(no subject)

Cenk Uyger, one of my dorm-mates from my freshman year at Penn, is one of the bloggers at the Huffington Post, and this weekend, he posted an interesting exploration of some of the theorizing about government that people like Grover Norquest and Rush Limbaugh have been harping on these last two weeks - the question I have, especially for those of you who are, or have been, conservatives or more libertarian (the latter as I myself have been at times) - what are your thoughts? Anon commenting is allowed and although I'm still keeping IP logging on, I promise to not use it for anything that isn't an actual LJ ToU violation. I've seen a lot of discussion from the right recently that emergency response is entirely the responsibility of the local and state government, but if that's the case, when did it change? Can anyone deny that last fall when the hurricanes hit Florida, the government stepped in to help throughout the recovery process, and the national guard was there hours after the eye had passed? 4000 soldiers & airmen, my statels national guard site says, were activated to aid in disaster relief. In contrast, only 7,500 troops were activated to help in three states as of September 1, with a storm that was much more severe, regardless of the flooding aftermath. how does this make sense?

Also, those who've been passing around and reposing Larry Bradshaw's story, it's now in the New York Times, along with a confirmation by Arthur Lawson, chief of the Gretna, La., Police Department, "that his officers, along with those from the Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office and the Crescent City Connection Police, sealed the bridge." He had not, as of yesterday, asked his officers about whether any of them threatened people with guns or fired weapons over people's heads.