About Me

My photo
Los Angeles, California, United States
I am a Product and Brand Value Accelerator with over 2 dozen IMDB Credits, Los Angeles EMMY Winner. Top 25 Lifetime Tongal Ideationist, Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Internship Scholarship Winner. Also am a Video Forensics and Video Analysis Expert for Hire.

Featured Post

My Beautiful and Amazing 91 year old Mother was refused service at her local E.R. for a wheezing chest and died three days later. I am Devastated.

91 year old Fortunata Machi was refused service for a Wheezing Chest by the E.R. even as her Caregiver Son Alessandro Machi begged  th...

Friday, May 13, 2011

Barack Obama knowingly cut Mississippi River dredging budget in late 2010. Is Barack Obama's Munchausen's Disease by Proxy flaring up?

Barack Obama has been repeatedly forewarned about the Mississippi flooding resulting from cutbacks in the Mississippi River Dredging budget as far back as January of this year and still refused to undo significant 2011 budget cuts to
the Mississippi River Dredging budget that were already in place.

According to Dredging Today...

Reps. Steve Scalise (R-La) and Jerry Costello (D-Ill.), along with more than three dozen other lawmakers, have written to President Obama urging that he weigh in on the dredging shortfall. Obama's proposed 2012 budget included an overall $57 million cut in Corps of Engineers funding.

"While River conditions have improved, the dredging policy put in place by the Army Corps of Engineers ... and ensuing draft restrictions have had a negative impact on commerce and remain a serious concern," the lawmakers wrote in their letter. -Dredging Today, March 25th, 2011

- end quote.

Later on in the article it mentions that there are only 4 dredgers available instead of the normal 7.

We have a president who is so in over his head that even after 3 DOZEN POLITICIANS WROTE TO HIM ABOUT THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER DREDGING UNDERFUNDING, Barack Obama did nothing and now he's about to flood thousands of homeowners and business people out of their homes and businesses.

We have a president who knowingly cut 40 million dollars from the Mississippi River dredging budget and which will probably result in over A BILLION DOLLARS IN homeland damage and heartache for tens of thousands of americans, business people, farmers, retired people, people on fix incomes, many who soon will be homeless because of the Mississippi River flooding, flooding that is PREVENTABLE by dredging the bottom of the Mississippi River.

Watch over the next week, as President Obama galavants up and down the Mississippi River, telling Mississippi River flooding victims, (a victimization caused by THE PRESIDENT'S oversight), that he will now help rescue them with low interest rate government loans.

Will anybody from the media dare to ask President Obama about "The Letter" from 36 politicians about the Mississippi River Dredging budget underfunding?

Our president has exhibited an equivalent incompetency towards homeowners in regards to HAMP, yet yesterday he got on television and BRAGGED ABOUT HAMP at a town hall meeting.

HAMP most likely violated the Federal Hobbs Act, the extortion clause, by taking property under the color of right. HAMP ACCELERATED the loss of a MILLION Americans' homes by luring them to a taxpayer funded HAMP program, causing A MILLION HOMEOWNERS to BOTH lose their homes and damage their credit rating in an accelerated manner!

If you are a homeowner, the present president continues to come up with ways to endanger your well being, and your home. Whether Barack Obama means to or not, does it really matter?

I also would not have much faith in the Republicans when it comes to HAMP.

Hillary Clinton was and probably still is the best option for this country. If only Barack Obama would accept that he is bought and paid for by too many people behind the scenes to be a good president at this time and step down and ask Hillary Clinton to run in 2012.

(Article update, February 5, 2014).

For an article in opposition to Dredging Rivers in general, please click here.  However, I would like to add a response to that article below that was written in their comments section by vrager
"I am amazed at the ignorance displayed by people who know nothing about water management. Put some Dutch people in charge and they would dredge the river and put the silt and mud on the banks as levees so that the capacity of the river is increased by deepening it and raising the height of the banks.
That’s why there are dykes on both sides of rivers in Holland and in the Fens. It the most simple physics: you expand the capacity of water outflow to the sea by raising banks and dredging bottoms.
It’s been pouring with rain in Holland and there isn’t any flooding, despite the land being below the river levels and the river levels are higher than usual.
The Environment Agency replaced the Drainage Boards which were established to keep the water off the land and to prevent flooding. The prime aim of some in the Environment Agency is to increase wildlife habitat by using the circular argument that wetlands attract waders and migrant ducks geese etc, and to protect them, the man made habitat created by neglecting flood defences needs to carry on being flooded. Where the cattle, sheep and crops are supposed to be is of no concern to them as their livelihoods are paid by taxpayers and they couldn’t give a hoot about farmers and landowners who over centuries have reclaimed this land from marshes and the sea."


Stray Yellar Dawg? said...

Wow! That article in "Dredging Today," if accurate, is damning.

Too bad 99.9% of Americans will never see it or hear of it. Becaue the media is more bought and paid for than the President.

Alessandro Machi said...

It's almost as if curating a story that actually is of incredible importance doesn't mean anything if the media doesn't already know you.

Thanks for noticing!

Alessandro Machi said...

I went ahead and added four headline images along with links to their stories, all are from the first three months of 2011.

Ironically, the A.P. did report on this story back in January of this year, but will they do a follow up?

Anonymous said...

The "Dredging Today" article does not relate the lack of dredging to flooding risks, nor do any of the headlines you cite.

They claimed the dredging was necessary to increase the draft (depth of water) available to allow the free passage of shipping. Nothing to do with flooding. Try reading the article again.

Alessandro Machi said...

Anonymous, huh?

I'm well aware of the purpose of dredging to a certain depth so that ships can safely pass.

Barack Obama CUT the dredging budget so there were HALF THE SHIPS AVAILABLE to dredge.

Dredging allows MORE WATER to PASS without flooding, if dredging funds are cut, more flooding will result.

Barack Obama was REPEATEDLY WARNED that dredging would be curtailed during flood season, and he was non-responsive.

Anonymous said...

"Dredging allows MORE WATER to PASS without flooding, if dredging funds are cut, more flooding will result."

Nice try, Mr. All of a Sudden Water Engineer. How come none of REAL water engineers in the article you cite mentioned FLOODING at all when making their case? Surely that would have added persuasion to their case if it was relevant? The best you can come up with is this:

"Barack Obama was REPEATEDLY WARNED that dredging would be curtailed during flood season, and he was non-responsive."

Yes, they warned that DREDGING would be curtailed. They can't work when the water's that high. That says NOTHING about flooding resulting from a lack of dredging. Cite where they mention it. You can't.

Do you have any idea about the width of the river and other bottlenecks that impede the flow? The channels dredged for shipping would barely make a difference in that scale of water flow.

You were wrong, you went apeshit over a totally different issue and made wrong assumptions so you could bang your little drum and now you play cover your ass rather than admit it.


Alessandro Machi said...

If you're going to attack me with inane analysis, you need to use a real name.

I'll keep up your diatribe for a day so you can copy it and resubmit it under a real name.

Now, to give an answer to your continued idiocy. Only the government can dredge the river. The river is dredged to allow ships to pass.

However, the river can be also be dredged deeper to allow more water to flow. If more water flows through the river, there is less flooding.

I then suggested what could be done with the dredged silt from the bottom of the river. It could actually be sold as potting material to gardeners all over the country.

The bottom line is Barack Obama CUT the budget for dredging, causing MORE FLOODING TO OCCUR, and this after he gave his sophomoric state of the union address in which he wanted to double exports while reducing the Mississippi River dredging budget in half.

Less dredging equals more flooding.

ayshwariya said...

I actually enjoyed reading through this posting.Many thanks.

Dredging Companies India

Best Quality VHS to Digital Transfers

Best Quality VHS to Digital Transfers
Serious Customers Welcome.

Share Gadget

10,000 Dollar Grant! Another Great Find from FABULOUSLY40.com

10,000 Dollar Grant! Another Great Find from FABULOUSLY40.com
Would this be a good way to win funds for Louisa's Law ?