Actually it's the subhead of the day:
New Orleans: Not Quite Stormproof
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reveals the root cause of the failed levee system: itself
It's a throw away link but a zinger of a subheadline.
« Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners | Main | CBS, Not Content With Egg On Face »
Actually it's the subhead of the day:
New Orleans: Not Quite Stormproof
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reveals the root cause of the failed levee system: itself
It's a throw away link but a zinger of a subheadline.
Send e-mail tips to us:
Get Wizbang in your inbox by submitting your email address below.
Just as the McCain/Palin desperation flop-sweat starts to really stink up the country, good news arrives in this afternoon's release of new polling results showing Barack Obama and Joe Biden are widening their lead over John "What Economic Problems?" McCain and Sarah "I can see Russia from my House!" Palin.
4:51 PM |
2 comments
How does John McCain react to the bad economic news? He changes the subject! In late afternoon trading, the Dow Jones industrial average fell 800 points, then recovered slightly in erratic trading to a loss of 764.38, or 7.40 percent,...
3:45 PM |
2 comments
Not only did Palin lie, she was in fact partly or wholly responsible for the failure of the effort she now claims credit for. She's a cheeky monkey donchaknowit youbetcha!
2:29 PM |
1 comments
The father of a measurement known as the "Smoot" returned Saturday to be honored at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the school where he and his fraternity brothers invented...
1:57 PM |
1 comments
At the heart of the scandal was Keating's Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, which took advantage of deregulation in the 1980s to make risky investments with its depositors' money. McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating with federal regulators tasked with preventing banking fraud, and championed legislation to delay regulation of the savings and loan industry -- actions that allowed Keating to continue his fraud at an incredible cost to taxpayers.
1:01 PM |
0 comments
"Bull Durham" sequel is getting made. Kevin Costner will reprise the role of catcher Crash Davis from the 1988 baseball flick. Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon are also expected to...
12:43 PM |
0 comments
The price of Mean Manor just got $30 million leaner, reports the The Post's Braden Keil. Leona Helmsley's 40-acre estate in Greenwich, Conn. - known as Dunnellen Hall - has...
8:35 AM |
0 comments
Tony Curtis still regrets his flippant crack about how kissing Marilyn Monroe in "Some Like It Hot" was "like kissing Hitler." In fact, he now reveals, he was extremely...
8:13 AM |
1 comments
Eddie Van Halen is engaged to his girlfriend/manager Janie Liszewski, PEOPLE has learned. Van Halen, 53, proposed to Liszewski, 38, on Aug. 4 while they were vacationing in Hawaii. The...
7:56 AM |
0 comments
Detailed below are highlights of a news segment aired Saturday morning on CNN hosted by Christine Romans, who opened with "The populist uprising against the Washington Bailout has its roots in a deep distrust of the Bush Administration, which for...
2:00 AM |
2 comments
Publisher: Kevin Aylward
Section Editor: Jay Tea
Comment Section Editor: Maggie Whitton
Editors: Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Jim Addison, Charlie Quidnunc, Jayson Javitz, Cassy Fiano
All original content copyright © 2003-2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.
Powered by Movable Type 3.35
Hosting by ServInt
Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.
Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.
Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.
Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.
Comments (11)
For the money that is going... (Below threshold)1. Posted by USMC Pilot | July 16, 2006 8:12 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
For the money that is going to be spent on New Orleans, we could move everyone of it's citizens to a condo in Miami Beach, and probably save a bundle in the process. Let the damn place sink!
1. Posted by USMC Pilot | July 16, 2006 8:12 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 16, 2006 20:12
2. Posted by fmragtops | July 16, 2006 8:33 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I love that, "New Orleans Not Quite Stormproof". New Orleans will never be "stormproof." No matter how much money is spent, or how many evacuations plans planned, there will always be tha chance of another storm blowing New Orleans away. If you don't want to flood, move to where it doesn't flood.
2. Posted by fmragtops | July 16, 2006 8:33 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 16, 2006 20:33
3. Posted by Palmateer | July 16, 2006 8:49 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
It has come to my attention that a certain "segment" of New Orleans society now refers to the catastrophic event of last year as "The Katrina."
3. Posted by Palmateer | July 16, 2006 8:49 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 16, 2006 20:49
4. Posted by Jim | July 16, 2006 10:40 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Palmateer - I haven't heard anyone here refer to it as "the Katrina." Perhaps I don't hang out with the right segment. Everyone I come across calls it the storm or Evil Bitch Storm from Hell, but usually only church people say that.
fmragtops - every city is vulnerable to something. New York is incredibly vulnerable. San Francisco, Miami, St. Louis (that crazy New Madrid fault is going to go off one day). And if we all left, we'd abandon enormous industry, not to mention that whole sea port thing that imports and exports half of what goes in and out of the U.S. - including 60% of the petroleum. So, you might want to rethink your position.
4. Posted by Jim | July 16, 2006 10:40 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 16, 2006 22:40
5. Posted by epador | July 17, 2006 1:04 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh, so Miami is less storm prone than NO????
5. Posted by epador | July 17, 2006 1:04 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 17, 2006 01:04
6. Posted by USMC Pilot | July 17, 2006 7:00 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
epador:
It's not 12 feet below sea level.
6. Posted by USMC Pilot | July 17, 2006 7:00 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 17, 2006 07:00
7. Posted by USMC Pilot | July 17, 2006 7:00 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
P.S. My apologies to the prople of Miami!
7. Posted by USMC Pilot | July 17, 2006 7:00 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 17, 2006 07:00
8. Posted by doctorj | July 17, 2006 7:52 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"For the money that is going to be spent on New Orleans, we could move everyone of it's citizens to a condo in Miami Beach, and probably save a bundle in the process. Let the damn place sink!"
It is people like this that make it imperative that Louisiana get its fair share in offshore oil royalties so the state can protect itself from flooding and not rely on "the kindness of strangers". We have found out from this disaster that kindness is not in the vocabulary of many Americans.
8. Posted by doctorj | July 17, 2006 7:52 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 17, 2006 07:52
9. Posted by Mac Lorry | July 17, 2006 10:04 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Popular Mechanics published a great article in March, some of which raises more questions.
New Orleans can be made safer with proper engineering and billions of tax dollars, but it's unlikely that it can be made safe against a category 5 hurricane.
Allowing market forces to set insurance rates that reflect the true risk to property would force depopulation of costal areas. One way to achieve that depopulation without destroying individual's investments in their homes is to not allow rebuilding of property destroyed by hurricanes. The government pays to move people out of the danger area just like they did along the Mississippi river. Tax payers pay more one time rather than paying and paying and paying.
9. Posted by Mac Lorry | July 17, 2006 10:04 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 17, 2006 10:04
10. Posted by kbiel | July 17, 2006 1:07 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I completely agree and this would not depopulate all of NO. Contrary to popular belief, not all of NO is below sea level, but the portions that are probably should not be built residential, though they might make fine business districts with a few areas kept up as historical districts (or at least great places to watch people get drunk and make fools of themselves).
10. Posted by kbiel | July 17, 2006 1:07 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 17, 2006 13:07
11. Posted by Jaime | July 17, 2006 3:13 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Throw away link? I thought the lines
"nearly two thirds of the flooding could have been prevented had the Corps simply fortified the weak soil conditions that ultimately caused the levees to collapse."
"Most of the levees withstood the hurricane's initial volley, only to collapse when water cascading down their dry side eroded the soil around their foundations"
Pretty important stuff there.
USMC Pilot - "For the money that is going to be spent on New Orleans, we could move everyone of it's citizens to a condo in Miami Beach, and probably save a bundle in the process."
Not true by a long shot. New Orleans is where it is for a reason. If you look at the largest ports in the world with very few exceptions they are located at the point where a river and a large body of water meet which occurs at sea level. Many of those ports are below or right at sea level, just like New Orleans. You can't move everyone out of the area and still have the perks - it does not work that way.
If you think rebuilding and coastal protection systems are expensive look at the cost of increased freight charges due to the loss of the efficiencies of the port of New Orleans. Add to that the cost of rebuilding the energy and port infrastructure elsewhere. Much higher energy prices and more vulnerable energy supplies are also significant factors. The cost of moving the citizens are negligible compared to the industrial costs and the security factors. National interest requires this restoration. To say anything other than that is short sighted and ill informed.
"It's not 12 feet below sea level." Neither is New Orleans. There are occupied areas that are 8' below but anything lower than that is canal basins, underpasses or wetlands. Even including those things 10' is the max. Over 49% of the city is at or above sea level and in the end it made little difference. My in-laws live in Lakeview, which was considered well protected. Their house is raised 2.5 feet above grade with puts it 6" below sea level. They had almost 7' inside their house. What difference did that 6" make? The fact is that we would have had "wet ankles" had the levee's held and flooding was limited to topping. Localized flooding in flood prone areas - big deal. With the destruction elsewhere New Orleans would not have been a blip on the media screen.
We have had breaches before. Betsy breached a levee in the lower 9th and caused substantial flooding and damage. You know how you can tell it is not the same thing all over again? During Katrina the houses that were shifted around like monopoly pieces were, for the most part, all over 100 years old.
How many posts have you people written about the rebuilding of Mississippi? What about Florida? The area that just flooded up in the northeast has done so repeatedly in the past 10 years - any posts about shutting that region down? Didn't think so.
11. Posted by Jaime | July 17, 2006 3:13 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 17, 2006 15:13