Democrats AND Republicans criticize Jindal's speech

[Mr. Shaman]

Having watched the speech twice now, I didnt hear him saying that. He lumped it into a bunch of other pork projects like the maglev train line from Disneyland to Vegas.

....Despite the fact there are no plans for a high-speed train, between Disneyland & Vegas.

At least he's got his Republican-approved rhetoric/lies down, pat.

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

....if the GOP wants to be at all viable in 4 years they had better get thier stuff together, and instead of having half a dozen candidates already more or less running for 2012, they should be shoring up thier base and instead of jumping on the attack a month into a brand new administration, they should minimize thier comments and let the Dems fail and move in when it happens.

Agreed!!!!!!

Those were their (same) plans, against Bill Clinton....let the Dems fail and move in when it happens!!!!!! (...Which would explain their present-tactics.)

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Move in when it happens? It’s happening now. As obama proudly says, he has done more in his first month than any other administration. The things he has done are terrible. Only a fool would sit and say nothing.

Maybe it'd be best (for you) to do the Republican-thing, and take a little vacation.

​

 

[BigRob]

OK, Ill address this, as to why it is in the stimbill. Ultimately, a volcanic eruption is a terrible interference to the economy in the areas that are effected. Just ask Republican Senator Murkowski from Alaska, who ensured the measure was in the bill, but then voted against it.

So what are we doing? Stimulating or attempting to prevent possible "interference?"

Lets take for instance Anchorage, which is a city that is potentially highly effected by an ash fallout. Anchorage is a MAJOR air cargo hub not only for just Alaska but for the world. Millions of tons of freight travels by air annually through Anchorage from the Asian far east to the American east cost. If you take this refueling stop out of the equation it will seriously damage the movement of goods.
Then on the smaller level, you also have the danger to air traffic, and the potential for planes to crash. Back in 1989 when Mt. Redoubt erupted, this happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KLM_Flight_867

Like I said, is money for volcano monitoring a good thing? Sure. However, nothing you list here has anything to do with "stimulus." So I ask again, what is it doing in a stimulus package?

My point being is that if the Governor of the fine state of Lousiana wants to take issue with monitoring volcanos, that are potentially devastating to the area involved as a natural disaster, then the rest of the country needs to take issue with the money spent on hurricane monitoring.

No one is taking issue with spending money to monitor volcanoes, the issue that is being taken is that it has nothing to do with stimulating anything.

Of course I support watching both, but somehow Gov. Jindal in his ignorance doesnt realize the potential problems with volcanos outside of Hawaii in this country, and is slightly moronic in thinking that the volcanos in question are the type where lava flows from the summit down.

These are stratovolcanos in question, and they are quite a bit more dangerous than the cinder volcano type. So again, the only reason Gov Jindal brought up the volcano issue is to provide a potential visual idea of Congress driving a dump truck towards the top of the mountain and dumping dollars into the pit of lava below.

He brought it up because according to the President we are facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and one would think the solution is not to spend money monitoring volcanoes in an emergency stimulus package.

Of course this probably works for the average American who has no concept of actual volcanos and wants only to hear questionable evidence to what they already think to be fact. But of course they are incorrect.

This is changing the focus on the issue of monitoring volcanoes, when the issue here is whether or not this is stimulus. Should we monitor volcanoes? Yes. Is it stimulus? No.

 

[Pandora]

So what are we doing? Stimulating or attempting to prevent possible "interference?"


Like I said, is money for volcano monitoring a good thing? Sure. However, nothing you list here has anything to do with "stimulus." So I ask again, what is it doing in a stimulus package?


No one is taking issue with spending money to monitor volcanoes, the issue that is being taken is that it has nothing to do with stimulating anything.



He brought it up because according to the President we are facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and one would think the solution is not to spend money monitoring volcanoes in an emergency stimulus package.



This is changing the focus on the issue of monitoring volcanoes, when the issue here is whether or not this is stimulus. Should we monitor volcanoes? Yes. Is it stimulus? No.

I think its just pointless to even try and explain. They get it but dont want to admit they get it. If it were their beloved obama being critical of some GOPer wanting to put that exact same thing in a GOP emergency stim bill they would be saying what you are saying, the difference is, you would be agreeing with them