Posse Incitatus

Ignorance is NOT Bliss!

It cannot be emphasized enough that stupidity and apathy, although plagues upon society, pale in comparison to ignorance as far as the damage done. Frankly, there aren’t that many purely stupid people, but there are those whom the Creator did not endow with much intelligence. Bless their hearts, as the southerners like to say.

Regrettably, the United States has tens of millions of ignorant people. The ignorance of history, Economics 101 and the U.S. Constitution are appalling. Many people don't even know what the three branches of government are! This probably explains the leftward tilt of both political parties, and the sudden romance young people are having with socialism.

We knew for decades the Democrats were too much into big government, nanny state nonsense. They subscribe to what President Woodrow Wilson advocated a century ago: the administrative state. Supposedly brilliant experts will formulate, dictate and regulate policies affecting Americans in virtually every phase of their lives. The upshot, according to this school of thought, is that the elitist “experts” know better than we do how to run our lives.

For a while there, Republicans pushed back reasonably hard, and emphasized that large federal deficits will prove our undoing at some future date of reckoning. But in recent years, the GOP has been mostly spineless, and has gone all-in for blowout spending. The spending may not be going toward the same constituents (i.e., voters and prospective voters) as happens with the Democrats, but it’s still excessive spending. The liberals were right when they castigated the GOP for corporate welfare, but in truth, it was hypocrisy. For they, too, are fully on board the gravy train.

Alarmingly, the Democrat Party is tilting toward full-fledged socialism. Many of its millenial supporters, brainwashed and indoctrinated by leftist professors in the cesspool of academia, are gung-ho. Because they don't understand basic economics, the individual liberties held dear by our founding fathers, and the way heavy-handed government has literally resulted in genocide and mountains of skulls, they're all in for trashing capitalism. Critical thinking? What's that?

Climate change is a prime example of useful idiots, aka dupes, agreeing to give up their liberty for some pie-in-the-sky higher cause. (Never mind that we could stop driving all of our vehicles and shut down all of our industries forever, and China and India would continue to pollute wantonly -- with negligible effect on the climate.)

Recently, left-wing Canadian author and commentator Naomi Klein wrote an essay about destroying capitalism and the notion of private property as a means to promoting and supporting policies that will prevent a supposed catastrophe wrought by climate change.

Like many brainwashed leftists, Klein doesn't realize that capitalism has raised the standard of living of literally billions of people worldwide. Air conditioning, affordable automobiles, jet airplanes, computers, radio, TV, the Internet, cameras, quality housing, myriad medical instruments and procedures, wonder drugs... The list goes on. Sorry, liberals, but freedom and the profit motive benefit humanity more in a couple of years than communism / socialism have in a century-and-a-half.

You can be ignorant and spout off to your heart's content. But if your political opponents have an ounce of cajones, they'll get in your face. And your ignorance won't be bliss; it'll be the source of chronic strife.

 

The Left Rears its Ugly Head....Again and Again....

Arrogance and smugness are bad traits of politicians on all points of the political spectrum, but these undesirable qualities, sprinkled with a tendency toward the profane, definitely seem more prevalent among the leftists.

Last weekend, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo gave an interview on "The Capitol Pressroom," a PBS radio program. He stated that "extreme right wing" conservatives who favor the Second Amendment and oppose abortion and gay marriage are not welcome in New York state.

“Who are they?” the governor asked in his annoying, nasal voice. “Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”

The millions of New Yorkers who are pro-life, favor the right to own firearms and oppose gay marriage would beg to differ. Just because New York is a blue state doesn't mean it has no conservatives. And those conservatives, who pay taxes just like everyone else, certainly do not want a left wing Democrat governor defining who New Yorkers are. This is just one of many recent examples of haughty behavior from insufferable liberals.  (If I were to respond like a typical lefty, I'd call the governor an intolerant bigot and a "hater.")

In recent months a couple of teachers' unions -- in Michigan and Wisconsin -- have defended tooth-and-nail two dirtbag teachers whose transgressions were disgraceful.

In the small northern Michigan town of Rose City, math teacher Neal Erickson was fired after he was convicted of raping a male student over three years, from 2006 to 2009. He was sentenced to 15-30 years in prison. The Michigan Education Association is going to arbitration to try to force the West Branch-Rose City school district to pay Erickson a $10,000 severance buyout. Adding insult to injury, several teachers wrote letters to a local judge in support of their pedophile colleague. Moreover, one school board member sat with the supportive teachers and Erickson's family when the scumbag was sentenced.

Now on to another nauseating display from one of our esteemed "educators"...

In Wisconsin, Andrew Harris, a science teacher at the Glacier Creek Middle School in suburban Madison, was fired for viewing porn on school grounds and trading it with others. The local teachers union was able to get Harris reinstated with $200,000 dollars in back pay. The union spent about $700,000 on legal fees. Your tax dollars at work!

Think about it: Does a convicted pedophile deserve ANY kind of severence pay? Would you want a pervert who abuses school equipment by viewing and transmitting porn to be teaching your kids? Of course not, but the teachers' unions dug in their heels with a fierce determination for both of these dirtbags, demonstrating that power, money and sickly pride trump common decency and respect for others in the minds of left-wing ideologues.

These are the kinds of stories that deserve closer attention from the public. These are the types of incidents that low information voters don't know or care about, either because they have chosen to be apathetic and ignorant, they are addicted to sucking off the government teet, or they believe the distorted stereotypes of conservatives that the corrupt media perpetuates with its tainted reporting. 

And there's more...

Down in Texas, which seems to be a culture and world all its own, the darling of the left-wing media is Wendy Davis, famous for her abortion filibuster last fall in the state legislature during which she wore pink sneakers that were pictured all over Twitter and other social media. (The Twitter hashtag #standforwendy was a busy one!)

Ms. Davis is a candidate in the Lone Star State's gubernatorial race, and her opponent, Attorney General Greg Abbott, has been paralyzed and in a wheelchair for 30 years. It seems Davis, whose personal veracity has come into question of late due to extreme embellishments on her resume, has a gaggle of tasteless supporters who are badly lacking in class and common decency.

A video has surfaced depicting Davis supporters as having fun with the fact Abbott is in a wheelchair. And lest we forget, Ms. Davis claimed it was Abbott who was behind revealing her dishonesty about her supposedly "self-made" background, and chose to state that Abbott "has never walked a mile in my shoes." Classy.

And then there's Florida Democrat U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who on Wednesday's anniversary of the 1973 Supreme Court ruling on abortion wished Roe v. Wade a happy 41st “birthday” because of her “commitment to protecting women’s rights.” It doesn't take a genius to spot the irony of that idiotic statement. "BIRTHDAY"? Really? For an anniversary that commemorates the butchery of 55 million fetuses, courtesy of vacuum hoses and saline solution? This is beyond the pale. I'd be willing to bet that 95 percent of abortion supporters don't know who Margaret Sanger was, or that she was a vile, racist eugenicist.

Speaking of abortion, worthless commediene Sarah Silverman, whose schtick would make a drunken longshoreman blush, recently came out with an ad in which Jesus Christ is sitting munching popcorn with her and gives the thumbs-up to abortion. Breathtaking sacrilege, to say the least.

I could go on a lot longer, but ought to wrap this up... No sense regurgitating the numerous vulgar and nasty attacks on Sarah Palin from the likes of Martin Bashir and perpetual potty-mouth Cher. They're out there, but I'm not going to wallow any further.

There is a stark ugliness to the progressive mindset and many who call themselves progressives. A cold, soulless and expedient nature in itself is bad enough. But accompanied by unbridled conceit, it's insufferable.

The most alarming thought for conservatives is not so much the fiscal ruin that will befall our nation if the progressives continue to make inroads in K-12 education, academia, the news media and government (as bad as that scenario would be). It's the condescending, smug know-it-all attitudes of the leftist elites regarding their misguided statist policies, in conjunction with their cancerous, nihilistic social agenda that could well destroy this nation. There is absolutely no time for complacency or overconfidence. We're in for the fight of our lives.

The true significance of the Chris Christie bridge thing

Most of the pixels being wasted in the blogosphere are focusing on the political aspect of Chris Christie's staff allegedly closing bridge lanes as political payback.

This is the way we are these days - the substance of the charge isn't as interesting as the contortions used to evade it.  While the media is of course harder on a Republican governor than it would ever be on a Democrat (got to protect one's own, of course), the treatment is actually quite similar.

"How will he respond?"

"Will the voters buy it?"

"Will this hurt his presidential campaign?"

Nowhere in the mix is there a discussion of what this says about the politics of today.  As someone with far too many years in electoral politics, I am here to tell you that Chris Christie's petty, smug and vindictive staff is the rule, not the exception in our political class.

This is who those people are.  This is why they go into politics.

Time was, failure was met with a demand for accountability.  Governments fell and careers ended over lapses in judgement or even bad luck. 

Nowadays, all one need do is hold a contrite press conference, weep convincingly (or appear outraged, as appropriate) and it's all good.

To put it another way, scandals used to be about what actually happened.  In Benghazi, a US ambassador was murdered.  That used to be a big deal.

Nowadays, scandals are about how poeple manage them.  Do they say the right things?  Has the coverage been favorable?  Are the polls showing any movement?

Writing at PJ Media, Richard Fernandez has been talking about the steadily eroding design margin of western civilization.  This casual attitude toward the actual offense is a large part of it.

When the margin was narrower, fools simply could not be trusted.  Gen. Curtis LeMay's alleged formulation:  "I have neither the time nor the inclination to seperate the incompetent from the merely unfortunate."  One mistake was enough.

For a generation that was farms blow away into dust and lived through the carnage of two world wars, this approach made sense.  For people 70 years removed from the danger, it seems harsh and archaic.

Maybe it is.  Maybe civilization is strong enough to withstand unlimited levels of idiocy.

On the other hand, the capital city of a major industrialized state just went without power for a week because its municipal utility has been systematically robbing the infrastructure budget to cover transfer payments.  The largest city in the same state is now bankrupt.  Perhaps the margin isn't as big as we thought.

There is a tendency among historians to think in terms of centuries, but the dividing lines do not always line up with the calendar.  This was noted somewhere in the blogosphere earlier this week (I forget where) - that the 19th century didn't really begin until the overthrow of Napoleon in 1815 and the 20th didn't commence until the Great War began in 1914.

This trend actually goes back farther than that.  One could argue that the death of Louis XIV in 1715 ushered in the 18th century proper, and that the beginning of the Thirty Years' War in 1618 ushered in the 16th century.

That being the case, we may be living in the final years of the old 20th century, waiting for the world crisis that will bring on the next epoch.

Indeed, I sometimes think we are living in 1914.  We are secure in our prosperity, smug in our global trade and distracted by emerging and new entertainments (back then it was silent films and records).  And of course our leaders were far to enlightened to make a gross miscalculation that would shatter the fabric of civilization itself.

Just like their leaders were.

Haiti Earthquake Fallout is The Kobayashi Maru for U.S.

Right now, the events happening in Haiti are very disturbing. The U.S. military is on shaky ground at best and that has nothing to do with aftershocks. The international community is blaming the U.S. government for not letting the Médecins Sans Frontières' planes land, but that isn't what is happening on the ground.

The U.S. is following the orders of the Haitian government because of the sensitive history between Haiti and the U.S. The international community, okay France, is accusing the U.S. of an occupation of Haiti. The U.S. is trying so hard not to appear as occupiers to the point we are afraid of stepping on Haitian government toes and taking control of the situation.

So, where are we? That would be stuck between a rock and a hard place.

If our military backs out, then the U.S. isn't doing enough to help the Haitians. If we do what the Haitian government wants, then we are aiding an unjust governing body that doesn't really care about the lives of the Haitian people. If our military ignores the Haitian government and takes complete control, then that's an occupation.

This operation is a no win scenario.

We should let the international community handle the negotiations with Haiti. We should let the U.N. tell the Haitian government it can go to hell because help is on the way.

Think about this from a cold, calculated standpoint:

You have no real concern for the people of your country. As long as food, water and medical supplies are scarce, the people are not concerned with how the government frakked up because they are desperately trying to survive. As a Haitian government official, you know that refusing to let MSF land will be blamed on the U.S. and any criticism will be directed away from Haiti because right now the world is reacting to the catastrophe. And when all of these Haitians die and all of the aid money is processed, it is the Haitian government that stands to gain the most.

If you think it will be passed on to help the people of Haiti you have no comprehension of the political dynamic and corruption in Haiti.

Just read what the Haitian people have to say, not what the press is feeding you during this frenzy.

United Entitlement Workers (UEW)

I’m only joking.  There really is no such thing, but judging from recent utterances and actions of labor leaders, the entitlement mentality is alive and well.  This being Labor Day, it’s an appropriate time to take stock of the labor movement and labor unions in the United States.

First, let me acknowledge that labor unions have played an important role in leveling the playing field between workers and management.  There was a time when industrial and business owners could get away with exploiting workers, making them work long hours in dirty, dangerous conditions for low wages.  Child labor was common.

Labor unions’ activism and involvement in the political arena helped bring about landmark legislation such as the Clayton Act, Wagner Act, Railway Labor Act, and various reforms prohibiting child labor.

But the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction.  You could see it coming as far back as the 1970s, as the Big Three automakers increasingly began offshoring production and using robotics in their plants.

Some UAW locals had a reputation for being more militant than others.  Flint, Michigan, was already going rapidly downhill when General Motors decided to shut down the massive Buick City complex in 1999 and move most of its operations elsewhere.  The city is but a shell of its former self, and the UAW Locals are partly to blame. 

The union’s obstinance in contract negotiations, plus an inordinate number of line workers who decided to use alcohol and/or smoke pot during their working hours back in the 1970s and 1980s, helped seal GM’s decision.

These days, public employee unions are growing in membership and clout while the UAW wanes.  Increased automation and computerization in manufacturing, plus the Big Three’s plunging domestic sales, are far more responsible for the UAW’s slide than NAFTA, despite what the demagogues say.

What’s amazing — or on second thought, maybe NOT so amazing — is the intransigence of public employee unions in giving up some benefits or chipping in more for their health care costs.  All of this while unemployment is sky-high and the economy continues cratering.  Two examples that come to mind are State of Michigan civil service employees, and Detroit’s city unions.

Michigan and Detroit are facing major budget crises.  Both need desperately to restructure, but to do so will be difficult.  Michigan is led by a spineless governor (Jennifer Granholm) who is in the vest pocket of unions.  Until just a few months ago, Detroit was led by a mayor and city council that kowtowed to unions. 

Now, fortunately, former NBA star Dave Bing is at the helm, and the self-made millionaire has stated he'll do what it takes to right the city's finances, even if it means he's a one-term mayor.  He’s delivered an ultimatum: He will lay off 1,000 of the city's 13,000 workers in the next few weeks and also needs the unions to take a 10 percent pay cut to help shrink Detroit's $350 million budget deficit.  Otherwise, come Oct. 1, the city could fall into receivership.

Predictably, the militant unions have resisted.  At a recent demonstration, union members waved pickets stating, "Mayor Resign Now" and "No Pink Slips." The Detroit News quoted AFSCME Local 207 President John Riehl as saying, "We know this isn't a battle just for the unions, but for our city. This is the battle for Detroit."

Umm, yeah, John, it is a battle for Detroit, but not in the way you think it is.  It is a battle to keep Detroit solvent, not to preserve city government as a jobs program.

Meanwhile, in Lansing, Gov. Tinkerbell plans to use Obama stimulus funds to plug part of the FY 2010 $2.2 billion deficit.  But don't be surprised if she and the Democrats try to force another tax increase down the throats of long-suffering Michiganders.  Democratic House Speaker Andy DIllon, to his credit, proposed a reform program to save millions of dollars by reducing the gold-plated health insurance benefits enjoyed by 400,000 Michigan employees.  Unions and even his fellow Democrats are castigating him for this as they remain delusional about the severity of Michigan's fiscal condition.

City of Detroit and State of Michigan union members, as well as unionized rank and file across this great land, can whine all they want about having to grant wage concessions, be furloughed for unpaid days off, and contribute more toward their health insurance premiums and co-pays.  But they really ought to be grateful they have jobs.

On Labor Day 2009, there are PLENTY of white-collar workers with far more educational achievement than the majority of those union members who are OUT OF WORK and have slim prospects for finding a good job.  They would give their eye teeth to have the opportunity to give up some wages or have a greater amount deducted from paychecks for health care.  But you cannot make concessions if you don't even have a job.

No Free Lunch

Where to begin? The health care debate is picking up steam, and I fear the twin panaceas of “single payer” and “universal health care,” both Trojan horses of the first division, will suck up millions of gullible Obama-ites.

Trying to address health care in a blog is like trying to analyze the Civil War in a Twitter post. A 150-word, or even 1,000-word essay is hugely inadequate.  One may as well try to get an online PhD with a 486 on a dial-up connection.

So I will not attempt to cover all the bases, but will focus instead on the dynamics of supply and demand, the philosophy of personal responsibility, and the fiscal and budgetary ramifications. Tort reform, insurance deregulation, electronic records, and other matters can wait for another time.

The fiscal & budget part is so cotton pickin’ easy, I’m going to make fast work of it and move on to the next item. Put simply, we cannot afford for Uncle Sam to take on another massive entitlement when it is already drowning in a sea of red ink and has gargantuan unfunded liabilities stretching from here to the next galaxy.

One of the many things I disliked about George W. Bush was his expansion of the Medicare program to include a prescription drug benefit for seniors. I’ve always thought it outrageous that ALL seniors are eligible for Medicare, regardless of income. But beyond that, Medicare, like most other government programs, costs FAR more than was ever projected, and has widened its scope enormously since its creation in the 1960s. It is rife with corruption, fraud, and mismanagement. It is living proof that “single payer” = fiasco policy.

So, Uncle Sam has unfunded liabilities for Medicare and Social Security totaling in the 10s of trillions of dollars during the next 50 years or so; the national debt is $11 trillion and climbing; annual deficits are out of control; and Bush decided to take on MORE entitlement spending? And now Obama and others are talking about putting the government entirely in charge of guaranteeing universal health care?

That would be like me running all of my credit cards up to the limit, gambling away the mortgage money, blowing all my savings on fancy vacations and fine dining, and then going out and buying a Corvette Stingray. Stupid; reckless; insane; idiotic; suicide. That’s what I think about the government taking another bite when it is already choking on its first few bites.

Now on to supply and demand. To put it simply, health care is a finite resource. There are only so many doctors, nurses, physical therapists, et al, to serve a growing population of 300 million-plus. You cannot wave a magic wand and suddenly provide high-quality coverage to everyone.

I know from speaking with former co-workers in Ontario that Canada’s universal health care forces some patients to wait months for routine tests or outpatient surgery. Some of them, if they can afford it, travel to the United States for more immediate attention. But many just accept their fate.

The $64,000 question: How is “universal health care” defined? How extensive is it? Does it include tummy tucks, aroma therapy, Botox treatments and contraceptives? Or is it far more basic?

The old joke goes, “You could pass out aspirin and Band-Aids to everyone and you’d have universal health care.”

This is simply meant to illustrate a point: We’ve got to clarify our terms so we are at least debating apples vs. apples. Currently I suspect the various parties quibbling in this debate might as well be speaking different languages. I don’t believe they’re understanding each other.

Lastly on this point, the finite nature of health care providers — personnel, facilities, equipment, and dollars — begs greater personal responsibility. The provider network can be expanded over time (provided the money is available and health care resources are used more wisely).

This segues us into individual accountability. If people help pay for some of their health care, and use it responsibly, the providers’ end will respond accordingly. More demand and sufficiently large payments (i.e., more market-based rates rather than arbitrary, bureaucratically-imposed reimbursements intended to constrain costs), WILL lead to more doctors, nurses, hospitals, clinics, and the like.

Think of it this way: When you take your car in for an oil change, new tires, or a new muffler, your auto insurance company doesn’t reimburse you for the maintenance, does it? No. You need to figure routine maintenance, insurance, and gasoline into the cost of owning a vehicle, along with the monthly bank note.

Health care is not a God-given right like the air we breathe. It is a valuable commodity that we should be willing to pay for if we are able to. In the days of government-imposed wage freezes, employers began offering health coverage as an incentive to attract and retain employees, and companies get tax breaks for providing such coverage. This is a convoluted system.

Let me propose something that might feel like a cold slap on the face to entitlement lovers: The cost of health care insurance and some expenses such as routine check-ups, flu shots, and dental cleanings and X-rays, ought to be paid by the consumers. People need to consider health and dental costs as a budget priority, just like groceries, utilities, the rent, and a car payment.

Many of the alleged 45 million people without health insurance are young, healthy, and could afford to pay for their own insurance, but elect instead to spend it on things like a car payment, nice apartment, or fancy clothes. It’s a question of how you set your priorities.

For those who cannot afford their own health insurance or treatments because of long-term unemployment, old age, health issues, etc., I am all for a safety net, as I’m sure the vast majority of Americans are.

I will have more to say about health care in the future, but do not believe in posting excessively long blogs.

Islamist protest in N.Y.

I picked this up off Drudge:

A New York rally by the Islamic Thinkers Society outside the Israeli consulate yesterday featured chants of "The mushroom cloud is on its way! The real holocaust is on its way!"

The chants were in Arabic and translated by the Investigative Project on Terrorism, headed by Steve Emerson, a former reporter for CNN.

Here are some excerpts from the chants:  Leader (in Arabic): "With our blood and our lives we will liberate al Aqsa!" [The rest also respond in Arabic:] "With our blood and our lives we will liberate al Aqsa! Israeli Zionists What do you say? The real Holocaust is on its way"

Bring it!  Push us over the edge of reason, come on.  Prove that you are nothing but a group of intolerant, warmongers that can not be dealt with on an intellectual level.  Radical Islam is Islam.  Islam should not be tolerated.  Islam should not be embraced.  We should not try to understand Islam.  It is a religion of oppression and hate.  Remember if you are not Muslim, you are an Infidel.  They no longer tolerate people of their book.  These followers of a supposed peaceful religion train and encourage CHILDREN to blow themselves up and kill the infidels.  Why is that okay?  How do you rationalize that in the West?  What in your brain doesn't function right that allows you to dismiss or support such stupid and self-destructive behavior?  Is it your thalamus or amygdala or just your entire frickin cortex?  If a group of Southern Bible-thumpers decided to train their eight year olds to walk into an abortion clinic straped with explosives to kill the heretics, would this be tolerated?  Would it be okay?  Should we try to understand their interpretation of religion and embrace them?  HELL NO!  So, why is it okay in Islam?  Because so many people are AFRAID of actually doing ANYTHING.  People are afraid to aline with a belief in anything against Islam.  Well the days are coming when you will have to choose which side you want to be counted with.  For me and mine, we will not be on the side that encourages their children, their babies, to blow themselves up for the glory of Islam.

SITHKITTEN

Oscars, Who Cares?

I guess Oscars are approaching...perhaps this Sunday...not really sure.  When I was a kid, I would stay up to watch them.  I wanted to see the beautiful dresses and hairstyles and what stars were there.  Now, I just don't care, and I'm certainly not going to let my daughters watch.  Oscar night once meant something, now it is nothing more than a political statement...We Are Better Than You America...so we are enlightened...deal with it.  Hollywood stars once had class, poise, and elegance.  Now, it is about seeing how revealing they can make a dress that will barely pass standards for television.  It is pathetic really.  Besides they reward people that don't really deserve it.  A few years back, where was the Best Director nod for Baz Lurhman for Moulin Rouge?  And today, where is the Best Movie nod for Walk the Line?  Instead a movie about gay sheep herders...THEY ARE NOT COWBOYS!...will probably win in a couple of categories.  SORRY JAKE, you don't deserve it.  You got paid to love a boy, that makes you a whore not a good actor.  Joaquin Phoenix should get Best Actor, but because of a "progressive" agenda, he won't.  So, farewell to Hollywood, enjoy it while you can, it won't last.  Australia and New Zealand are way better.  I, along with the rest of the Posse, will be renting Walk the Line and remembering Oscars gone-by when talent was worth a nod and character was more than what you played in a movie.  By the way, Sheep Herders of that NOT COWBOY MOVIE, you don't deserve to wipe the boots of Clint Eastwood.

SITHKITTEN

Reporters are like vultures...

As I watch the footage from Hurricane Katrina my temper rises. 

On Fox News we have reporters complaining about crowd management and hostilities because the rescue workers haven't told everyone where to go to get help.  On CNN we have more reporters showcasing the dying and dehydrated. 

I have one fricking question...how are these reporters getting to and from the bridges and overpasses and convention centers where these people are dying?  If they have such a problem with the relief efforts, why aren't they helping. 

This is the United States, and they are dealing with fellow Americans.  This is not a war, this is a disaster.  If they have access to food and water, and the means by helicopter or boat, why are they not distributing?  Why does Shep not get on a bull horn and say "You need to walk or make your way to the Superdome?"  Instead of complaining that hundreds need some official to tell them where they need to go for aid.  This is not a case of showing bias for one side or the other by intervening.  This is fellow Americans dying while you make money showing their suffering. 

I don't blame them for being hostile toward the media, because all they can do is exploit their pain and drive away or fly away.  A more rewarding story would be the staff of Fox News or CNN or NBC going down to volunteer and reporting live. 

If you can't help them, stop rubbing it in their face that you can go get a bottle of water and a sandwich after the footage is taken, only film aerial footage!

-SITHKITTEN