BREAKING: Ike to Produce 20 ft. Storm Surge, Direct Hit on Galveston/Houston

The headline on CNN reads: Weather Service Warns of Certain Death in Face of Ike.

Residents living in single-family homes in some parts of coastal Texas face “certain death” if they do not heed orders to evacuate ahead of Hurricane Ike’s arrival, the National Weather Service said Thursday night.

Apparently people are still not leaving.

Call the White House, (202) 456-1111 and the Office of Texas Governor Rick Perry, (800) 252-9600 and tell, no INSIST they mobilize the Texas National Guard to forcible evacuate. The Storm is set to hit tomorrow evening.

8 Responses to “BREAKING: Ike to Produce 20 ft. Storm Surge, Direct Hit on Galveston/Houston”

  1. Craig says:

    So, this is setting up to be the government’s fault if they don’t mobilize troops to go into every home in the path of the storm, kick down the doors, grab the people inside and throw them on a bus?

    Freedom means freedom to be an idiot too. If people choose to be ignorant or to put property ahead of their own lives, despite having knowledge of the destructive power of hurricanes, being given advance warning of its arrival, being told the likely damage it will cause, being told that medical help will be slow to arrive if they choose to stay, being ordered to evacuate, being given means with which to evacuate and a place to evacuate to, then they ultimately have the right to live with the consequenses of their actions.

  2. D Metzger says:

    If “kicking down doors” is what it takes to save these idiots life then yes, that’s what the national guard should do. It’s hardly without precedent.

  3. Craig says:

    I’m seeing graphics that 40% of Galveston Island is staying through the hurricane.

    The stupidity is amazing.

    Sorry, but the military has no business physically dragging people out of their homes as well as risking their own lives by confronting people who may even defend their property with guns. You make an obviously reckless personal choice, you live (or die) with the consequences of your own decisons.

  4. Kathy says:

    You know, Craig, your statements here make sense from a purely factual point of view, but they also are very revealing of the right’s true priorities. To me — and obviously, since it’s not me who wrote this post, I’m not alone in this — the value and worth of human life and the importance of doing everything possible to safeguard human life trumps the value of letting people always live with the consequences of their decisions. For the right, it’s the opposite.

  5. Craig says:

    So, if you’ve done EVERYTHING reasonable and legally that you can do to (literally) save people from themselves and they refuse any such help, we can violate their rights and drag them out of their homes kicking and screaming. Likely even get into some violent altercations where some people get hurt or killed? Apparently 40% of the population of Galveston Island refused to obey evacuation orders. That is thousands of people. Can you imagine the public outcry (and rightfully so) if all these houses are being broken into by soldiers and police officers and people are being physically dragged away against their will, as a huge storm begins to rage?

    You are telling officials to go well beyond their legal bounds, because someone determined it to be for people’s own good. And the ACLU will rightfully have a field day with all the lawsuits that will be made afterwards.

    Think about the practical implications and ripple affects of what you are expecting here.

    Making it a righty/lefty thing is BS.

    Personal responsibility seems to be more and more of an antiquated thought.

  6. l.williams says:

    Why is it considered “left field”, or left or liberal or whatever to expect, at this point, your COMMANDER IN CHIEF to have a clue?!!!! I am terrified of what the Republican Party has succumbed to. I am terrified of the power given to people who cannot even place Burkina Fasso on a map. What is going on????? Is it “liberal” to require an Intelligence Quotient for people who as was so aptly put, “have their finger on a nuclear code who think dinosaurs existed 4,000yrs. ago?” The U.S. is in big trouble.

  7. Kathy says:

    No one said anything about dragging people out of their homes kicking and screaming, Craig. Ultimately, people cannot be forced to leave if they refuse to do so, but there is a big difference between warnings on tv and radio and in newspapers, no matter how stern, and actually sending government officials to the endangered areas to do everything possible to persuade people to leave.

    Again, I don’t see what personal responsibility has to do with saving lives, when you can. Stupidity is not a capital offense. People have all kinds of reasons for refusing to heed hurricane warnings like this, many of them based in unreasoning suspicion of government authority, or strong emotions about homes and land and not leaving it, or any number of other reasons tied to their past experiences and/or personal history. Some of those people who refuse to go may be disordered in their thinking in a clinical sense, even. Who knows? But it’s not like they are criminals, Craig. I don’t see either the logic or the humanity in saying to people, essentially, You’re too stupid to act for your own safety, so we’re going to let you die. Why? I mean, when you come right down to it, one could argue that building homes below sea level is irresponsible to begin with. Why issue hurricane warnings at all, to people who chose to live on islands in a coastal area subject to hurricanes and tidal waves? I think it’s pretty risk and pretty stupid to choose to live along the coast below sea level in an area that’s hit by devastating storms every year. So why urge people to leave at all? They can listen to the weather report and find out that a hurricane is coming. If they don’t leave, that’s their fault, right?

    You could argue that Californians who live near the San Andreas Fault, or in areas subject to wildfires, are irresponsible. Why give disaster relief to people who live in an earthquake zone, or a wildfire zone? They knew what they were getting into, right?

    You could argue that people who live in isolated areas where there are no services are irresponsible. People who live in urban areas where there’s crime are irresponsible. What human decision, behavior, or living arrangement is not irresponsible if it can possibly lead to a negative outcome? And if you use that as a reason not to go the extra mile to protect and save human lives, then when is it okay to save people’s lives — or at least try to save people’s lives — even if those people are stupid or irresponsible?

  8. Craig says:

    My initial response was to the original poster who was demanding FORCIBLE evacuation by the Texas National Guard. To me, force means just that, being forced out, i.e. physically dragged out if necessary. If you agree with me that such an action is wrong, then great!

    I’m not sure who these Government “officials” are who you would want to go to the coastal Texas area and “pursuade” people to leave. Are they government hypnotists? Are they going to go to hundreds of houses on Galvaston Island and the eve of the storm and have a debate with each resident to get them to see the light?

    And what makes you think that the only warnings have been via TV/radio/newspaper? In these situations the police are going through neighborhoods with their external speakers and telling people to leave immediately and offering help to those who need it. In some cases they are able to go right to people’s doors and tell them that they are under a mandatory evacuation. Officials were telling those who lived outside of the seawalls that if they stayed, they needed to write their ID and next-of-kin’s info on their arms for identification purposes afterwards. After being inundated with all this information and support services, right up to the storm’s arrival, yes, I do think there is a point of reason in which you can say, “fine, you are determined to live with your reckless decision. So be it.”

    You obviously agree with such a distinction ultimately, since you agree that people can’t be physically taken from their homes.

    By the way, I love the false logic of saying that my line of reason somehow ultimately arrives at not giving any warning, information or support at all to those live in areas that are at some form of risk of natural disaster.

    I really don’t get your resistance on such a straightforward point of logic. It has nothing to do with not caring enough or a lack of humanity.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. The Prescient Matt Damon | Comments from Left Field - [...] Contact Subscribe Browse > Home / Uncategorized / The Prescient Matt Damon « Previous Post [...]

Leave a Reply to D Metzger Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook