Obama:"I'm adopting the Tman 'Infrastructure Rebuild Plan'."

[travelinman67]

...oh, eat shat...I'll tell you more about the "why" later...

[Appaholic]

This last topic, the "Everglade Restoration Project" has less to do with the Corp of Engineers than Congress and Florida Developers. The Everglades is not merely a single river with a relatively narrowly defined biosphere/bioregion. The Everglades itself is over 6000 square miles, and adding the Central Florida watershed that was effected by this project, the "effected" area is around 13,200 square miles...one of the largest sub-bioregions in the North American hemisphere. If the C.O.E. made any mistakes, it was attempting to treat the Everglades as they would any other "typical scale" natural resource. Could it be done with little impact to the ecosystem, hypothetically, of course it could. Could it be done using strictly traditional dam/canal/levee method? Probably, but not without long-term analysis and corrections/modifications based on environmental impact.
If you've ever been down into the Everglade region, it can be harsh and the seasonal fluctuations are extreme. Historically, during dry years, drain down of low lying regions in the Everglades trapped fish, manatees, shrimp, etc...resulting in massive kills of native species. Once the Everglades have been restored ($8billion project estimated to take 20-30 years), will the government be expected to mobilize to "save" (relocate) those dying species? That's just rhetorical. My point is, for every problem we would "fix" in an Everglades scale project, a new one is created.

So, do we abandon all resource/watershed management, fall back to a time when there was NO flood protection (...which, in effect will take place once the Everglade Restoration Project is compete), or try to REASONABLY find some balance/compromise? And, BTW, the Restoration Act grew out of environmental/political opposition that started before the channel was ever in place...i.e., this was more about blind, unscientific opposition to "anything manmade" that to actual environmental harm. And something else to ponder, the Sierra Club's point man on this activist project, Frances Coleman said:

We rejoice in what has been restored - and we grieve that it isn't the entire river. Too much development in the northern section, with resultant concerns over flooding, and too many homes built in the southern section have forestalled total restoration. The lesson that has, hopefully, been learned is that we must use greater caution when we contemplate changes to our natural systems, because, once homes are built in large numbers, financial, social and political concerns will prevent restoration.

...my question to you, Appa...If the homes are not built, and the development not done there, then where? Are we to limit our habitation to geographically restricted, government defined, regions? If so, who makes that "map", and when will it become available?

But back to your attempt to support the bash Corp of Engineer crowd...

Appa, this yay-hoo Grunwald obviously is an envirowhacko (...really, go check him out...written books on anti-war activism, destruction of the everglades, global warming, tried to blame N.O. on the C.O.E., the list of lefty drownin'-in-'da-Kool-Aid diatribe goes on and on, but most importantly, critically examine his "logic". He makes HUGE conclusions without support, and often introduces his personal opinion with unprofessional sarcastic remarks: FinE for a blog, not appropriate for investigative jouralism.) who has a stick up his azz in re: the C.O.E....Good for him. But to find a couple of instances where the C.O.E. has administered/built watershed management projects that didn't work out as planned, and declare that C.O.E. is a pack of self-serving, bastardized, no'er do well bent on destroying the environment is telling of the thoughtless rationale exercised by the envirowhackos.

Finally, a personal comment. I know gents retired from the C.O.E., all officers, all with "distinguished" records. None of these men give a sh!t what you or any other political do-gooder says or thinks. Not because they're politically close-minded, but because mostly they're apolitical. They build. PERIOD

Where you or the average person looks at a mesa, or lake, or mountain, or valley, or plateau and thinks, "Wow! What a beautiful natural terrain." The C.O.E. Officer looks at it and thinks, "First, we build access roads with culverts to allow year 'round operations. Next, cut a temporary pad for parking of heavy equipment, servicing of equipment, and standby for off-haulers. Complete a survey and calculate the off-haul volume, distance to placement of spoils, number of trips, estimate extended load-days, verify availibility of equipment for the duration of the project and need to purchase lease own equipment, and finally execute labor agreements. Commence tunneling, blasting and rough excavations..." They are EXTREMELY focused, and rarely factor in "non-job specific" variables (biosphere impact; how the project will effect the neighbor's view; whether the "locals" will treat them nicely when they go into town; if some nutcase lefty journalist will target them for attack; or some group of narrow-minded environtmentalists with anti-growth fixations will target them for never-ending harassment and character assasination) when looking at a project...not because they don't care...but because that's NOT THEIR JOB!!!

My point is, these envirowhackos are attempting to villify an agency and it's management, without knowing the TRUE definition of their mission or intent.

T-Man, you ignorant corporate slut (j/k), I am not "bashing" the Corps for the sake of bashing, but merely as a response to their ill-conceived ideas and execution of said ideas. That's nice you have buddies who used to be in the corps...I'm sure it hasn't clouded your perception of the entity. My college professor retired from the Corps, nicest guy in the world, but we would argue over the Corps role in changing the environment. What brought these arguments on? He assigned me a senior thesis, I chose the Corps role in re-shaping the SE to promote settlement and commerce. During the researching and writing of this thesis, I, who had always been a proponent of the Corps (as well as TVA, who I used to want to work for once out of college) became enlightened to the counter-productive projects, wasteful spending, faulty math for justification and environmental destruction that is the modern day C.O.E. This is not to say the COE hasn't been beneficial....you would have to have a serious agenda not to acknowledge this fact. However, to think "all is well", the Corps doesn't care about the projects "but only doing their job"...well that's naive at best and disengenous at worst.

T-man, you're a very knowledgeable person and I would love to share a beer and discussion with you as I am sure I could learn things from you. However, with regard to the Corps...just don't go there....I'll own your ass in that arena.

[D1B]

Tman O for 4 for the week. Blowing smoke is a poor substitute for true intel.

Nice work again Apply.

[dbackjon]

Good work, appa.

Similarly, I took a graduate level course on Colorado Plateau history. First paper was on the building on the Hoover Dam. Second was on the building of the Glen Canyon Dam. Final paper was on how the sucess of the Hoover Dam ushered in the big dam building era, and the failures at Glen Canyon ended it.


Lots of arrogance in the COE...

[D1B]

Tman is partially correct in that COE takes it's orders from pork-sucking congress and big industry, special interest capitalists. However his glowing accolades for this organization underscore his ignorance related to how terrible the COE is. Like FEMA and numerous other orgs that have been bought up by industrialists or gutted to the point of impotency during disastrous republican administrations, the COE is a broke-dick shell of a once important goverment asset.

Also, his chronic use of cut & paste War and Peace-sized blog entries, "I know a guy who worked there" and "this one thing happened in Sacramento" as arguments, simply expose his complete lack of understanding of basic logical fallacies and debate strategies.

He hates environmentalists. Simple.

[AZGrizFan]

Tman is partially correct in that COE takes it's orders from pork-sucking congress and big industry, special interest capitalists. However his glowing accolades for this organization underscore his ignorance related to how terrible the COE is. Like FEMA and numerous other orgs that have been bought up by industrialists or gutted to the point of impotency during disastrous republican administrations, the COE is a broke-dick shell of a once important goverment asset.

Also, his chronic use of cut & paste War and Peace-sized blog entries, "I know a guy who worked there" and "this one thing happened in Sacramento" as arguments, simply expose his complete lack of understanding of basic logical fallacies and debate strategies.

He hates environmentalists. Simple.

Your comment lost all relevancy at the word "republican". Much like T-Man's "glowing accolades", your blind hatred for all things conservative cause YOU to be exposed.

[D1B]

Tman is partially correct in that COE takes it's orders from pork-sucking congress and big industry, special interest capitalists. However his glowing accolades for this organization underscore his ignorance related to how terrible the COE is. Like FEMA and numerous other orgs that have been bought up by industrialists or gutted to the point of impotency during disastrous republican administrations, the COE is a broke-dick shell of a once important goverment asset.

Also, his chronic use of cut & paste War and Peace-sized blog entries, "I know a guy who worked there" and "this one thing happened in Sacramento" as arguments, simply expose his complete lack of understanding of basic logical fallacies and debate strategies.

He hates environmentalists. Simple.

Your comment lost all relevancy at the word "republican". Much like T-Man's "glowing accolades", your blind hatred for all things conservative cause YOU to be exposed.

Read your history books AZ. That comment is, for the most part, accurate. Especially since Reagan.

I don't hate all things conservative and we have much in common. One critical difference is that I entertain the hope that our government can be an agent of good. Unfortunately, again, it's been vilified (some cases justified) and gutted by republicans to the point where it no longer operates effectively. To throw salt in the wound, republicans then use this situation, that they created, to disparage government, discourage quality people from seeking office or employment to basically hand over our national wealth to capitalists who only think of their bottom line or moral tyrants (christian right) who only think of power and their bottom line.

You don't trust goverment. I don't trust capitalists. Obama's victory may be a step in the right direction.

[Cap'n Cat]

This all started when we gave the Negroes the right to vote.

Count on it.

[travelinman67]

This last topic, the "Everglade Restoration Project" has less to do with the Corp of Engineers than Congress and Florida Developers. The Everglades is not merely a single river with a relatively narrowly defined biosphere/bioregion. The Everglades itself is over 6000 square miles, and adding the Central Florida watershed that was effected by this project, the "effected" area is around 13,200 square miles...one of the largest sub-bioregions in the North American hemisphere. If the C.O.E. made any mistakes, it was attempting to treat the Everglades as they would any other "typical scale" natural resource. Could it be done with little impact to the ecosystem, hypothetically, of course it could. Could it be done using strictly traditional dam/canal/levee method? Probably, but not without long-term analysis and corrections/modifications based on environmental impact.
If you've ever been down into the Everglade region, it can be harsh and the seasonal fluctuations are extreme. Historically, during dry years, drain down of low lying regions in the Everglades trapped fish, manatees, shrimp, etc...resulting in massive kills of native species. Once the Everglades have been restored ($8billion project estimated to take 20-30 years), will the government be expected to mobilize to "save" (relocate) those dying species? That's just rhetorical. My point is, for every problem we would "fix" in an Everglades scale project, a new one is created.

So, do we abandon all resource/watershed management, fall back to a time when there was NO flood protection (...which, in effect will take place once the Everglade Restoration Project is compete), or try to REASONABLY find some balance/compromise? And, BTW, the Restoration Act grew out of environmental/political opposition that started before the channel was ever in place...i.e., this was more about blind, unscientific opposition to "anything manmade" that to actual environmental harm. And something else to ponder, the Sierra Club's point man on this activist project, Frances Coleman said:
...my question to you, Appa...If the homes are not built, and the development not done there, then where? Are we to limit our habitation to geographically restricted, government defined, regions? If so, who makes that "map", and when will it become available?

But back to your attempt to support the bash Corp of Engineer crowd...

Appa, this yay-hoo Grunwald obviously is an envirowhacko (...really, go check him out...written books on anti-war activism, destruction of the everglades, global warming, tried to blame N.O. on the C.O.E., the list of lefty drownin'-in-'da-Kool-Aid diatribe goes on and on, but most importantly, critically examine his "logic". He makes HUGE conclusions without support, and often introduces his personal opinion with unprofessional sarcastic remarks: FinE for a blog, not appropriate for investigative jouralism.) who has a stick up his azz in re: the C.O.E....Good for him. But to find a couple of instances where the C.O.E. has administered/built watershed management projects that didn't work out as planned, and declare that C.O.E. is a pack of self-serving, bastardized, no'er do well bent on destroying the environment is telling of the thoughtless rationale exercised by the envirowhackos.

Finally, a personal comment. I know gents retired from the C.O.E., all officers, all with "distinguished" records. None of these men give a sh!t what you or any other political do-gooder says or thinks. Not because they're politically close-minded, but because mostly they're apolitical. They build. PERIOD

Where you or the average person looks at a mesa, or lake, or mountain, or valley, or plateau and thinks, "Wow! What a beautiful natural terrain." The C.O.E. Officer looks at it and thinks, "First, we build access roads with culverts to allow year 'round operations. Next, cut a temporary pad for parking of heavy equipment, servicing of equipment, and standby for off-haulers. Complete a survey and calculate the off-haul volume, distance to placement of spoils, number of trips, estimate extended load-days, verify availibility of equipment for the duration of the project and need to purchase lease own equipment, and finally execute labor agreements. Commence tunneling, blasting and rough excavations..." They are EXTREMELY focused, and rarely factor in "non-job specific" variables (biosphere impact; how the project will effect the neighbor's view; whether the "locals" will treat them nicely when they go into town; if some nutcase lefty journalist will target them for attack; or some group of narrow-minded environtmentalists with anti-growth fixations will target them for never-ending harassment and character assasination) when looking at a project...not because they don't care...but because that's NOT THEIR JOB!!!

My point is, these envirowhackos are attempting to villify an agency and it's management, without knowing the TRUE definition of their mission or intent.

T-Man, you ignorant corporate slut (j/k), I am not "bashing" the Corps for the sake of bashing, but merely as a response to their ill-conceived ideas and execution of said ideas. That's nice you have buddies who used to be in the corps...I'm sure it hasn't clouded your perception of the entity. My college professor retired from the Corps, nicest guy in the world, but we would argue over the Corps role in changing the environment. What brought these arguments on? He assigned me a senior thesis, I chose the Corps role in re-shaping the SE to promote settlement and commerce. During the researching and writing of this thesis, I, who had always been a proponent of the Corps (as well as TVA, who I used to want to work for once out of college) became enlightened to the counter-productive projects, wasteful spending, faulty math for justification and environmental destruction that is the modern day C.O.E. This is not to say the COE hasn't been beneficial....you would have to have a serious agenda not to acknowledge this fact. However, to think "all is well", the Corps doesn't care about the projects "but only doing their job"...well that's naive at best and disengenous at worst.

T-man, you're a very knowledgeable person and I would love to share a beer and discussion with you as I am sure I could learn things from you. However, with regard to the Corps...just don't go there....I'll own your ass in that arena.

In your dreams, Jethro. I was a civil engineering major before switching to accounting...father and grandfather were both engineers (R.E./P.E.). Was doing plan checks while I was in college.

I'm pretty busy today...I'll revisit this tonight when I have more time. Better tune up on your C.O.E. EIS/ITR review process...you're in for a surprise.

Here's a clue.

http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Divisions ... al_Rpt.pdf

See if you can spot the tell.

[Appaholic]

T-Man, you ignorant corporate slut (j/k), I am not "bashing" the Corps for the sake of bashing, but merely as a response to their ill-conceived ideas and execution of said ideas. That's nice you have buddies who used to be in the corps...I'm sure it hasn't clouded your perception of the entity. My college professor retired from the Corps, nicest guy in the world, but we would argue over the Corps role in changing the environment. What brought these arguments on? He assigned me a senior thesis, I chose the Corps role in re-shaping the SE to promote settlement and commerce. During the researching and writing of this thesis, I, who had always been a proponent of the Corps (as well as TVA, who I used to want to work for once out of college) became enlightened to the counter-productive projects, wasteful spending, faulty math for justification and environmental destruction that is the modern day C.O.E. This is not to say the COE hasn't been beneficial....you would have to have a serious agenda not to acknowledge this fact. However, to think "all is well", the Corps doesn't care about the projects "but only doing their job"...well that's naive at best and disengenous at worst.

T-man, you're a very knowledgeable person and I would love to share a beer and discussion with you as I am sure I could learn things from you. However, with regard to the Corps...just don't go there....I'll own your ass in that arena.

In your dreams, Jethro. I was a civil engineering major before switching to accounting...father and grandfather were both engineers (R.E./P.E.). Was doing plan checks while I was in college.

I'm pretty busy today...I'll revisit this tonight when I have more time. Better tune up on your C.O.E. EIS/ITR review process...you're in for a surprise.

Here's a clue.

http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Divisions ... al_Rpt.pdf

See if you can spot the tell.

I was a Civil Enginieering major originally myself, spent summers surveying lake boundaries and running lake elevation profiles. Also spent a summer collecting data at the Coweeta Hydrologic Lab to assist a professor in his dissertation with a grant from USDA. As usual T-Man, you've confused long-winded responses with effective, valid responses...I'm still waiting....

[travelinman67]

Only have about 10 min. to respond...so let's make this easy.

The two principal review stages conducted by the Corp being questioned are the Planning Study phase and the Technical Review phase.

What's being challenged (I hope) is the Planning Study. As was the case with most of the Corps projects, the initiation of the Corps Planning Studies are INITIATED BY A LEGISLATIVE OR REGULATORY AGENCY REQUEST. In the cases you cited, the Southeaster Missouri flood control and Kissimmee Restoration project,

THE INITIAL REQUESTS FOR PLANNING STUDIES WERE MADE BY LEGISLATIVELY EMPOWERED FLOOD CONTROL AGENCIES IN RESPONSE TO CATASTROPHIC NATURAL DISASTERS.

In the case of S.E. Missouri, the floods of 1927, and in the case of the Everglades Project, the Hurricanes of 1926 and 1947.

THE CORP DID NOT INDEPENDENTLY INITIATE EITHER PROJECT'S PLANNING STUDY.

Let me know how much more information you'll need to figure this out.

[Appaholic]

Only have about 10 min. to respond...so let's make this easy.

The two principal review stages conducted by the Corp being questioned are the Planning Study phase and the Technical Review phase.

What's being challenged (I hope) is the Planning Study. As was the case with most of the Corps projects, the initiation of the Corps Planning Studies are INITIATED BY A LEGISLATIVE OR REGULATORY AGENCY REQUEST. In the cases you cited, the Southeaster Missouri flood control and Kissimmee Restoration project,

THE INITIAL REQUESTS FOR PLANNING STUDIES WERE MADE BY LEGISLATIVELY EMPOWERED FLOOD CONTROL AGENCIES IN RESPONSE TO CATASTROPHIC NATURAL DISASTERS.

In the case of S.E. Missouri, the floods of 1927, and in the case of the Everglades Project, the Hurricanes of 1926 and 1947.

THE CORP DID NOT INDEPENDENTLY INITIATE EITHER PROJECT'S PLANNING STUDY.

Let me know how much more information you'll need to figure this out.

So this means that the COE isn't bloated and antiquated and who doesn't use faulty CBA's to justify and lobby congress for wasteful spending projects ONCE they are contacted about feasibility?

[travelinman67]

Only have about 10 min. to respond...so let's make this easy.

The two principal review stages conducted by the Corp being questioned are the Planning Study phase and the Technical Review phase.

What's being challenged (I hope) is the Planning Study. As was the case with most of the Corps projects, the initiation of the Corps Planning Studies are INITIATED BY A LEGISLATIVE OR REGULATORY AGENCY REQUEST. In the cases you cited, the Southeaster Missouri flood control and Kissimmee Restoration project,

THE INITIAL REQUESTS FOR PLANNING STUDIES WERE MADE BY LEGISLATIVELY EMPOWERED FLOOD CONTROL AGENCIES IN RESPONSE TO CATASTROPHIC NATURAL DISASTERS.

In the case of S.E. Missouri, the floods of 1927, and in the case of the Everglades Project, the Hurricanes of 1926 and 1947.

THE CORP DID NOT INDEPENDENTLY INITIATE EITHER PROJECT'S PLANNING STUDY.

Let me know how much more information you'll need to figure this out.

So this means that the COE isn't bloated and antiquated and who doesn't use faulty CBA's to justify and lobby congress for wasteful spending projects ONCE they are contacted about feasibility?

No. If you make an accusation. Back it up.

The attempts to impeach the COE's integrity is 100% driven by envirowhacko extremism. I've given you the pieces. Get of your ass and do some homework. The Everglades Restoration Project was started by some local yocals who had no more knowledge or experience than what they acquired looking out the back window of their homes. Started in '72 before the projects was even finished, before any "harm" could have been studied or documented. The boost came when the Sierra Club came in and organized the locals in '78. Go check the facts, Jack.

Like any organization, has the COE built projects that could have been designed better? Of course. But they are no different than any other human managed organization on this planet. They refine their methods and improve with time. If you took the time to read the Hoover Dike project doc I linked, you'd find there were materials issues with the natural fill that became apparent ONLY after long-term exposure and testing. Judging the COE "calculations and methods" based upon projects they built 70 years prior to computerized methods (not to mention the means and Mu have significantly changed with evolved materials testing methods), reveals the critic's ignorance. Oh, and BTW, the COE has long since abandoned internal-only review, even during the Planning Study. All of the COE's design and engineering is independently reviewed by private sector registered engineers, repeatedly, by different agencies, throughout the process. Again, go do your homework. This is all bullsh!t that was publicly discussed during a Congressional review in 2002-2003 when the mindless hippy-do gooders in Congress attempted to attack the COE's credibility.

To boot, the two examples you cited as COE incompetence are horsecrap, and you don't even have the guts to take ownership of your mistake.

Go back to your envirowhacko Kool Aid guzzling until you're ready to open your eyes to the real world.

[Appaholic]

So this means that the COE isn't bloated and antiquated and who doesn't use faulty CBA's to justify and lobby congress for wasteful spending projects ONCE they are contacted about feasibility?

No. If you make an accusation. Back it up.

The attempts to impeach the COE's integrity is 100% driven by envirowhacko extremism. I've given you the pieces. Get of your ass and do some homework. The Everglades Restoration Project was started by some local yocals who had no more knowledge or experience than what they acquired looking out the back window of their homes. Started in '72 before the projects was even finished, before any "harm" could have been studied or documented. The boost came when the Sierra Club came in and organized the locals in '78. Go check the facts, Jack.

Like any organization, has the COE built projects that could have been designed better? Of course. But they are no different than any other human managed organization on this planet. They refine their methods and improve with time. If you took the time to read the Hoover Dike project doc I linked, you'd find there were materials issues with the natural fill that became apparent ONLY after long-term exposure and testing. Judging the COE "calculations and methods" based upon projects they built 70 years prior to computerized methods (not to mention the means and Mu have significantly changed with evolved materials testing methods), reveals the critic's ignorance. Oh, and BTW, the COE has long since abandoned internal-only review, even during the Planning Study. All of the COE's design and engineering is independently reviewed by private sector registered engineers, repeatedly, by different agencies, throughout the process. Again, go do your homework. This is all bullsh!t that was publicly discussed during a Congressional review in 2002-2003 when the mindless hippy-do gooders in Congress attempted to attack the COE's credibility.

To boot, the two examples you cited as COE incompetence are horsecrap, and you don't even have the guts to take ownership of your mistake.

Go back to your envirowhacko Kool Aid guzzling until you're ready to open your eyes to the real world.

Yeah, that leftist think tank, the Cato Institute, is really looking out for environmental extremism.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0510-27.pdf

...and let's not forget that lefty pinko organization, Taxpayers for Common Sense

http://www.taxpayer.net/projects.php?ac ... roj_id=411

I'll stand behind my earlier links as your COE funded report just might be a little biased....my only contention in this was the Corps is a bloated, ineffecient government relic that needs an overhaul. I find it comical that you would disagree, yet bitch about Congress/Democrats/Government waste. The Corps of Engineers is the biggest welfare program out there. And the fact you are getting personal about it betrays a sensitivity that maybe, just maybe, I might have struck a nerve...

Is the world a better place because of the COE? Yes, much better
Could the COE use some oversight and overhaul like most government agencies that have been around for as long as this country? Of course....that's all I'm saying....

[travelinman67]

Yeah, that leftist think tank, the Cato Institute, is really looking out for environmental extremism.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0510-27.pdf

...and let's not forget that lefty pinko organization, Taxpayers for Common Sense

http://www.taxpayer.net/projects.php?ac ... roj_id=411

I'll stand behind my earlier links as your COE funded report just might be a little biased....my only contention in this was the Corps is a bloated, ineffecient government relic that needs an overhaul. I find it comical that you would disagree, yet bitch about Congress/Democrats/Government waste. The Corps of Engineers is the biggest welfare program out there. And the fact you are getting personal about it betrays a sensitivity that maybe, just maybe, I might have struck a nerve...

Is the world a better place because of the COE? Yes, much better
Could the COE use some oversight and overhaul like most government agencies that have been around for as long as this country? Of course....that's all I'm saying....

A) The Cato Institute is an anti-government, libertarian think tank run by some leftist loons who add depth the the phrase "liberal wolf in sheep's clothing".

2) Taxpayer's for Common Sense, checked theirs at the door. As with Cato, it's mission is to promote environmental law, under the guise of libertarianism.

Go. Do a background on both and look at who funds them and what "products" they sell. All are either envirowhackos, former govt. employees who oppose the U.S. military, or "sell outs" (former govt. employees) who are exploiting their govt. developed skills by marketing their knowledge to folks who promote anti-war and anti-carbon/nuclear energy agendas.

Next, my link to the Hoover Dike rehabilitation project was primarily included to illustrate the "independent review" process, which in comtemporary times includes inclusion during the Planning Study phase.

TRUTH
You and Dback hate the Corp of Engineers and want to see it gutted because:
1) The Environmental Oracle-o'Activism, The Sierra Club promotes abolishing the COE.
2) It is the chief architect of natural resource management in the U.S., and as such, possesses Darth Vader-like control of every envirowhacko's id, denying them their pleasure, while underscoring that if they continue to pursue the pleasure while disregarding their overall health, the will go blind and eventually die...(...and that's just too tough for the instant gratification envirowhackos to deal with. )

[D1B]

By Tman:
TRUTH
You and Dback hate the Corp of Engineers and want to see it gutted because:
1) The Environmental Oracle-o'Activism, The Sierra Club promotes abolishing the COE.
2) It is the chief architect of natural resource management in the U.S., and as such, possesses Darth Vader-like control of every envirowhacko's id, denying them their pleasure, while underscoring that if they continue to pursue the pleasure while disregarding their overall health, the will go blind and eventually die...(...and that's just too tough for the instant gratification envirowhackos to deal with. )

After

Appaholic:
Is the world a better place because of the COE? Yes, much better
Could the COE use some oversight and overhaul like most government agencies that have been around for as long as this country? Of course....that's all I'm saying....

[travelinman67]

By Tman:
TRUTH
You and Dback hate the Corp of Engineers and want to see it gutted because:
1) The Environmental Oracle-o'Activism, The Sierra Club promotes abolishing the COE.
2) It is the chief architect of natural resource management in the U.S., and as such, possesses Darth Vader-like control of every envirowhacko's id, denying them their pleasure, while underscoring that if they continue to pursue the pleasure while disregarding their overall health, the will go blind and eventually die...(...and that's just too tough for the instant gratification envirowhackos to deal with. )

After

Appaholic:
Is the world a better place because of the COE? Yes, much better
Could the COE use some oversight and overhaul like most government agencies that have been around for as long as this country? Of course....that's all I'm saying....

...and I'm just sayin that at this point in time, we should be rebuilding/maintaining our existing infrastructure and resource management systems, not tearing them out.

As with the Everglades Project, there are levee systems throughout the U.S. that need urgent repairs and expansion. We have one here surrounding downtown Sacramento and North Sacramento. Just last week, the residents in the North Natomas area, a low to middle income residential area north of downtown, learned their (mandatory) flood insurance premiums had TRIPLED due to the failure of the Corp and the local flood agency to come to agreement on the repairs/modifications to the levees. Those folks can't afford a 200% increase. This "crisis" is not just isolated to Sacramento...it's going on all over the country. And the cost for not addressing these problems was painfully demonstrated in New Orleans.

(BTW, check your PM's)

[Appaholic]

Yeah, that leftist think tank, the Cato Institute, is really looking out for environmental extremism.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0510-27.pdf

...and let's not forget that lefty pinko organization, Taxpayers for Common Sense

http://www.taxpayer.net/projects.php?ac ... roj_id=411

I'll stand behind my earlier links as your COE funded report just might be a little biased....my only contention in this was the Corps is a bloated, ineffecient government relic that needs an overhaul. I find it comical that you would disagree, yet bitch about Congress/Democrats/Government waste. The Corps of Engineers is the biggest welfare program out there. And the fact you are getting personal about it betrays a sensitivity that maybe, just maybe, I might have struck a nerve...

Is the world a better place because of the COE? Yes, much better
Could the COE use some oversight and overhaul like most government agencies that have been around for as long as this country? Of course....that's all I'm saying....

A) The Cato Institute is an anti-government, libertarian think tank run by some leftist loons who add depth the the phrase "liberal wolf in sheep's clothing".

2) Taxpayer's for Common Sense, checked theirs at the door. As with Cato, it's mission is to promote environmental law, under the guise of libertarianism.

Go. Do a background on both and look at who funds them and what "products" they sell. All are either envirowhackos, former govt. employees who oppose the U.S. military, or "sell outs" (former govt. employees) who are exploiting their govt. developed skills by marketing their knowledge to folks who promote anti-war and anti-carbon/nuclear energy agendas.

Next, my link to the Hoover Dike rehabilitation project was primarily included to illustrate the "independent review" process, which in comtemporary times includes inclusion during the Planning Study phase.

TRUTH
You and Dback hate the Corp of Engineers and want to see it gutted because:
1) The Environmental Oracle-o'Activism, The Sierra Club promotes abolishing the COE.
2) It is the chief architect of natural resource management in the U.S., and as such, possesses Darth Vader-like control of every envirowhacko's id, denying them their pleasure, while underscoring that if they continue to pursue the pleasure while disregarding their overall health, the will go blind and eventually die...(...and that's just too tough for the instant gratification envirowhackos to deal with. )