Okay – can I agree with her sentiment and disagree with some of the language that she used?
If a person starts by taking a position of fiscal responsibility (and extremely few politicians even give lip service to that notion), then it can be argued that she’s right – we should not use “emergency” to get around the “pay as you go” budgeting process, every time it’s inconvenient. Emergencies, shocking though this may seem, CAN be anticipated, and there can be advance planning, and therefore budgeting for emergencies.
Having said that, the notion that Hurricane Katrina (and to a lesser degree Rita) was a convenient excuse for the Bush Administration and Congress to spend money that had not been collected by way of some revenue proposition is political demogogary. I was there and I can assure you it was an emergency – in fact it was an “Emergency” with a capital “E”, just like that old TV show.
This is as disingenuous as liberal democrats who cry foul at “tax cuts” (usually dips in tax “rates”, that typically result in increased revenue for the government) that have not been offset by other revenue or spending cuts, when these same liberal democrats never seem to care where the money comes from for the myriad of perpetual wealth redistribution programs they enact.
In a similar vein, many want to criticize the splitting of the operational costs of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan from the core budget of the Pentagon. While I agree that they should be considered separately – they are definitely distinguishable and for different purposes. However, after 8 years in Afghanistan and 6 years in Iraq, to continue to treat the operational budget for the wars as an “emergency” is yet another example of government using language as a weapon. See also, the multiple bailouts (corporate welfare, political paybacks), and their treatment as “emergencies”. See also, the multiple “stimulus packages” (individual welfare, political paybacks) and their treatment as “emergencies”.
CenLamar 
“Uhhhhh” what? You need further explanation? It’s a simple statement, someone from Rizice should be able to comprehend dis.
Hahaha.
Okay – can I agree with her sentiment and disagree with some of the language that she used?
If a person starts by taking a position of fiscal responsibility (and extremely few politicians even give lip service to that notion), then it can be argued that she’s right – we should not use “emergency” to get around the “pay as you go” budgeting process, every time it’s inconvenient. Emergencies, shocking though this may seem, CAN be anticipated, and there can be advance planning, and therefore budgeting for emergencies.
Having said that, the notion that Hurricane Katrina (and to a lesser degree Rita) was a convenient excuse for the Bush Administration and Congress to spend money that had not been collected by way of some revenue proposition is political demogogary. I was there and I can assure you it was an emergency – in fact it was an “Emergency” with a capital “E”, just like that old TV show.
This is as disingenuous as liberal democrats who cry foul at “tax cuts” (usually dips in tax “rates”, that typically result in increased revenue for the government) that have not been offset by other revenue or spending cuts, when these same liberal democrats never seem to care where the money comes from for the myriad of perpetual wealth redistribution programs they enact.
In a similar vein, many want to criticize the splitting of the operational costs of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan from the core budget of the Pentagon. While I agree that they should be considered separately – they are definitely distinguishable and for different purposes. However, after 8 years in Afghanistan and 6 years in Iraq, to continue to treat the operational budget for the wars as an “emergency” is yet another example of government using language as a weapon. See also, the multiple bailouts (corporate welfare, political paybacks), and their treatment as “emergencies”. See also, the multiple “stimulus packages” (individual welfare, political paybacks) and their treatment as “emergencies”.
My alter ego “Libbryrizzle” tried to get you but failed. Interesting article though.
She published an explanatory letter in the Picayune today.