Kudo's to Anthony Weiner...

YouTube - ‪Anthony Weiner Rips Apart Republicans on 9/11Health Bill‬‎

For ripping the GOP a new one. As usual, a common sense bill that a normal person would support and vote for, is fought by the GOP. Talking about the bill for the 9/11 responders.

Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-New York) ripped into the GOP July 29 over a bill that would have provided free health care to rescue workers who became ill as a result of the 9/11 World Trade Center collapse.

The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act would have provided more than $7 billion in aid to those rescue workers. However, the Democrats used a procedure that suspended the rules before considering the bill,
but required a 2/3 majority to pass it, as opposed to a simple majority. The maneuver was meant to prevent Republicans from loading the bill with any partisan amendments of their own, which was likely given the popularity of the bill.

Most Republicans were against the bill, with Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas calling it a "slush fund." Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois didn't like that the fund would pay at a higher rate than medicare, and stated, "what this is is enfranchising a bunch of New York City Hospitals."

When it appeared likely that Republicans were going to vote against the bill, in part due to taking offense at the procedure used to pass it, Rep. Weiner took to the stand and admonished Republicans for doing so.

"It's Republicans wrapping their arms around Republicans, rather than doing the right thing on behalf of the heroes," Weiner shouted into the microphone. "It is a shame... a shame... if you believe this is a bad idea to provide health care, then vote no! But don't give me the cowardly view of, oh, if it was a different procedure..."

The bill fell over 20 votes shy of the number needed in order to pass.

On July 30, Weiner appeared on Fox News and showed no regrets over his statements, stating,"You know, this is not something that got rushed through, this is nine years in the making. This is doing the right thing, and we should have passed this bill overwhelmingly without any controversy at all. But unfortunately, the party of 'no' hit a new low last night."


Rep Anthony Weiner Rips Republicans Over Health Care, but It's Not the First Time - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com
________________________

The dems shouldn't have went with the dumbass 2/3 majority to prevent them from adding amendments, but how they could oppose this is beyond me. Stewart busted them for it tonight, also got the dems for the procedure part, but kudos to this guy for standing up to the idiots.

The bill has enough votes to pass, it's not just reps not all the dems are for for this bill either. They have 265 votes to pass the bill easily. Weiner and the other dems are just trying to get more votes from the reps so when people finally find out what all is in this bill they can say well even the republicans voted for this stuff and supported it and with the 2/3's rule it won't be able to be amended to take out the controversial aspects.

Hannity and Peter King own Weiner, you can fast forward to the 7 min mark if you don't want to listen to the full discussion. I really like how Weiner says he will only do his JOB and read a bill before he votes on it if Hannity agrees to read all of them as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMjOeMl1cPs

There wasn't enough dems to pass it on it's own. I may be wrong, but I don't think any dem voted against it, it was 243 dems and 12 reps, the rest of the reps voted against it. The people know what's in the bill, it had been openly discussed and the two things that the reps. found "wrong" with it...that there was a small tax on offshore accounts or something(which actually was just closing a tax loophole), then that there "may have been illegals who were at ground zero, that would qualify for compensation". Yeah, things that ridiculously stupid. Those the controversial aspects you were talking about? Because if not, I'd love for you to show me. This is just them being dicks, just plain and simple and now our heroes, have to suffer because of it.

Playing devels avacult here Why would the Gov singel out these rescue workers from any others throughout the US that develop health problems due to there job?

These workers aren't just suffering from regular, everyday hazards of the job. It's just like soldiers benefits IMO. The regular coverage they had as just firefighters or whatever, doesn't cover most of what they suffer from. There were plenty that weren't on the clock, but rushed in anyway, but are denied compensation because they weren't on the job. This bill is about as common sense as it gets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

These workers aren't just suffering from regular, everyday hazards of the job. It's just like soldiers benefits IMO. The regular coverage they had as just firefighters or whatever, doesn't cover most of what they suffer from. There were plenty that weren't on the clock, but rushed in anyway, but are denied compensation because they weren't on the job. This bill is about as common sense as it gets.

---

Sounds good but what about Vol fire fighters that are injured in the line of duty or the off duty Police officer that rushes in to help in a crash but is injured off the clock......why is one situation more fund worthy than the other?

They only need 218, if you believe for a second there isn't some alterior motive for wanting all these extra votes then you more than show all you care about is blindly following whatever the dems tell you. Where was all this uproar and needing all this rep support and votes when they barely squeaked through that healthcare debacle with 219 and didn't have full dem support like they do know.

Don't bother to repost I know you'll come up with some bullchit justification.

And as I've said, this isn't a normal hazards of duty issue. And those would be isolated incidents over the country, this was a federal issue and effected many, many people. Obviously, Congress can't individually have a vote and allocate funding for scattered incidents across the country. The health effects of the dust and conditions aren't normal as a house fire, along with other effects that this has caused to those that responded and worked at ground zero.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBeast

They only need 218, if you believe for a second there isn't some alterior motive for wanting all these extra votes then you more than show all you care about is blindly following whatever the dems tell you. Where was all this uproar and needing all this rep support and votes when they barely squeaked through that healthcare debacle with 219 and didn't have full dem support like they do know.

Don't bother to repost I know you'll come up with some bullchit justification.

---

They went with the 2/3rds majority that needed 265, if they had went with the normal 218, the GOP could drag this out for months with adding amendments to it. I've already said it was a dumb move and should have just went with the regular procedure. They were expecting more GOP support, that was part of what Weiner was talking about.

I'm still waiting for you to show me what these parts in the bill that were so controversial....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

And as I've said, this isn't a normal hazards of duty issue. And those would be isolated incidents over the country, this was a federal issue and effected many, many people. Obviously, Congress can't individually have a vote and allocate funding for scattered incidents across the country. The health effects of the dust and conditions aren't normal as a house fire, along with other effects that this has caused to those that responded and worked at ground zero.

---

No they can't go ona a case by case bases buy is it not unfair to treat this situation differant from others with simular situations on a smaller scale?

Why not pass a blanket coverage that would apply to everyone and not just a few (equle protection anyone)

And the smaller situations are dealt with with the local/state government also.

When you make a blanket law like that, you are begging for fraud, it's not possible to extend that to everyone just because of a few cases here and there. In some case there were to be another attack, then health problems like this arose, then we can say it was wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

And the smaller situations are dealt with with the local/state government also.

When you make a blanket law like that, you are begging for fraud, it's not possible to extend that to everyone just because of a few cases here and there. In some case there were to be another attack, then health problems like this arose, then we can say it was wrong.

---

Not disagreeing with you on the froud BUT it still does not make it right that people in 2 differant parts of the country will get treated differantly based solely on where they live to me that just seems wrong....If the fire fighters that worked 9/11 and now have related health problems diserve special treatment so does the the guy in Kingsport that has the same issues due to fighting fires there IMHO there is (or should not be) any differance

Like I've said several times, this was normal on the job complications, a house-fire that's out in no more than an hour is routine(not taking away from what they do), but working at ground zero(this isn't just firefighters by any means) for an extended amount of time comes with a thousand times more the health risks than something routine in kingsport or elsewhere. This is a federal matter and this has effected many, many people...it had to be acted on at that level, the scattered incidents here and there couldn't possibly be, nor should it be, acted on at the fed. level like that. They are very, very different.

What about the citizens in the area who have similar health issues because of the bombings that were not workers? Are they covered also?

Not that I know of, is there even people that live that close to it? I would bet it's mostly all businesses near ground zero. And if there are ones that live that close to it, I'd imagine they weren't there too much after the area was closed off, cleaned up and inspected for months after.

There was a lot of housing around it. Numerous apartment complexes especially. What I think we get into here is discrimination if we find a lot of workers getting these deals when Joe American doesnt and he/she was dealing with the hazardous fumes and such as well and not knowing where we stop since this has became a "federal issue".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1inStripes

There was a lot of housing around it. Numerous apartment complexes especially. What I think we get into here is discrimination if we find a lot of workers getting these deals when Joe American doesnt and he/she was dealing with the hazardous fumes and such as well and not knowing where we stop since this has became a "federal issue".

---

That is what I was getting at it seems to me we are saying that the health of those in NY is more important than the health of those in Utah.....the avg citizan is in the back of the line in all cases

I wouldn't call the people who rushed in to help when they didn't have to for the 9/11 disaster an "avg citizan". They went above and beyond the call of duty to try to rescue people after what happened.

For instance--let's say a Fireman from Oklahoma went to NYC to help w/the 9/11 efforts. Lots of people traveled from all across the country to come and help in the efforts. Let's say said Fireman suffered an injury attempting to rescue one of the people, or at worst recover a body so it could be buried respectfully...BUT...they were denied healthcare for the injury by their work's insurance plan b/c they suffered the injury 1) outside of their jurisdiction, and 2) off the clock.

The only people that makes sense to is the insurance company denying the coverage. I'm pretty sure anyone else with half a patriotic heart and sound mind can agree that the Fireman deserves to be taken care of for his service to the country in that time of crisis.

Why not extend VA health benefits to these people? They may have not been active military duty, but 9/11 was an "act of war" and led to the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan. In my eyes, these people were serving their country in war time, though war hadn't been declared yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1inStripes

There was a lot of housing around it. Numerous apartment complexes especially. What I think we get into here is discrimination if we find a lot of workers getting these deals when Joe American doesnt and he/she was dealing with the hazardous fumes and such as well and not knowing where we stop since this has became a "federal issue".

---

I figured there might be some apartments around it, but that's about it. As I've said, during the clean-up/recovery period, it was all closed down around it. Plus the infrastructure of the buildings around also was an issue, I highly doubt anyone was living that close to ground zero for many months. And I don't think so at all, that can and would be dealt with on a smaller level in those cases as it should, it's not like the bill prohibits that. A terrorist attack is a federal issue, even just the fact it's on this level with this many people, special circumstances exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Counts

That is what I was getting at it seems to me we are saying that the health of those in NY is more important than the health of those in Utah.....the avg citizan is in the back of the line in all cases

---

It's not "those in new york", it's about a terrorist attack site that happens to be in New York and responders to it. It really never crossed my mind that this could be taken as that and I don't see how it could be, even the ones that voted against it didn't argue it because of this. Again, it's not like in these scattered incidents that they can't and won't be handled with the local levels like they should.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

It's not "those in new york", it's about a terrorist attack site that happens to be in New York and responders to it. It really never crossed my mind that this could be taken as that and I don't see how it could be, even the ones that voted against it didn't argue it because of this. Again, it's not like in these scattered incidents that they can't and won't be handled with the local levels like they should.

---

Not sure how you could take it any other way IMHO the cause should not dictate the result.....I am with Cane as far as extending va benifits to them however I think if that if you do it for that situation you need to do it for all situations that is all I am arguing

This is just the first I've heard of a favoritism argument against this .And it can be and probably is on the local levels, no one is against that, but the fed. can't and shouldn't extend a blanket law like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

This is just the first I've heard of a favoritism argument against this .And it can be and probably is on the local levels, no one is against that, but the fed. can't and shouldn't extend a blanket law like that.

---

No the Fed should not be doing this at a local level it should be at a national level or not at all IF NYC or State wants to do something like this then that would be a differant story

Huh? They are acting on what they can, what they should and what they needed to do. Let the local incidents be taken care at the local level. This is a large federal issue and they are acting on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

Huh? They are acting on what they can, what they should and what they needed to do. Let the local incidents be taken care at the local level. This is a large federal issue and they are acting on it.

---

Large yes but still local WHY is this a Fed issue and if it is why not other smaller but indvidualy just as devastating incadents?

As I read this bill, it is not just for first responders. It is also for residents of New York who may have contracted WTC cough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1inStripes

As I read this bill, it is not just for first responders. It is also for residents of New York who may have contracted WTC cough.

---

Fine by me too that they be covered. They were closest to the devastation of 9/11 and got the brunt of the ill effects that came from it.

This is one of those touchy things b/c I see where Counts is coming from...why aren't there coverages extended to those from other states who go and volunteer to fight wildfires in California?

The delineation I make between something like that and 9/11 is that those in Cali or helping w/Katrina cleanups are all volunteering for natural disaster/phenomenon, not an attack on the country as 9/11 was.

Im not done reading it, but I can definitely see how that would raise the question though if residents are involved about illegals benefitting though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Counts

Large yes but still local WHY is this a Fed issue and if it is why not other smaller but indvidualy just as devastating incadents?

---

It's a terrorist attack, the largest terrorist attack, it's obviously a federal issue. A person who has health problems outside of the normal, on duty risks, it would be taken care of on the local level...why would the federal government get involved in that? This was a federal issue to begin with, the local gov. isn't doing anything, they have to step in and they should. Your examples of here and there local matters can't and shouldn't be acted on by congress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoeburnCane

This is one of those touchy things b/c I see where Counts is coming from...why aren't there coverages extended to those from other states who go and volunteer to fight wildfires in California?

.

---

That is exactly what I am saying not that it makes a big differance in what actualy ends up getting passed one way or the other. To me it is EXTREAMLY sad that someone liveing IN NY would develop problems due to the 9/11 cleanup but to me it is NO better or worse than The illness from the Katrina cleanup or fighting wild fires....R13 mentioned that the Feds need to get involved now becouse 9/11 was an attack on our countly.....well Katrina had Gov built Dykes that failed and most of the Wild Fiers out west are on National forst property so again why not cover the people in those situations too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

These workers aren't just suffering from regular, everyday hazards of the job. It's just like soldiers benefits IMO. The regular coverage they had as just firefighters or whatever, doesn't cover most of what they suffer from. There were plenty that weren't on the clock, but rushed in anyway, but are denied compensation because they weren't on the job. This bill is about as common sense as it gets.

---

You believe in fighting for these people when the Dems are supporting it but you don't care that a mosque is being built near where all the people served and got ill at ? If it wasn't for that religion we wouldn't have the problem in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Counts

That is exactly what I am saying not that it makes a big differance in what actualy ends up getting passed one way or the other. To me it is EXTREAMLY sad that someone liveing IN NY would develop problems due to the 9/11 cleanup but to me it is NO better or worse than The illness from the Katrina cleanup or fighting wild fires....R13 mentioned that the Feds need to get involved now becouse 9/11 was an attack on our countly.....well Katrina had Gov built Dykes that failed and most of the Wild Fiers out west are on National forst property so again why not cover the people in those situations too?

---

First I've heard of any widespread illness outside the normal or hell any at all from the cleanup efforts from those specific examples with Katrina or any wildfire. So what exactly are you referring to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Milk3

You believe in fighting for these people when the Dems are supporting it but you don't care that a mosque is being built near where all the people served and got ill at ? If it wasn't for that religion we wouldn't have the problem in the first place.

---

This isn't a dem/rep issue, it's a common sense bill, the GOP just happened to be on the wrong end of it as usual. I support it because those people have absolutely nothing to do with what happened there, they are citizens just like the rest and people seem to forget many muslims died in the attacks too, but they aren't as important huh? Christianity had as much to do with it as Islam did, these were terrorists who happened to be muslims, not the other way around. People need to get that through their head.

So you are fine with illegals being covered if they livedi n the area?

I wouldn't necessarily agree with it, but if they did receive money, the system obviously failed. Illegals aren't likely to apply for something like this in fear of getting caught, they're scared to take a census, let alone prove citizenship, then prove legitimate illness. If it did happen, it would be a maybe a handful that actually were affected and cheated the system, sorry that's no cause to deny everyone else this money. If it were illegal people that ran in and helped or worked with recovery or something? I'd have absolutely no problem with it, they would be more than deserving, why would I care if they had a SS number.

It is a legit reason to correct the bill though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

Christianity had as much to do with it as Islam did

---

Please explain this comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

First I've heard of any widespread illness outside the normal or hell any at all from the cleanup efforts from those specific examples with Katrina or any wildfire. So what exactly are you referring to?

---

Mysterious Illness Could Have Katrina Ties

Quote:

---

Published on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 by the Ruston Daily Leader (Louisiana)

Mysterious Illness Could Have Katrina Ties
by George Graham

Pafford Ambulance Service EMT Greg Coleman watched the polluted water of a flooded New Orleans stain, rust and generally erode the metal slide action of his Glock handgun.

Now the toxic water is threatening his health, as well as other Ruston-area first-responders who answered medical and law enforcement calls for assistance after back-to-back hurricanes earlier this year that may have changed Louisiana?s Crescent City and other Gulf Coast parishes forever.

The paramedic recalls treating victims who trudged waist- and chest-deep through the overflow of Lake Ponchatrain with some of the same symptoms that now have him seeking medical help.

?I can?t clean (the gun) because a film residue keeps coming back,? Coleman said. ?And, if it did that to a metal gun that is nearly indestructible, I can?t imagine what it is doing to people.?

Coleman is not alone. Other area law enforcement and emergency service volunteers also are reporting medical problems and attempting to alert the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals to recognize the health hazard being dubbed the Katrina Rash or New Orleans Crud.

Louisiana State Trooper David Bryant responded three times to the help call and also is receiving medical assistance after contracting a recurring 102-degree fever following his third trip. Doctors have been unable to determine whether his illness, which resembles pneumonia or bronchitis, is fungal or bacterial.

?It definitely came from New Orleans,? the trooper said. ?My chest started hurting in October and lasted for more than a month. I returned to Ruston, but went back to New Orleans for a week over Halloween. When I came home the third time is when I had the high fever.?

Lincoln Parish Deputy Tommy Doss, another early responder, had a different experience ? a rash developed on his forearm shortly after returning from his stint in New Orleans. Topical skin treatment helped his forearm for a few days, but then the rash emerged on his legs. During treatment, it also returned to his arm.

?Now I?ve got the rash on both legs and my arm,? Doss said. ?I don?t know for sure that I caught it in New Orleans, or what it is, but a lot of people are coming down with weird rashes.?

At the beginning of Coleman?s first tour, the water did not appear to be contaminated, he said. That quickly changed.

?We would be wading along and find ourselves walking beside dead and decomposing bodies,? Coleman said. ?In the heat, the water became very stagnant with a combination of sewage, bodies, gas, oil and other chemicals. It was horrible ? and it smelled horrible.

?We were trying to save lives, but we never thought we would encounter this catastrophic experience in our own country ? hunger, extreme thirst, people dying.?

Coleman returned to Ruston on Sept. 6 and during the next two or three days, his appetite disappeared and his body rejected all food.

?The itching skin was the worst part,? Coleman said. ?Our (Pafford) assistant medical directors, Keith Carter and Zach Helsing, immediately recognized the symptoms as a medical problem and sent me to HealthSouth (rehabilitation hospital).?

Nurse Practitioner Shelyna Rice of HealthSouth quickly had Coleman admitted to Lincoln General Hospital under the care of Dr. T.L. Morris. Coleman was given hepatitis and tuberculosis shots, and a series of tests were run. Then internal symptoms showed up.

?The abdominal cramps were extremely painful, the skin rash was still there and the vomiting was horrific,? Coleman said. ?The doctor told me he had never seen anything like what my symptoms were and said he couldn?t diagnose what I had.?

The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) Web site at American Society of Health System Pharmacists, has posted an article claiming several residents in other states who traveled to New Orleans in the wake of Katrina have come down with skin infections and rashes.

Amy M. Hollar, a pharmacy practice resident at Mission Hospitals in Asheville, N.C., calls the condition the Katrina Rash. The ASHP field hospital treated several local (New Orleans) residents and relief workers for various skin infections and rashes. Several patients were diagnosed with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

Robert Leeds, a critical care pharmacist at Durham (N.C.) Regional Hospital, part of the Duke University Health System, said another skin infection is being identified as being caused by the marine bacterium Vibrio fischeri.

A third skin infection is suspected by epidemiologists at the field hospital to be a contact dermatitis, Hollar said.
Heather Tornabene is a licensed practical nurse and a first-responder EMT. She volunteered to go to New Orleans twice and says MRSA is very dangerous.

?MRSA is antibiotic resistant,? Tornabene said. ?Most antibiotics won?t touch it, so it is extremely hard to treat.?

Doss recalls post-hurricane New Orleans as a huge smelly mess filled with floating corpses when the Ruston contingent arrived. The air was also filled with smoke from fires burning out of control since firefighters had no water pressure. At one point, a factory or warehouse explosion sent huge clouds of smoke into the air and everybody inhaling the vapors suffered an immediate, serious headache

Doss and others were in a pickup truck at the scene of one fire where rescue workers were using Blackhawk helicopters with ?balloons? to dip water out of Lake Ponchartrain. The helicopter would then drop the load of water hoping to extinguish the fire, Doss said.

?Deputy Jim Stephens was riding in the bed of the truck when a load of water was dropped,? Doss said. ?We were so close that he was completely soaked with filthy water, and he didn?t get a rash.?

Ruston firefighter Kevin Lewis said he was in contact with the contaminated New Orleans water, but did not come down with a rash.

Ruston Paramedic Tom Leith said firefighters used extra precautions.

?No one in our department has said anything to me about any rashes,? Leith said. ?We were in the second group and were really careful.?

Doss said he got off lightly compared to Bryant.

?Bryant has something internal,? Doss said. ?He?s having chest pains and is in really bad shape.?

Bryant?s fianc饬 Carol Dreyfus, said Bryant also suffers with abdominal problems, extreme weakness and fatigue.

?David (Bryant) is home now, but he?s going to a specialist in New Orleans after the first of the year,? Dreyfus said. ?They really don?t know what he has ? they just call it the New Orleans Crud. But he?s lost 32 pounds and looks horrible.?

Bryant blames part of his woes on lack of preparedness by state police headquarters.

?They dumped us off in New Orleans without the right equipment and they didn?t give us shots or respirators,? Bryant said. ?The whole thing in New Orleans was really unorganized ? horribly, horribly, horribly unorganized by both the governor and state police headquarters.?

Bryant, who prior to his illness ran an average of 140 miles a week, will enter Oshner Hospital in New Orleans where he will be tested by the hospital?s internal medicine diagnostic facility.

?I?m tired of my chest hurting,? the eight-year veteran trooper said. ?I?m tired of the cramps.?

Ruston Fire Chief James Tornabene said the firefighters who returned from New Orleans only recently completed their shot regimen because no one knew what they were going into.

?We had no time to prepare, as if anyone could prepare for a disaster of the magnitude of Katrina,? James Tornabene said. ?The second team we sent got Hepatitis A shots, and our EMTs had to have Hepatitis B shots.?

Heather Tornabene said for the Hepatitis A shot to be effective, it would have to be administered 30 to 60 days in advance. Because of that, she was extremely careful to not go into water more than ankle-deep and constantly wore rubber gloves.

James Tornabene said he was concerned about air-borne particles, but respirators were not the answer to disease prevention in aid workers.

?Respirators were impractical in the 100-degree heat and high humidity of New Orleans,? the chief said. ?One of the keys to avoiding diseases is to avoid prolonged contact with contaminants ? the longer the exposure, the greater the chance of disease.?

Coleman, 33, of Ruston, was the 2003 winner of the EMT of the Year Award presented by the National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians. His symptoms of vomiting, abdominal cramping, constant thirst and no appetite returned a week after he was released from the hospital.

Coleman said he personally treated people in New Orleans with the same symptoms, and the problem now is getting the State Department of Health and Hospitals to recognize Katrina Rash as a legitimate health problem. He issued a dire warning to anyone planning to live in New Orleans.

?My personal observation is that I see a serious safety hazard,? Coleman said. ?None of these medical problems have been identified, and I recommend that people not go back to live and if they return to visit to wear the heaviest rubber boots and gloves they can find. I recommend they carry in their own water and not drink any New Orleans water or any drink with New Orleans ice in it.

?I don?t see how that city can recover. My grandchildren will live to see repercussions from the area down there.?</SPAN>

---

Vibrio Illnesses After Hurricane Katrina ? Multiple States, August?September 2005



Are FEMA trailers ?toxic tin cans?? - U.S. news - Katrina, The Long Road Back - msnbc.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1inStripes

It is a legit reason to correct the bill though.

---

I don't think it is, not to derail the entire bill. This is assuming it was done for that anyway, it was "find the smallest things so we can shoot it down" type move.

Can I borrow $5k from you just for the fun of it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Milk3

Please explain this comment.

---

Are you kidding? Do you think that they are just fighting amongst themselves? Who do you think they are pissed off at?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Counts

Mysterious Illness Could Have Katrina Ties






Vibrio Illnesses After Hurricane Katrina — Multiple States, August–September 2005



Are FEMA trailers ?toxic tin cans?? - U.S. news - Katrina, The Long Road Back - msnbc.com

---

Really hadn't heard anything about this, but was anything ever made of it? Looks like pretty old links and nothing ever came about from it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1inStripes

Can I borrow $5k from you just for the fun of it?

---

Of course not. But fraud with illegals would be enough to derail this bill? Fraud maybe in general to make changes to it, but because it's illegals who IMO would be some of the least likely to 1) attempt it and 2) actually get anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R13

Really hadn't heard anything about this, but was anything ever made of it? Looks like pretty old links and nothing ever came about from it?

---

Honistly it is/was alot like the 911 stuff for the 1st few years and how they are talking about the gulf oil well now there were more links but honistly I did not have time to read them there is a ton of stuff on it I personaly can't make a judgement on what is legit and what are people tring to work the system