I am getting pretty sick of the folks out there, on the news, etc. who seem to be defending the "nobility" of the people who stayed. For some reason, these "defenders" seem to think that admitting the locals have engaged in morally reprehensible behavior limits their ability to piss and moan and blame the whole thing on George Bush, Governor Blanco, Mayor Nagin, and Michael Chertoff. And of course, the most important thing is finding the right person to blame in order to score the most political points (and if it is possible to further sully the War in Iraq, all the better, right?).

For the purposes of this post, I am referring *ONLY* to people who COULD HAVE left but chose not to. I am specifically not talking about people who had no way to get out.

1) Staying was stupid.

2) Staying and looting anything other than food, water, and actually needed medicine (not drugs for recreational purposes) is utterly reprehensible

3) If you had to loot food, water, etc. because you stayed when you could have left, you are still engaging in an immoral act. Yes, it is theft out of necessity, but the only reason it is necessity is because you didn't leave when you could have. Note I am only calling that immoral, I am not calling it repugnant or disgusting or something that I think they should be prosecuted for. I do not think they should suffer criminal punishment for stealing food, water, and other necessities, but I definitely think they should feel real guilt about the immorality of their actions.

4) People shooting at police, medvac, helicopters, etc. should be killed.

I am also hearing some serious evidence of what happens when race pimps and class warfare warlords infect people with their utter BS.

I have seen numerous reporters talk about how when they speak to people who stayed, a very common reason they stayed was because "the poor folks felt the evacuation was ordered so the rich people could have the city all to themselves." How and why would a "class" of people want a city all to themselves? That doesn't even make sense and it wouldn't even work. The city would collapse.

That's just crazy. That is the kind of "Rich People are Evil" thinking that only exists because of the left's incessant class warfare lies.

Even if you look at the world in a 100% selfish, self-interested way, the rich people still wouldn't want poor folks to leave. Who would work at the jobs people need to even make the city a worthwhile or enjoyable place to live? To be a little bit flippant, who would pour the champagne and pump the gas?

Furthermore, since most rich people are just older poor and average people who worked hard for a few decades (look at US income mobility statistics if you don't believe me) it would require a massive epidemic of self-hate for "rich people" to want to do such a thing to "poor people."

I imagine a lot of poor folks really do think that way about "rich people." That's outrageous and it is a sad testament to the extremely detrimental effects of class warfare vote buying manipulation. And further, if you think rich people are evil, is it really a stretch to start looting any store or business in sight? It makes you understand how so many people excuse looting so easily. They've been told by politicians for decades that the rich are evil (even though, most politicians who say that, are rich themselves).