Hate to say it, but for once in his miserable life, Hastert is right

[Jackpine Radical]

(rather than just far-right). NO probably should not be rebuilt where it was.

First, it became an increasingly vulnerable target for hurricanes due to wetland degradation that has been ongoing in the region for at least a century.

But more ominously, much of the city is below sea level and dependent on a system of levees already--and this situation will get much, much worse as the seas rise due to global warming. To rebuild now is to invite sure disaster a few years down the road, as the polar ice caps continue to melt and raise the sea level. As it is, sometime in this century I expect we'll have to evacuate Manhattan and much of Florida, to name just two low-lying, population-dense places.

[trumad]

1. OK..maybe so...

But God Damn...it's major insensitive to say that at this time. Hope is all these people have left!

[Inland]

12. That's all I'm saying. No need to slam the door today, is there?

I know we've discussed it here on DU, but who listens to us?

[derby378]

2. Like Hell

It is Bush's fault that the funding to shore up the levees was cut off. It is Bush's fault that vital National Guard troops that could help alleviate the situation in NO were sent to Iraq instead.

I say rebuild New Orleans, and make Halliburton, Enron, Tyco, and Monsanto pay for it all.

[babylonsister]

22. Rebuild it, with functional levees, and let the people who

lived there return. I fear the fat cat repugs and corporations will buy it up, displacing the rightful residents. If that happens, perhaps that has been the plan all along.

[DebJ]

3. Wetlands would have been protected (thanks to Clinton) but

King George rescinded what Clinton set up.
Following your logic, we should also not rebuild in San Francisco, L.A., and other Californian areas either.

[stepnw1f]

8. You Need To Change That Heading..

I almost lost it. It reads as if you were blaming Bill.

I feel better now.

[GOPisEvil]

4. If we followed that logic, we'd have never rebuilt Chicago & San Francisco

There's a way to rebuild and make the site less vulnerable. The plans already exist.

[Inland]

14. I beg your pardon. Chicago didn't suffer a natural disaster.

Chicago burned. All one has to do is require relatively fire proof buildings.

Not the same as building a city on what is now the sea floor.

[GOPisEvil]

19. OK, fine. What about San Francisco?

[KittyWampus]

18. If Holland Can Keep Dry (And They DO) Certainly New Orleans Can

I kinda thought same too but realised that we do have technology to make it work.

Just wasn't implemented in NOLA

[Zhade]

24. The Netherlands doesn't get hurricanes.

Not the same situation at all.

Not even close.

[Demonaut]

31. how damaging are hurricanes to low lying dykes?

these dykes weren't adequately maintainedm funding was cut for too many years

[Neshanic]

5. Hastert should keep his fat pie hole shut, speculating, when

people are dying because they can't be saved.

He has no shame.

[Fight_n_back]

6. As a resident of San Francisco

let me say that Hastert couldn't be farther from correct. What city is free of natrual disasters?

New Orleans is not the only city under sea level. SF and Oakland are near sea level. Much of the Netherlands is below sea level. He is an ass and his statements will be trumpeted with the rest of the MArie Antoinette like ramblings of these loons who control the government.

[DemExpat]

20. Yes I was going to point this out too....The Netherlands should just pack

it in too I guess...

DemEx

[SmokingJacket]

7. Very, VERY tacky to talk about that now when people grannies are

still stuck in attics. Fuck, it's people's HOMETOWN.

Get everyone out, check out the damage, and then decide what needs to be done. But shoot, that city was one of the most amazing in the world. I can't hear talk of trashing it.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

9. We Should Rebuild Iraq Instead! - Yeah...That Makes More Sense. n/t

[lonestarnot]

23. Excellent observation Orange County Democrat!

[jbnow]

10. Who cares about that

right or wrong the timing was stupid. Shouldn't he be busy now insisting on immediate rescue?

[mcscajun]

11. Hastert should simply STFU

Nobody asked him! It's premature and tasteless to discuss the future of New Orleans, when it is the present that does, and should, command all our attention.

[aquart]

13. He's wrong. Logic does not apply here. Nor should it.

You can build anything anywhere and CALL it New Orleans. But this city has our history in its wooden bones...

By this logic, we abandon our coastlines. We never rebuild on a flood plain. On a fault line. You tell me, where is it safe enough to live?

[bleedingheart]

16. my house is built over a coal mine...

the new school built just 5 miles away was built on pillars that extend into the old mine to prevent subsidence.

[AnnInLa]

15. Uh, N.O. is a MAJOR port city

where would you have the people live who work in that much needed port?

where would you have the people live who work in the much needed refineries and chem companies?

Would you deny million people the right to live where their Acadian, Cajun, and African American heritage is? please rethink your opinion.

[Just Me]

17. Re-building a city is irrelevant. Saving lives is the ONLY discussion,...

,...that should be taking place. FUCK HASTERT,...the pasty tard!!!!

[Zhade]

25. Great point. Lives are still very much in danger.

People over property is the priority.

(Hey, that sounds like a nifty anti-NAFTA slogan, too!)

[cynatnite]

21. Sorry, I just don't agree

Not that I would want to live in a hurricane prone area, I don't believe in just letting a city fall to waste like that.

If bush and his minions are so determined to rebuild Iraq, an entire country even at the cost of lives, why not New Orleans?

[walldude]

26. This is going to take more than rebuilding

the city is underwater. That means things like Typhoid, Cholera, Malaria and other horrible diseases are already gestating. There are dead bodies lying in the sun, sewage is backed up and spilling in the streets. NO may not be habitable for years.

[proud2BlibKansan]

27. A couple days ago I would have agreed with you

But I heard Ed Schultz today talking about this. He said it is wrong to give up on NO and many families have made it their home for generations.

First they are abandoned by the govt with this piss poor relief effort by FEMA. Do we compound that by taking their homes away from them? I say no.

[applegrove]

28. Yes it is too expensive. Fighting terrorism is too expensive for

the 100,000 or so Americans it will save. Let's stop that subsidy too.:sarcasm:

[gnorville]

29. This disaster is a huge opportunity to advance our cause.

Bush's popularity has never been so low and we must strike while the iron is hot. We must take the initiative and hammer our opponents on global warming (the obvious cause of the hurricane), their blatant racism (notice how the majority of all the refugees shown on network news are minorities?), the total incompetance of the so called relief effort (for pete's sake it's been 3 damn days and people are still wading hip deep and dying to exposure), and the complete disregard for the poor as exhibited by the ridiculous price hikes by the greed ridden oil companies.

Network news is handing us on a silver platter the ammunition we need on TV every nite. >Some< prominant democratic voices have already started sniping around the edges but their feeble cries against the illegal administration aren't loud enough (Schumer, Kennedy the Lesser, Campbell).

If we can capitalize on current emotions we can solidify our grasp on the voter's minds and sway the fence sitters to our side. Write your representatives, write your newspapers and do not relent. Our actions today will determine the course of our government in the future, we can win back what is rightfully ours.

[Avalux]

30. Rebuild, and do it right.

A plan was constructed that would have effectively fixed the problems in NO - only it would have cost several billion dollars and the feds said no.

If we can spend 200 billion on the farce that is Iraq, we can rebuild NO and do it right.

[GRLMGC]

32. Amen nt

[OneBlueSky]

33. there's a plan that's been around for awhile for re-doing the canals . . .

and other aspects of the region's geography to both protect New Orleans and start allowing silt from the river to continually replenish wetlands and such . . . it was mentioned in an interview with one of the guys who helped develop it, and it's on the web somewhere . . . I don't recall what it was called, though, so can't Google it . . . did anyone else see that interview, and can you recall what this document is titled? . . .

[brentspeak]

34. He may be right, but he's wrong for saying it now

Now is not the time for people to be debating the ultimate fate of the city. His job as a supposedly responsible representative of the federal government is to help the people of the Gulf Coast out as much as possible - not to get his two cents in on TV pundit-land.