explaining things.
Fair enough. I'm not as used to abbreviations that might be often used on the internet as some people might be. I'm still challenged with e-mail! You can ask anyone who's attempted to correspond with me. I've got IMO and BTW down pretty good. I must be behind in the ethnic terms. My apologies, Trader_J. I'll edit the post. Impeach Bush.
I admit I was wrong...I was 5mph too high. I'll take a DIRECT QUOTE from the article that YOU posted: "New Orleans was on the storm's west side, which normally has weaker wind. Although an accurate reading of the highest wind in the New Orleans area was made difficult by the failure of measuring stations, a NASA facility in eastern New Orleans measured sustained wind of about 95 mph, the report said." So I guess it was you who found an article that disagrees with what you posted. Get over it dude, you were wrong about the 150mph winds, no big deal.
I'm following this sub-thread with some interest. I'll just note that for newsie types, "gusts" and "wind" are often used interchangeably and there is much confusion in reporting about windspeed. For weather nuts, sustained winds are very much different from gusts. You can easily have gusts much higher than sustained winds.
