See what I mean...this stuff no longer surprises-it's the status quo!

FEMA Knew Of Toxic Gas In Trailers
Hurricane Victims Reported Illnesses
Federal Emergency Management Agency since early 2006 has suppressed warnings from its own field workers about health problems experienced by hurricane victims living in government-provided trailers with levels of a toxic chemical 75 times the recommended maximum for U.S. workers, congressional lawmakers said yesterday.
A trail of e-mails obtained by investigators shows that the agency's lawyers rejected a proposal for systematic testing of the levels of potentially cancer-causing formaldehyde gas in the trailers, out of concern that the agency would be legally liable for any hazards or health problems. As many as 120,000 families displaced by hurricanes Katrina and Rita lived in the suspect trailers, and hundreds have complained of ill effects.
On June 16, 2006, three months after reports of the hazards surfaced and a month after a trailer resident sued the agency, a FEMA logistics expert wrote that the agency's Office of General Counsel "has advised that we do not do testing, which would imply FEMA's ownership of this issue." A FEMA lawyer, Patrick Preston, wrote on June 15: "Do not initiate any testing until we give the OK. . . . Once you get results and should they indicate some problem, the clock is running on our duty to respond to them."
FEMA tested no occupied trailers after March 2006, when it initially discovered formaldehyde levels at 75 times the U.S.-recommended workplace safety threshold and relocated a south Mississippi couple expecting their second child, the documents indicate. Formaldehyde, a common wood preservative used in construction materials such as particle board, can cause vision and respiratory problems; long-term exposure has been linked to cancer and higher rates of asthma, bronchitis and allergies in children.
One man in Slidell, La., was found dead in his trailer on June 27, 2006, after complaining about the formaldehyde fumes. In a conference call about the death, 28 officials from six agencies recommended that the circumstances be investigated and trailer air quality be subjected to independent testing. But FEMA lawyers rejected the suggestions, with one, Adrian Sevier, cautioning that further investigation not approved by lawyers "could seriously undermine the Agency's position" in litigation.
On the eve of yesterday's hearing by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, FEMA reversed course on the issue and said it has asked federal health officials to help conduct a new assessment of conditions in trailers under prolonged use. But revelation of the agency's earlier posture -- in documents withheld by FEMA until they were subpoenaed by Congress -- attracted harsh bipartisan criticism.
Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) decried what he called FEMA's indifference to storm victims and said the situation was "sickening." He said the documents "expose an official policy of premeditated ignorance" and added that "senior officials in Washington didn't want to know what they already knew, because they didn't want the legal and moral responsibility to do what they knew had to be done."
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) said FEMA had obstructed the 10-month congressional investigation and "mischaracterized the scope and purpose" of its own actions. "FEMA's reaction to the problem was deliberately stunted to bolster the agency's litigation position," Davis said. "FEMA's primary concerns were legal liability and public relations, not human health and safety."
About 66,000 households affected by Katrina remain in the trailers at issue. FEMA has replaced 58 trailers and moved five families into rental units. The in May 2006 reported finding unsafe levels of formaldehyde in 30 out of 32 trailers it tested along the Gulf Coast, and some residents filed a class-action lawsuit last month in federal court in against trailer manufacturers.
Three trailer residents who testified before the panel described frequent nosebleeds, respiratory problems and mysterious mouth and nasal tumors that they or family members have suffered. They also said veterinarians and pediatricians have warned that their pets and children may be experiencing formaldehyde-related symptoms.
"We have lost a great deal through our dealings with FEMA," said Paul Stewart, a former Army officer living in a trailer with his wife in Mississippi, "not the least of which is our faith in government."
In his appearance at yesterday's committee hearing, FEMA Director R. David Paulison apologized and said "in hindsight" FEMA should have tested trailers earlier. "The health and safety of residents is my primary concern," he said. But he depicted the 200 or so complaints as voiced by a small fraction of the number of families in trailers, and he said more research is needed to determine why some trailer residents have become sickened and what level of formaldehyde is unsafe in homes.
Paulison promised to consult with half a dozen U.S. health, environmental and housing agencies and with trailer manufacturers. He also acknowledged that concerns of environmental toxins in trailers go beyond formaldehyde. "There is an issue inside the trailers, but I don't know if it's formaldehyde, mold, mildew, bacteria" or something else, Paulison said.
FEMA tested new trailers last September and October after rejecting more stringent standards suggested by the , Waxman said. In May, the agency reported finding formaldehyde in those trailers at 1.2 parts per million, but it said levels dropped to 0.3 parts per million after four days of ventilation.
FEMA said that met a standard used by the for its manufactured homes. But Paulison said yesterday that FEMA now recognizes that ventilating trailers is impractical during the Gulf Coast's summer heat and humidity. Lawmakers noted that FEMA issued the advice at the beginning of last summer.
Mary C. DeVany, an occupational health and safety engineer advising the Sierra Club, testified that the exposure limit of 0.3 parts per million is 400 times the normal limit for year-round exposure set by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. DeVany called the move a "misapplication and skewing of scientific results . . . to minimize adverse health effects."
FEMA tapped many manufacturers for trailers, and Paulison said he did not know if production problems contributed to contamination. Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) defended the manufacturers pending a more comprehensive study of the problem. "You can't hang an industry on one case," he said.
But other lawmakers charged that FEMA's response augurs poorly for the nation's emergency preparedness. "I haven't seen this level of government incompetence . . . . And they executed an official in China for not having done their job," said Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), alleging parallels in lax consumer regulations and an uncaring government.
"No one is asking for that here, but how about a simple application of the golden rule?"

Incompetence, Evil, Bad Luck, or "Other"

Reading the news reports about this administration, especially now, can tend to make some exasperated, others, speachless, and still others more vocal. I'm trying to figure out where I should be.

It took Nixon to break though with China

Sometimes you need a conservative voice to help you find truth about a conservative.
Scaife-Owned Newspaper Calls for Iraq Troop Withdrawal -- Questions Bush's 'Mental Stability' By E&P Staff Published: July 16, 2007 3:29 PM ET :

NEW YORK The Pittsburgh newspaper owned by conservative billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife yesterday called the Bush administration's plans to stay the course in Iraq a "prescription for American suicide."The editorial in the Tribune-Review added, "And quite frankly, during last Thursday's news conference, when George Bush started blathering about 'sometimes the decisions you make and the consequences don't enable you to be loved,' we had to question his mental stability." It continued: "President Bush warns that U.S. withdrawal would risk 'mass killings on a horrific scale.' What do we have today, sir?"If the president won't do the right thing and end this war, the people must. The House has voted to withdraw combat troops from Iraq by April. The Senate must follow suit."Our brave troops should take great pride that they rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein. And they should have no shame in leaving Iraq. For it will not be, in any way, an exercise in tail-tucking and running."America has done its job."It's time for the Iraqis to do theirs."The editorial said it agrees with its local congressman on this: Democratic U.S. Rep. John Murtha.Scaife has been a loyal backer of Republican politicians and many conservative causes, and funded a network of investigations into President Clinton during the 1990s.

So what else is new...

David Vitter is going back to work, only one GOP candidate shows up at the NAACP, and Bush needs more time, troops and money for Iraq.

More On Racketeering

A Racketeering Enterprise is essentially an organization or entity in the business of breaking the law. It needs a common plan, and common goals...let's say like "maintaining its own power..." or "gaining financially (through self dealing, for example, or profiteering)...
So...I again pose the earlier question.

a few good men

So, the democratic congress is Tom Cruise in a Few Good Men, and the Bush Administration is Jack Nicholson. Does the congress have the will, guts, and character to push the "Code Red" issues?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070711/fired-prosecutors/

Is the White House a "racketeering enterprise"?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/11/washington/11surgeon.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

I might actually be sick. So sick i couldn't come up with a title. I guess I'll call it "Too sick to come up with a title , sick."
The director of Homeland Security said today in an official appearance that his "gut" told him there was going to be a terrorist attack this summer. No...there's no evidence suggesting that there might be one...but "you know how these terrorists love those summer attacks..." I can't believe he said that. Look at this guy's resume! he's a very bright guy, who's supposedly responsible.
Wow. We can't do better than this?

And the other question...might be answered by the release of this list...

It's just about the hypocrisy of some people...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070706/escort-list/

The Question I'd like to ask the candidates...for real

Mr./Ms. candidate:
How do you think harry Potter will end?
http://www.salon.com/books/2007/07/06/harry_potter/

But If Dobson doesn't like him, maybe we should? Am I in Bizarro world?

Dobson (about Fred Thompson): "I don't think he's a Christian"
In an interview with U.S. News and World Report, James Dobson disparaged the notion of a Thompson candidacy, saying: "Everyone knows [Thompson is] a conservative and has come out strongly for the things that the pro-family movement stands for. But I don't think he's a Christian."

And what do you call Fred Thompson?

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/05/gore-on-gore-libby-and-2008/

And now...here comes Al

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/05/gore-on-gore-libby-and-2008/

Poll

Who is more to blame for the state of the country right now: President Bush, because of...well I don't have the time necessary to even outline the reasons, or Former President Clinton, whose actions permitted Mr. Bush the opportunity to be President?

Sign of the apocalypse?

Am I really witnessing a front page ethics debate between Former President Clinton and this White House? I'll have more to write later. Right now I'm going to take a shower and hope it wakes me out of what I truly hope is a bad dream.

Ain't No Sunshine When She's Gone

Fourth of July, 2007. No sunshine, just gloomy cloudy weather during the day. Rain at night, sometimes heavy downpours. Happy Birthday America. An appropriate metaphor for where we are? Gloom and malaise abound in so many ways about the present and the future...but an overwhelming positive energy looming behind the clouds, which we all know is still there, no matter what, ready to burn away the gloom, negativity, deception, and restore the dominance of the great characteristics and traits that make us love and believe in America. THE RADIANT GREATNESS IS STILL THERE, FAR TOO STRONG TO BE UNDONE BY A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND OR VALUE THAT GREATNESS, AND THAT THAT GREATNESS IS BASED ON PRINCIPLE, VIRTUE, AND COMPELLING IDEAS, RATHER THAN SELF-DEALING, SELF-INTEREST AND ZEALOTRY. We need to get back to that place, which seems to have been slipping away for several years now. it's not a party thing, governed by a particular political ideology, it's an American thing, governed by ideas and principles.

where are you Ira Nerken?

Are the times just that different or are the Ira Nerkens all gone?
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,905173,00.html?iid=chix-sphere

Happy Birthday America: Heeeeere's Scooter!

What a birthday present for America. In a country where fair is foul and foul is fair, nothing should surprise us, and everything should surprise us. My gut tells me that the people in the White House, including my President and my Vice President are simply unafraid of anything any other authority might be inclined to do to them, period. And you know what? They're right, at least up to this point. No one is willing to do anything, so why shouldn't they do exactly what they like. This imperial presidency stuff...it really works! Congress can't get out of it's own way, and the executive branch views the judiciary as an ally. So....why not do exactly what they want? I'm not asking for moral reasons, just pragmatic ones. If my Vice president believes he's untouchable, whether for profiteering or torture, or whatever, and if the President feels the same, why should they care what others think? Happy Birthday America! This is what we are and have become, and WE THE PEOPLE simply don't care enough to change it.