Powered by TypePad

« There's A Ford In Your Future | Main | Recapping Gretna »

September 10, 2005

Comments

Seven Machos

They were LOOKING for more places, Stevie? Well, clearly, THAT'S a good plan. Clearly, since the Democrats contol virtually all aspects of every level of state politics in Louisiana, it's Bush's fault.

Gee, you are dumb. I mean, I am not the smartest guy in the world. We all know that. But arguing with you is like kicking a dog with no legs. It feels good to be winning, but surely you can do better than this.

Furthermore, your selective quoting of NR, as I showed above, is basically fraudulent.

Come on. Is it really with these arguments that you expect to win actual elections. I hope you are hiding a substantial part of the electoral playbook, for the sake of the two-party system.

Steven J.

Furthermore, your selective quoting of NR, as I showed above, is basically fraudulent.

Only in BushWorld.

Seven Machos

Awesome comeback.

Harry Arthur

Steven, a little history of racism among the conservatives unfortunately doesn't tell the whole story. I'll just offer that racism is one of those isms that cut across cultural and political lines in the 50s and earlier. As has been correctly noted, we didn't even pass a civil rights act until the mid 60s.

In all honesty, I believe the South has dealt more forthrightly with racism and our part in it than many other parts of the country. We have discovered that unless we learn to live together we'll never get far economically or culturally. I think that if you were to look at the number of minority mayors, police chiefs, fire chiefs, state office holders and federal office holders from the South that you'd be hard pressed to suggest that today's South is the South of 1957.

I realize many of these people are democrats but I also realize that the South is very much red state territory, so it would seem that a fair number of republicans and conservatives are voting for minority candidates in spite of any alleged racism. And if the South generally and conservatives who live there are still such racists, why then is the net movement of black people back to the South? (Sorry, no link for that - perhaps Rich M has a reference).

Of course the Southern Baptists (fair disclosure - I'm one) were wrong on race. Dead wrong with not a single excuse for our wrongness. I realize an apology is totally inadequate in righting the wrongs perpetrated on black people by the SBC but we have grown intellectually and spiritually and have sincerely apologized and confessed our sin.

We could discuss Nixon's southern strategy and Bob Jones University but it's late, I'm tired, I'm honestly not sure what good it would do, and I'm not at all certain either is fundamentally a conservative issue in any case.

Liberal American

Pay attention to these facts:

1) Bush lied about why we went to Iraq.
(read "the price of loyalty")

2) There were no WMD's.

3) He's giving tax breaks to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.

4) He's done NOTHING to fix the most bloated, inefficient health care system in the modern world.

5) His medicare bill has a specific provision that PROHIBITS a medicare representative from negotiating with drug companies for lower drug prices. Wow.

5) His administration cost many American lives by responding so poorly to the devastation in Louisiana.

6) He's done next to nothing (and look at the numbers in the energy bill on this) to really invest in renewable energy which makes economic sense, it makes sense for future generations, and it makes sense to keep up from relying on foreign oil.

7) His Republican FCC chairman tried to relax legislative rules which would have allowed for further consolidation in the media industry - leading to even fewer companies owning all the major media in the country. Right now we've got about five.

8) He wants to allow mexicans to come to america to pay taxes, not become citizens, and work in America as part of his "guest worker" program. Many republicans aren't even buying this one. This will bring the price of labor down for ALL OF YOU.

9) Your president has spent 20% of his presidency on vacation. Notable at times preceeding both 9-11, and the Katrina disaster.

I think Democracy is about opportunity. About creating opportunity for more people, not taking opportunity away to help the already priviledged.

What if your president talked about morals and did the most immoral things?

What if your president talked about a culture of life and let american soldiers die in a corrupt war?

What if your president said he was working for you
and he wasn't.

Bush was at a political fundraiser where some of america's richest were in attendance, this is a quote:

Bush: "some people call you the haves, and the have mores"
crowd laughs
Bush: "I call you my base."

Ask yourselves this: Do you want a president who thinks (and acts) like this?

Sincerely,

Liberal American

Syl

It's happened, folks.

Bush has won the Katrina debate.

That's why the liberals are changing the subject.

JayDee

Bush has won the Katrina debate.

Not quite. LOL.

The day the storm hit, [Blanco] asked President Bush for "everything you've got." But almost nothing arrived, and she couldn't wait any longer. So she called the White House and demanded to speak to the President. George Bush could not be located, two Louisiana officials told Time, so she asked for chief of staff Andrew Card, who was also unavailable. Finally, after being passed to another office or two, she left a message with DHS adviser Frances Frago Townsend. She waited hours but had to make another call herself before she finally got Bush on the line. "Help is on the way," he told her.

Actually, Bush Blew It.

"There are a number of steps Bush could have taken, short of a full-scale federal takeover, like ordering the military to take over the pitiful and (by now) largely broken emergency communications system throughout the region. But the president, who was in San Diego preparing to give a speech the next day on the war in Iraq, went to bed."

Oh my.

kim

The headline of the article you link to claims that government at all levels blew it. JD, selective quoting is the way to impress a high school forensics teacher. It's just bullshit here.
===================================================

kim

What if Liberal American thought his brain was working and it wasn't?
==================================================

JayDee

Selective quoting? Did he go to bed or didn't he? Was he AWOL or wasn't he? Selective blame gaming seems to be acceptable here. Find me some quotes to refute these facts, or to explain how they don't demonstrate detachment, incompetence and an utter failure of the highest level of leadership.

Of course all levels of government failed. Who has said otherwise? But what kind of country doesn't hold its chief executive to a standard higher than all other elected officials? What kind of country seeks scapegoats at the lowest level possible in order to cover up the ineptitude of the man chosen to be the leader, the most qualified, the most capable, the most (lol) accountable to the entire country at large?

kim

Check out the Times from TM's original post. Are they quoting Blanco quoting herself? They have her own reaction about her little temper fit and they call that journalism?
================================================

kim

Look, silly, calling a quote selective doesn't call it false, it calls it irrelevant. Kind of like your arguments.

This storm tore us a new anus. The tissue that gave was local. The body persists in its functions and will survive, thanks to our glorious federal leader.
==================================================

kim

What sensible polity doesn't lay the blame where it belongs? The local failures were so spectacular they draw the eye and the frown. FEMA responded as well or better than expected; it was the local response which was panicked.
==========================================

kim

Glorious Leader----"the most qualified, the most capable, the most accountable" man chosen.
=================

Etienne

kim, good to see you have caught your breath and are back to worshipping your unaccountable "glorious federal leader".

What country/century are you living in again?

kim

You do note the definition came from JayDee. Did you misplace your sense of humour over the weekend?
==================================================

rwallis

"Steven J and Libal American and JD
for response time to the hurrican go to
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05254/568876.stm
Jason van Steenwyk is a Florida Army National Guardsman who has been mobilized six times for hurricane relief. He notes that:

"The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."
go to the FEMA web page and see what it says about who is the first responders and what their responsiblity is

Steven J.

RWA -

I beat your punk with a general:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1103583,00.html
Honoré also says help should have come sooner. First responders hesitated, he says, because they were "afraid of big crowds of poor people." It was a case of "people believing the movie." But the city was not out of control, he concluded after delivering food and seeing the streets for himself. The subsequent forays by government forces may have reassured outsiders desperate that help get into the deluged city, but, says Honoré, they "just pissed off people inside the city. Imagine being rescued and having a fellow American point a gun at you. These are Americans. This is not Iraq."

Jim E.

"The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."

Let's all follow along here:
- FEMA sucked under Bush I, partly because it was staffed by inexperienced political cronies
- Clinton successfully improved FEMA, in part by staffing it with experienced professionals, not cronies
- FEMA again sucks under Bush II, partly because it is staffed by inexperienced political cronies

Therefore, it is highly lame to compared the current hurricane debacle to hurricanes that occurred under Bush I and Bush II, when most people agree FEMA sucked. You are comparing a shitty Bush response to other shitty Bush responses.

Jim E.

"I think the Clinton administration would have done a better job in handling Hurricane Katrina."

-- William Kristol

Etienne

Thanks, Jim E., for making that all too obvious point. BOTH Bush's gutted FEMA, both screwed up major hurricanes. Seems like Bill Kristol is just making the same point in a lot fewer words.

Hey, look over there - Brownie RESIGNED!....B-b-but why would he do that if the federal response was so above reproach?

rwallis

Steven J
FEMA had National Gaurd stationed in panhandle of Fla, NM Ark and had supplies stationed in several states waiting on the gov of La to call on them. Gen Honer'e was critizing the local gov not FEMA

TexasToast

Wondering when Brownie gets his Medal of Freedom? ;)

Etienne

Why did he resign? Brit Hume said FEMA is just a small agency with no real responsibilities. And FEMA is supposed to be waiting on the locals on scene overwhelmed by a hurricane, flood, riots and a million stranded souls to detail carefully, specifically, compeltely what exactly they neeeeeeeed. With all the forms properly signed and notarized.

So how did Brownie screw up? He was only carrying out his mission.

Does this mean Bush has "won the Katrina debate" once and for all? Is he CEO of the World again?

Steven J.

RWALLIS - FEMA had National Gaurd stationed in panhandle of Fla, NM

Speaking of New Mexico:

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson offered Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco help from his state's National Guard on Sunday, the day before Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana. Blanco accepted, but paperwork needed to get the troops en route didn't come from Washington until late Thursday.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/K/KATRINA_NATIONAL_GUARD?SITE=AZTUS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

rwallis

Steven J
and the NG troops in Fla and other states, why did she not ask for them? maybe it is because they might have a rep. gov? they were ready and waiting on the gov to ask. You Quoted The Gen. who was he talking about, (why... the NG of course.).. who the gov would not send in to get control of the city. gee it still comes back to Blanco and the mayor

Seven Machos

I want to respond to American Liberal, above:

1) WRONG. Bush did not lie about why we went to Iraq. WMD was one component of a larger argument. It's simply the one the Left latched onto before and after the war. American policy had been to oust Saddam since at least 1991.

2) There were no WMDs. SO WHAT? WMD was one component of a larger argument. It's simply the one the Left latched onto before and after the war.

3) SO WHAT? Bushi is giving tax breaks to the less-wealthy 99% of Americans as well. Some people did not get tax breaks because they did not pay taxes before.

4) SO WHAT? First of all, our healthcare systsem is the best in teh world. (I await American Liberal brining up Cuba and France.) What did Clinton do for healthcare in eight years except try to socialize it?

5) SO WHAT? Medicare has never resonated at the polls.

6) WRONG. Local response was a disaster. The Left is ridiculous here. You think Bush is a terrible leader who wants to declare martial law. When a hurrican happens, and he follows the law and gets authority to intervene through legal mechanisms, the Left chides him FOR NOT DECLARING MARTIAL LAW AND NOT LEADING. First responders will always have to be local. If you think about it for a minute, you'll see that this is unavoidable. I know the Left wants to defeat logic, but try to use it. It can be your friend.

6) SO WHAT? What did Clinton do to invest in renewable energy? How successful was Carter in fighting energy problems? Markets set the price of oil. The reason oil is more expensive is that people in China and India and Vietnam (et al) are using it. This is good. This is poor people enjoying material consumption.

7) I agree that the FCC should foster competition.

8) SO WHAT? If you are anti-immigration, you are conservative. Period. Which party is the one with all the pro-illegals in it? Bush is out of line with his party here, but SO WHAT? It's not like you are a Republican criticizing. You are just trying to score points here. If you are anti-immigration, welcome to my political party. We have a big tent, and you can find a place with us. As it is, your cheap rhetoric is disheartening at best.

9) SO WHAT? You think Clinton never went to Martha's Vineyard every August. This argument is a joke. Also, YOUR president spent his ENTIRE presidency letting terrorists blow up our navy ships, try to blow up the World Trade Center, blow up our embassies, blow up apartment buildings where Americans lived in huge numbers overseas, and pick off dozens of Americans overseas. What did Clinton do to stop any terrorism EVER? You got a lot of nerve, pal.

And I love the platitudes. What a DEEP THINKER you are. What a MORAL person. You think "democracy is about opportunity." (I think it's a system of selecting leaders.) You think democracy is "about creating opportunity for more people, not taking opportunity away to help the already privileged." WHAT A HIDEOUS STRAWMAN! This specimen ought to be preserved forever. Do you really belive that those who disagree with you politically want poor people to remain poor and disadvantaged?

When did YOUR president talk about morals and do moral things? Was it in the bathroom with Monica?

I could go on and on, but I will end on a question: in this guy's rant, where was one positive solution to any political problem? Your time in the political wildnerness could well be long and lonely, Democrats, if this and Stevie are the best you have. Jim E. used to make no sense to me. Now, he seems like a veritable fount of wisdom in comparison to some of the left-loony-hackery I've seen in the last few days.

cathyf
The day the storm hit, [Blanco] asked President Bush for "everything you've got."

...and then refused to allow it into New Orleans...

The Red Cross and Salvation Army (the organizations which, in the federal disaster plans, are responsible for delivering aid in the early days of a disaster) were kept out of New Orleans by the Louisiana state dept of homeland security and not allowed to deliver the supplies that they had pre-positioned to the superdome or convention center.

The New Orleans Police Department radio system died when it flooded. They were not just severely undermanned, but they had no command structure for the police, no way of telling officers what plans were being made, no way for officers to call for backup or to report information. The criminals took over, and then the "dramatic" press coverage was an exaggeration which became self-fulfilling, as the only people moving information in New Orleans was the press, and they wanted the most lurid pictures they could get. The police, wrestling to regain control of the city, used the very limited communications that they had to get a team of radio technicians to speed to New Orleans.

The state troopers turned them back.

When the National Guard started showing up, they had virtually no information from the police as to the actual tactical situation. All they had was the news pictures which showed complete anarchy. So they waited a full day to amass overwhelming force because they worried that moving in with the small number of troops they had at first would just make things worse. If they had known that the criminal behavior was really isolated (either by having police who could communicate, or journalists who could communicate honestly) they probably would have moved in much sooner with the troops they had rather than waiting.

In at least one case, a group of volunteers set off from East Texas on Monday evening with 22 flat-bottomed boats, because some official was on TV begging for boats to rescue people.

The state troopers turned them back.

(They went home to Texas and threw themselves wholeheartedly into the tasks of feeding, sheltering and resettling refugees there.)

The feds were relying on state and local authorities to tell them what particular things were needed in what particular places. To know who was who, who was in charge in each place. To communicate with people in each locality in the entire affected region, so that they would know which stretches of road were passable, which bridges undamaged, which routes could be cleared in the shortest time. Blanco spent hours and hours on the phone with CNN instead of giving orders to her subordinates to allow relief efforts through and to collect and coordinate information. Now it's possible that there is some behind-the-scenes secret person who is really in charge in Louisiana and sent Blanco to spend hours on the phone with CNN to keep her from getting in the way, but if there was, then he/she wasn't particularly competent either!

You know, there is this not uncommon family dynamic... One child is a screwup, always needing to be rescued from his/her bad decisions about relationships, jobs, schooling, etc. The other kids are reasonably together. So what happens? The screwup kid gets all the attention and support, while the good kids get ignored. The towns in Mississippi have suffered an incredible blow from an incredible storm. And they have faced this disaster without a lot of help from the American people. All you BDS sufferers who are ignoring the devastation there because it can't be blamed on Bush really do have no shame.

cathy :-)

vnjagvet

SM and cf:

BRAVO, I thought they had taken over the thread for a while. Cavalry to the rescue, and with ammo too.

Etienne

I'm really amazed at how easy it is to trump people's common sense. The conservative excuse du jour is that the feds were sitting in their offices, with their pencils sharpened, waiting for a mayor and governor who were dealing with a whirlwhind of hurricane, flooding, riotiing, mass evacuations, communications failures, law enforcement failures, etc. to delineate for them an inventory of their specific needs?????

Now I'm not even going into the technical facts of the argument, over what the charters of these federal agencies specify...but does this actually make sense to people? From a simple commn sense viewpoint, why the HELL would the feds be sitting in their clean little offices waiting for these overwhelmed locals to specify their needs? It is - to put it mildly - INSANE.

Yet this meme is being sold through winger media and, if the conservatives here are any indication, it's being eaten up like chocolate covered coffee beans. THIS is why I say conservatives scare me. If it is this easy to hypnotize through propaganda, I can't see how we can ever return to being a respected nation, governed with competence.

Seven Machos

Edy -- No. Conservatives are defending the federal response and attacking the local and state response. This is appropriate.

Perhaps if you and the rest of your loony-left cohorts would calm down and be reasonable and rid yourselves of BDS, we could all have a logical conversation about how we could all approach national disasters better. Congress needs to pass some laws, and have proactive inspectors. But, no. You want to blame Bush for a HURRICANE. This is beyond ridicuolus. This is in the realm of insanity.

But, again, it's ultimately up to the states and the cities and the neighborhoods to resond first. Think about it. Just for a second. There's no other way.

Jim E.

"Conservatives are defending the federal response and attacking the local and state response. This is appropriate."

Yes, and that's what so damn funny -- for a so-called conservative to write. Attack the state and locals! Very, very conservative, indeed. An obvious knee-jerk response for a conservative to take. Yep.

It's also playing that game of blame that President Bush specifically said should not happen. Tsk, tsk.

P.S. Just so you're not confused, I've never defended the state and local response myself.

cathyf

Ah, I think I finally get your argument, Etienne. The federal government is incompetent because they can't read minds...

So how the f*** else do you get the right stuff to the right places except by having the people who know (because they are on the scene) tell the people who have the stuff? It's not really useful to send a semi-trailer load of infant formula to a place where there aren't any babies who need chemical feeding. To send generators to a place that there isn't any gasoline. To send cell phones to a place with no cell towers. To send trucks to places that are only accessible by water. To send cans to places with no can openers. To send air conditioners to a place with extremely limited generator power. To send a 10,000 gallon-per-hour water purifier to a place that has 600 people. To send size XXL depends to the neonatal ICU, or premie-sized diapers to the nursing home. To send troops down a road which leads to a bridge so totally destroyed that it will be months before that road is open. To go on TV and beg for volunteers to bring specific things when nobody tells the state police to let people with those things through the roadblocks.

This disaster has caused significant loss of life and property over an area the size of a small country, and the area that is sheltering evacuees is the size of a medium-sized country. To the extent that any of this works at all it is because local people in all of the thousands of local places are working to get it done, rather than waiting for some outsiders to jump in and rescue them.

I used to live in South Carolina, where the unofficial state motto is: "Thank God for Mississippi, or we'd be last in everything!" I think that it is totally fair to point out that Mississippi deserves its own unofficial motto: "Next to Louisiana, anybody can look good!"

cathy :-)

Seven Machos

Jime E. -- A rational observer would come to the following conclusions:

1. It was a terrible act of nature. Some people were going to die no matter what. The hurricane itself was not the fault of anyone.

2. The local response was awful. The police did not keep order and, in fact, committed crimes. The city did not have a plan to get people out.

3. The state response was awful. The state was too busy covering its ass and playing red tape to get leadership on the ground as quickly as possible before, during, and after the fact.

4. Macro-problems are, in retrospect easy to see, and should have been address at the local, state, and federal levels. Don't build an under-sea-level city by a hurricane-producing body of water, just for example. If you do, you must engineer it better.

5. The federal response was inadequate. The federal government needs a mechanism to declare an emergency and assert itself, and make people follow its lead to get its resources in place. HOWEVER, this is a recipe for corruption and tyranny if there aren't a ton of checks and balances. The federal government must proactively insepct what the states are doing in terms of disaster response.

Once again, if the Left would stop with the BLAME BUSH/BUSH LIED!!!! nonsense, we could spread the blame honestly and forthrightly, and we can put nto place laws and institutions that will prevent this awful thing in the future. But your side has to can it with the lunacy.

Etienne

You're right, Seven, we really can't have a conversation if you are going to keep repeating nonsense like "liberals are blaming Bush for a hurricane"...That statement is willful foolishness. No one has said that. No one will say that. No one could say that. So when you accuse people of saying that, you are basically indicating you are not interested in a rational conversation.

Answer this question: Does it make sense to expect the people on the ground dealing with hurricane, flood, riots, homelessness, deserting police, medical emergencies and all the other CHAOS of a true disaster to NOT get supplies, reinforcements, equipment, assistance, etc....unless they formally request it ? One of the state National Guard, a Colonel, said this was akin to expecting soldiers in the heat of battle to requisition each and every round of ammunition.

It's nonsense. The evidence doesn't even seem to back up this craven attempt to escape responsibilty by the feds, but if it did, it would only prove that whoever wrote this policy was an IDIOT.

If the "blame game" is such a GAME, why are Republicans so committed to playing it?

richard mcenroe

"Hey, look over there - Brownie RESIGNED!....B-b-but why would he do that if the federal response was so above reproach?"

Etienne, you ever held a day job? The term is "sacrificial lamb," optionally, "scapegoat."

Jim E.

"The term is 'sacrificial lamb,' optionally, 'scapegoat.'"

If you truly think Michael Brown isn't deserving of the blame heaped upon him, then why aren't any Republicans screaming at George W. Bush for hanging the guy out to dry? If you actually believe what you write, isn't Bush a scoundrel for abandoning Brown when the going got tough? What does that say about Bush's character that he would push Brownie -- he did a "heck of a job," after all -- over the edge to save his own skin?

Seven Machos

Edy -- The federal government is a government of limited powers. It is not allowed to run roughshod over the states without declaring what amounts to martial law without the states' formal permission. The federal government repeaatedly tried to intervene but was denied.

We aren't a tinpot dictatorship with no laws. You don't seem to understnd this.

Secondly, you are making what amounts to a he said/she said argument. It's dumb. You are essentially saying, "yes, let's be rational. The federal government failed and no one else did because that's what the governor of Louisiana says."

Edy, I have wasted a lot of words on you, and I have yet to see you say one cogent thing -- one thing that wasn't propaganda that amounts to Bush Bad.

Jim E.

So the so-called conservative Machos says the state and local responses were "awful," but the federal response was merely "inadequate," and he adds a whole bunch of verbage pointing out mitigating factors on behalf of the feds, but not on behalf of the state and local officials. (And he conveniently ignores the unqualified personel Bush chose to staff the agency with, as if individual leadership positions in such an important department don't matter and had nothing to do with the debacle).

And some of that verbage -- "The federal government needs a mechanism to declare an emergency and assert itself" -- isn't even on-point since mechanisms were/are already in place. The feds just chose not to act aggressively. The WHite House apparently didn't even know that Blanco declared a state of emergency, indicating a deeper problem than mere bureaucratic snafus. Incompetent people do incompetent things, on all levels of government. Bill Freakin' Kristol has said the Clinton Administration would have done a better job with the Katrina aftermath. I guess he suffers from BDS?

Please provide evidence of a single person blaming Bush for the actual hurricane. I've seen conservatives blame homosexuals for the storm, but I've never seen anyone blame the president.

I've never read anything by Machos that wasn't propoganda that amounts to Bush Good.

Seven Machos

That's not true, Jim E. I criticize Bush all the time in this very forum. I think the federal response has been bad, but not nearly as bad as the state and local response. Who kep the National Guard out? Who kept the Red Cross out? Who kept out people with private boats (except, apparently, Sean Penn)? Who hired the cops that ransacked the stores and/or left town? Who built the city below sea-level.

New Orleans is a corrupt and awful city in a corrupt and awful state (that has a totally different -- French-variant, actually -- legal and political system.

Yet it's Bush's fault.

Come on, Jim. These other people, they are hopeless. But you, I really feel that you and I could come to some agreement here.

Jim E.

"I criticize Bush all the time in this very forum."

I've never seen it a single time. No joke. So I'm not sure where you get "all the time" from.

"Who built the city below sea-level."

I honestly think you can blame the French for that one.

Also, can you please give a citation of anyone blaming Bush for the storm? Your very first point in your above list seeks to clarify things for the confused ("The hurricane itself was not the fault of anyone"). So I'm wondering why you found it necessary to write that piece of wisdom if not to imply that people are blaming Bush for the hurricane. kim has made the same point as you (Bush can't be blamed for the storm itself) repeatedly, so I'm wondering who you guys think you're responding to.

cathyf
Answer this question: Does it make sense to expect the people on the ground dealing with hurricane, flood, riots, homelessness, deserting police, medical emergencies and all the other CHAOS of a true disaster to NOT get supplies, reinforcements, equipment, assistance, etc....unless they formally request it ? One of the state National Guard, a Colonel, said this was akin to expecting soldiers in the heat of battle to requisition each and every round of ammunition.

How else can you get what you need? I'm pretty sure it's a bad idea to send in vast amounts of ammunition to the Coast Guard guys who haven't requisitioned it when they're in the middle of doing those dramatic helicopter rescues.

The key to disaster response is preparedness, and preparedness over tens of thousands of volunteers supported by hundreds of staff people. When you see the eye of the hurricane on your local radar it's too late to take the courses on running a shelter, or doing damage assessment. Or to construct a list of all of the local buildings appropriate for shelters and negotiate for their use. Or to contact all of the medical facilities in a region to negotiate what each one's role will be in a disaster. To run disaster drills and figure out what works and what sounds like a good idea in theory but doesn't work in practice. To get your ham radio license and acquire and build your radio equipment.

All of those things, and the gazillion other details, take time and money and people to accomplish. The money has been very short, especially since 9-11. People have this idea that the billions of tax dollars that they have spent on the DHS since 9-11 should have made things better. But instead, disaster preparedness has been starved of funds and crippled because Fox News, pimping controversy for ratings profits, mounted a huge campaign to punish the Red Cross for spending any disaster money on preparedness. Fox tells us that every dollar that is donated to the Red Cross in the weeks after a popular disaster must be given to the victims of that particular disaster. While simultaneously raging that the Red Cross "didn't show up" somewhere during this disaster. Somehow they are totally oblivious to the fact that the Red Cross or the Salvation Army doesn't "show up at" disasters. They should already be there in every community. Sure, there is a core of highly-experienced people who go where the needs are large and complicated. But as for everywhere else, every community in America ought to be prepared, have a plan, have people who are trained, have thought through their own unique local circumstances of geography and sociology. Every community needs to know how to evacuate, especially people with special needs. Or to feed and shelter a high-school-gym's worth of people using their own local already-trained volunteers. Every community has to know who their contacts are both up and down the tree in any kind of emergency. They have to have made plans, and figured out how to communicate when infrastructure fails.

When we fight a war the first thing that we target are the enemy's command and control infrastructure. Managing a huge disaster without command-and-control is not analogous to expecting soldiers in the heat of battle to requisition each and every round of ammunition. It's analogous to expecting soldiers to fight battles without command-and-control. In technical military terms they have a name for fighting without command-and-control. They call it "losing."

cathy :-)

millco88

Didn't Robert Kennedy, Jr. blame the hurricane itself on global warming? He cited Kyoto as if that would have prevented Katring from forming. We can argue over how much anyone should listen to the guy, but there were people that can get airtime who were blaming the hurricane on Bush.

cathyf

The German enviro minister, too.

cathy :-)

some random person

With all due disrespect to the French, the 'French Quarter' is high and dry.

Jim E.

milco88,
RFK, Jr. did use Katrina as a springboard to discuss man-made global warming and Barbour's part in ignoring it. He didn't blame Bush (or Barbour) for Katrina, although various right-wing sites, like NewsMax, incorrectly attributed that specific viewpoint to RFK.

You can read RFK's article yourself:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20050829/cm_huffpost/006396

Seven Machos

Goodnight, Jim E.:

"Guest blogged by Joseph Cannon...

For an hour or so, I contemplated the idea of turning it into a crusade: No-one in the blue states (where the money is) should give one dime of aid to the victims of this hurricane, which devastated Bush-friendly regions.

Why did I flirt with such a callous attitude?

Because it should be obvious to all that this tragedy was not just an act of God. Dubya and his diety conspired to transform mere disaster into an unprecedented mega-catastrophe.

Scientists warn us to expect more Katrinas. Global warming -- the existence of which W would prefer to rationalize away -- caused the temperature of the sea's surface to rise in the Gulf of Mexico, thereby transforming what should have been a manageable hurricane into a monster.

The National Guard was off in Iraq stealing oil -- and everything else in that nation -- all to benefit Haliburton and the oil companies. They could have been in N.O. earlier, building levies, overseeing evacuation.

Bush financially eviscerated the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The money went to his Iraq debacle.

Bush cut funding for hurricane relief and the prevention of disaster in New Orleans."

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001782.htm

millco88

So he uses Katrina as a springboard to discuss man-made global warning and he's not equating the two?? Come on, if he doesn't think the two are related, why even bring it up??

millco88

Err, make that global warming. Doh!

Steven J.

1) WRONG. Bush did not lie about why we went to Iraq. WMD was one component of a larger argument.

According to Wolfowitz, it was the CORE reason:
"The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason." http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030509-depsecdef0223.html

OF COURSE, this was repeated over and over again by the Administration:

THE PRESIDENT: Our mission is clear in Iraq. Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament. 3/6/03
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030306-8.html

"But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about." -Ari Fleischer Press Briefing 4/10/03

Steven J.

3) SO WHAT? Bushi is giving tax breaks to the less-wealthy 99% of Americans as well.

Bush's tax breaks hurt our economy.

Steven J.

4) SO WHAT? First of all, our healthcare systsem is the best in teh world.

We rank about 17th.

Etienne

SevenMachos, the points have been made in just about every article written about this disaster that the federal response - of following rather than leading, of expecting overwhelmed local officials to create inventories of needs, of hiding behind abstract concepts of federalism to excuse their own lack of imagination and initiative - was inexcusable. I haven't got time to go off and find quotes for you, but really - start with AP, Reuters, NYTimes, Time magazine, Newsweek...really just about every outlet other than Fox or Newsmax. The cons on here keep pretending that I'm making this pov up. It's basic to the national conversation being held right now, everywhere except winger media - which is still fixated on schoolbuses and RedCross not being let into Superdome...conveniently reported incompletely and because they supply an out for a very cowardly group of unaccountable REpublican leaders.

I credit the propagandists at the WH with coming up with the term "blame game" so quickly. They are really pros. You see, if you are looking to blame (i.e. hold accountable) you are playing a game (i.e. are not serious). Unless of course you're looking to blame state officials, as the administration is trying so desperately to do, through its propaganda outlets. Don't listen to what one side of the admin's mouth is saying, because you might miss what's coming out of the other.

Jim E., thanks for your attempts to keep reminding everyone of the simplest, most basic facts - discussing global warming does not equate to blaming Bush for hurricanes, the tax cuts have done absolutely nothing for the bottom 80% in this country aside from starving their government of funds, and YES, Virginia, We DID go to war for WMDS. No, it was not one of many reasons. It was THE reason....Growing up I learned that Stalin rewrote Soviet history, and I wondered how he could do that, since people must have remembered the truth. Living in the USA through the past four years makes it clear that nothing is easier than brainwashing the masses to forget simple truths and "remember' the preferred reality of a corrupt government.

kim

So is that your objection, that the tax cuts hurt the economy? It's not that they were unfair, now, were they?

How did they hurt the economy?

17th on what list, with what determinants of rank?

And the Democrats are not ever gonna win national prestige again unless they are prepared to concede that geting rid of Saddam was a good idea. Are you ready to do that? Why not?
===================================================

kim

Would you care to quote for us the reasons that your elected representatives gave when they voted to go to Iraq?

You need to read and absorb the lessons of the Duelfer Report and Claudia Rosett's reporting about the Oil for Food scandal to understand why caterwauling about WMD is a loser postiion for Democrats and liberals to take. Joe Wilson lied, Saddam was increasingly dangerous. Those purple fingers belonged to people; though not domestic they illustrate why Democrats are losing their populist mojo. They simply no longer realize what people want. Vox populi is not singiing your tune, Etienne. It sounds too much like cant.
=================================================

Etienne

kim, you sound like a wind up toy that was damaged, stopped working for awhile, and has returned to spinning and squacking even more unintelligibly than before...purplefingersvoxpopulisaddamjoewilsonliedoiilforfooddemswillnever....really, blah blah blah.

I can tell you that even Fox News has now determined (monitoring those viewer emails again) that the Blame the Locals meme is backfiring. You'll be hearing less of it. There's a sense of desperation and depression in Ailes' newsroom these days. When bellicosity and slander don't work, they are at a loss. Thank God for John Roberts' hearing. Now they can start pounding out the meme that elected representatives of the people, questioning a lifetime appointee to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, as they are ordered to do under our Constitution...are "attacking" him. Meanies. Acting like this is a friggin democracy, the nerve of these people....That's the new meme of the week. Anything that gets Katrina, Drownie and that confused, uncomprehending mug of W off the evening news.

kim

Etienne, did you know that in an op-ed in the LATimes on February 6, 2003, Joe Wilson argued that we should not attack Saddam for fear that he would use his chemical and biological weapons on our troops? Now who's the broken wind-up toy? Your ideas and those of liberals in general about that war are so far off base that you will not be taken seriously about security for a long time.

Saddam was dangerous, had sympathyy and ties with stateless terrorists, and he had the power of a rich state behind him. If we hadn't gotten rid of him then, how would we get rid of him now? Or would you prefer he still be there? I've asked you this before, little broken record, and got no answer?
===============================================

kim

Where do you come up with this stuff, Etienne? "There is a sense of desperation and depression in Ailes' newsroom these days". This is you projecting your wishes. Why are you revealing your wishes to a crowd that can't help but rejoice in the denial of your wishes. Forum discussion, conversation etc., can be interesting, but it is not particularly edifying or entrancing to watch your disconnect between reality and desire.
==========================================

kim

Well here's a sober irony, Etienne, I'm going to have to be eternally grateful to you for that wonderful image: Democratic Party as Toy Story. And I'm nominating You, Etienne, as Marshall of the Universe. Take that star, saddle up, and build your liberal paradise.

But, leave those kids alone.
================================================

Etienne

Another irritating winger ploy is to set up these ridiculous arguments. As in, You're blaming Bush for a hurricane. Or, You'd like to see Saddam still in power.

I'm glad Saddam is out of power. I'd also like to see the leaders of Iran, SKorea and Pakistan out of power, since they also pose grave threats to our country. I'd like to see the leaders in Saudi Arabia and many African countries deposed, as they are despicable abusers of the human rights of their people. But we can't do all that, can we? And partly because of the reckless, unprepared, incompetent way this buffoonish administration botched the operation in Iraq. We are now hamstrung in every possible way. We look like Goliath after the Lilliputians got finished tying down all his limbs. We are broke. We are overstretched. We are exposed as incompetents and the limits of our power no longer need to be guessed at. All you need is a television to see what they are.

I know it is difficult to break out of the smugness of the rigid mindset this past election caused in conservatives. But you REALLY need to rethink how the public is going to judge national security concerns in the future.

For one thing, you have to be a willful idiot not to see that this administration has damaged our national security with its incompetence, and that our tax money spent on Homeland Security (for only one example) has swirled into a bottomless toilet of human greed and ineptitude. We have NOTHING to show for four years of supposedly streamliining and making our disaster preparedness more efficient and reliable. NOTHING. That's not national security. And only one party is responsible for that debacle - the ruling party in our one party state.

For another, you are going to feel really blindsided when you see that ALL the Iraq War vets running for office in the next election cycle (of those already announced or considering) plan to run as Democrats. One with a receptive mind would also notice that a great many of the military people speaking as commentators these days are speaking against the Republican agenda. (Oh, you have no idea how much Wes Clark is despised at Fox. I'm not privy to why they hired him, but god, do they wish they hadn't. A reliable voice of reason and intelligence from a West Point valedictorian and battle hardened General - who refutes the administration's lies at every opportunity. What were they thinking?)

I do get the impression that conservatives are like a morbidly obese person trapped on a train track, so complacent and smug they can't even conceive of the train bearing down on them.

Etienne

Uh, kim, I DO know the Fox News environment. I know that when the first exit polls came out on election day, Roger Ailes burst out of his office screaming "Get ready to have your taxes raised!!!" and then disappeared for two hours. (Later of course he got blissfully drunk.)

I can't go into it, because there would be consequences for any employee who openly violated the party line at Fox, so you can believe me or not as you wish. But when I talk about Fox, I'm speaking not from first hand experience, but from very extremely close second hand.

Jim E.

SM,

The blog item you quoted blames Bush for the crappy recovery, not the hurricane itself. You're providing evidence for me, not you, genius.

Time to admit your NUMBER ONE point in your above list is full of crap.

kim

You put your finger on your problem, Etienne. You've said that all you need to know about Iraq you can learn by watching television.

This is why the MSM is despised. Read Arthur Chrenkoff, read Iraqi blogs, ask Iraqis. Talk to soldiers.

We've untied the Iraqi people from the track they were on and you rightly rejoice that their villain is defeated. But where's the thanks for the hero?

You simply make no sense.
===========================================

kim

Oh, Etienne you old fox, you.
===============================

kim

Have you figured out the anecdote yet, Etienne?
=================================================

Jim E.

Via Kevin Drum, I see the Pew Research Center has a hurricane-related poll out. It shows that Republicans, Independents, and Democrats are ALL similarly critical (almost identically critical) of state and local governments.

The interesting part, however, is that Republicans are the only ones who approve of the federal response, while Dems and Indies are similarly critical of it.

Possible conclusion (by me, not Pew): Republicans are more partisan than Democrats.

Etienne

No,kim, that's not what I said. Geez, I hate to sound like a freeper, but reading comprehension, kim, try it.

I said that no one in the world needs to guess at the limits of US power, because it has been exposed through the simple facts told on the news around the world. It is the myopia of freeper-dom to imagine all Republican problems stem from the "liberal MSM". The rest of the world has access to news all on their own. And they can SEE that the US is a great power being humbled on a tragic scale. Completely bankrupt. Armed forces stretched beyond capacity. Incompetent and amoral leadership without the imagination or initiative to address any of the problems they themselves have created.

It isn't that no one's getting the "good news" from Iraq. Try as you like to demonize liberals, but NO ONE doubts that our soldiers over there are wonderful young heroes, and are doing good, humanitarian things along with their other, ill defined, military mission. That is completely besides the point.

Anyone with a television can see that we are impotent against Iran, Korea and any problems thaat may arise in Pakistan. Anyone can see that our incompetent leadership has now lost an entire city, and will see its deficit double as a result.

kim

Or perhaps simply feel more strongly that the federal response was hypocritically criticized.

Why don't we use hypocriticized?

Etienne, did the 'close second' personally feel desperate and depressed or interpret and imput those feelings to others? Do you see how you are now reporting hearsay wish projection and asking us to accept that as fact?
================================================

Etienne

Jim E., good point. The fact that polls are now consistently showing Independents siding with Dems does expose the extremely partisan nature of Republicans. For those who had any doubts.

kim

And you repeat your mistake about television without addressing my point. Television is lying to you about Iraq.
===================================================

Etienne

Uh, no, the "close second" isn't projecting, just reporting exact statements made. But I'll stop with this, not my prerogative.

kim

Nice try warping the meaning of that poll. Try reading comprehension.
===================================================

kim

So what are these exact statements? Now this is a source I can't find, so it's up to you, or leave your allegation unsupported.
=====================================

Etienne

Gotta get to work, kimster. But no, try again with the 'reading comprehension'. I'm not talking about what tv is telling ME about Iraq. I'm talking about the facts standing on their own, interpreted by that entire PLANET of intelligent, rational human beings that exist outside of the USA - i.e. mankind, humanity, our fellow human beings. I know this is an odd concept, but their judgments and impressions also matter. And what they are seeing is a great power that managed to destroy its own effectiveness, limit itself through consistent bad judgments and incompetence, and is now limited in the means available to address the grave international and internal threats that threaten it.

kim

I suspect, Etienne, you get told wdhat you want to hear, or, at the very least, hear what you expect to.
================================================

kim

So try looking at more direct sources of information about Iraq. Primarily, read some Iraqi blogs, and not just Riverbend.

We have done a good thing over there. Liberals can regain standing by accepting that.
==============================================

Seven Machos

Stevie: What planet are you on? The economy is humming. If the economy is doing poorly, how could the hurricane hurt the economic recovery?

Jim: I disagree. The person I quoted clearly believes that global warming caused the hurricane, and that Bushed caused global warming.

2. Edy: Goliath and the Liliputians? You are an idiot. You are even more of an idiot because you obviously think you are quite intelligent. Also, do you honestly believe that Fox News controls anything, anywhere, other than a spot on the cable television dial watched by maybe 0.6 percent of the public at any given time?

Jim E.

"The person I quoted clearly believes that Bush . . . caused global warming."

More lies. SM, you are an idiot. A lying idiot.

Seven Machos

"Because it should be obvious to all that this tragedy was not just an act of God. Dubya and his diety conspired to transform mere disaster into an unprecedented mega-catastrophe.

Scientists warn us to expect more Katrinas. Global warming -- the existence of which W would prefer to rationalize away -- caused the temperature of the sea's surface to rise in the Gulf of Mexico, thereby transforming what should have been a manageable hurricane into a monster."

Etienne

SEven Machos, since I'm not going to bother with Harry Arthur's requested decorum in a vacuum any longer - you're not only an idiot, you're a brainless wingnut parrot and the prototypical wingnut bully - spitting bullets from the cowardice of your fighting keyboard rocking chair.

I'd love to see you venture out and actually try and debate opponents from anywhere but your own myopic self congratulatory echo chamber. Coward.

kim

And it would be nice to hear you do something besides spout insults from your employer's furniture.
===========================================

kim

Gainfully emplyed, I'm too busy to spout internet invective. Maybe jobs in liberal paradises have that leisure.
==================================================

Jim E.

SM,
Are you going to keep re-quoting stuff that proves you wrong? Apparently.

"Dubya and his diety conspired to transform mere disaster into an unprecedented mega-catastrophe."

mere disaster = the hurricane (no blame for Bush)
mega-catastrophe = the lousy federal response that made a tough situation needlessly worse (blame for Bush)

"W would prefer to rationalize away [global warming]"

Doesn't say he "caused" it. You may disagree with the author's points, but he doesn't think global warming started January 2001. (Er, no one does.) Idiot.

kim

Alright to spell it out, many on the left blame Bush's cabal for the Kyoto fiasco. Nevermind the Senate vote, never mind the consequesces of Kyoto, just free-form BlameBush.
===========================================

kim

And, of course, some further falsely imply that global warming is happening because of our not joining Kyoto.
===============================================

kim

I suspect you're playing dumb, rather than being dumb. But dumb, whichever.
================================================

Jim E.

As usual, kim is stock full of evidence to show that lots of liberals have blamed Bush for Hurricane Katrina.

kim

My point all along has been that Bush is being blamed unfairly for the devastation, which fairly belongs to the hurricane, and to everyone effected by it, including you and me, Bub.

The devastation is, after all, the result of the interaction between the forces of nature and the community of man.
===================================================

kim

So it's playing dumb. Why don't you talk to me about the hockey stick, and the consequence of progressively sequestering carbon from the ecosphere?
==================================================

Paul Arthur

Does anyone else notice that what's being argued here is purely semantics? I don't care whether or not anyone is blaming Bush for either the hurricane itself or the aftermath...it doesn't matter.

The problem with this situation is that people started coming out and blaming anyone far too early. Lets get the situation under control first, then we can investigate it. We can learn from this experience; what went right, what went wrong, and how we can improve our response to these situations in the future. Neither the knee-jerk reaction from many on the left of "Bush sucks so obviously this is his fault" nor the knee-jerk reaction of many on the right of "Bush is awesome to obviously this is someone else's fault" are productive at all.

What this comes down to is that this was a NATURAL DISASTER and that there is probably enough blame for the preparation for and response to it to go around several times.

Jim E.

"I don't care whether ... anyone is blaming Bush for ... the hurricane"

Well, you're in luck, because no one has!

Paul Arthur

And a quick question for Etienne. In the scope of your world view, is it everyone the South or merely everyone who disagrees with you who are idiots? If so...I should really put down this pencil and paper and quit designing buildings cause I'm 2 for 2!!!

Paul Arthur

Jim, I was using the term..."the hurricane" loosely to mean the results of the hurricane.

JayDee

Wall Street Journal, 9/13 (subscription):

"internal documents and emails from FEMA and other government agencies dating back to Aug. 31 ...show the extent to which the federal government bungled its response to the hurricane. The documents highlight serious deficiencies in the Department of Homeland Security's National Response Plan, a post-Sept. 11 playbook on how to deal with catastrophic events. Mr. Chertoff activated the National Response Plan last Tuesday by declaring the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina an "Incident of National Significance."


The plan, which was rolled out to much fanfare in January, essentially
enables Washington to move federal assets to the disaster without waiting for requests from state officials. It then funnels help from all federal agencies through a single point of contact -- usually the secretary of homeland security.

...FEMA's official requests, known as tasking assignments and used by the agency to demand help from other government agencies, show that it first asked the Department of Transportation to look for buses to help evacuate the more than 20,000 people who had taken refuge at the Superdome in New Orleans at 1:45 a.m. on Aug. 31. At the time, it only asked for 455 buses and 300 ambulances for the enormous task. Almost 18 hours later, it canceled the request for the ambulances because it turned out, as one FEMA employee put it, "the DOT doesn't do ambulances." FEMA ended up modifying the number of buses it thought it needed to get the job done, until it settled on a final request of 1,355 buses at 8:05 p.m. on Sept. 3. The buses, though, trickled into New Orleans, with only a dozen or so arriving on the first day.

Next!

kim

When, oh when, did the schoolbuses go underwater? Not to mention the God knows how many left unused but high and dry.
=======================================

Harry Arthur

Real lovefest here.

I'm left wondering, however, whether wingnuts come in matched sets. Since there's obviously a right-handed wingnut, I presume that implies a left-handed wingnut, the universe being balanced and all. Yin-Yan, and that sort of thing.

How do I know the universe is balanced? It can only be so, otherwise it would be pulled, ever so slowly, toward the brainless, cowardly right.

Seven, since you've been diagnosed as being in a persistent vegitative state, I'm thinking we should probably cut off your food and water and send both to the hurricane victims in the gulf coast.

Wow! ...brainless wingnut parrot and the prototypical wingnut bully - spitting bullets from the cowardice of your fighting keyboard rocking chair.

I'm sensing some serious hostility here.

I'd love to see you venture out and actually try and debate opponents from anywhere but your own myopic self congratulatory echo chamber. Coward.

Translation: I disagree with your interpretation of the facts.

And those are your good points, my friend.

Personally, I've been called worse by better. In the current environment where we are routinely treated to Michael Moore "reality" and what the left currently wishes to pass off as "thought" and "debate" I can't say that anything surprises me any more.

As far as debating goes, I'm to the point of sympathizing with Ann Coulter's attitude expressed in the title of her book: How to Talk to a Liberal, If You Must. Any attempt at rational thought and any realistic evaluation of recent events seems to be met with purile invective and an absolutely irrational hatred of Bush in particular and conservatives in general. I can only conclude that this discussion has been and continues to be a stellar waste of time. I think I'll take my own advice and mow the lawn or plant a tree.

TexasToast

And you repeat your mistake about television without addressing my point. Television is lying to you about Iraq.

So try looking at more direct sources of information about Iraq. Primarily, read some Iraqi blogs, and not just Riverbend. We have done a good thing over there. Liberals can regain standing by accepting that. - Kim

Kim

I’ll pass on uncritical acceptance of your worldview in order to “regain standing”, - but thanks!

These remarks reminds me of a remark by my secretary's mother - "He must be smart, because he agrees with me" If we would just accept that you are right, we could regain standing! It’s easy – just trust you – don’t let those silly facts get in the way of being liked! Iraq a good thing because Kim says so. You don’t provide any reasons or facts not steeped in your ideological POV (and even these are few and far between), and you fail to address the obvious migration of justification, but you ask for trust?

I am frankly stupefied by the right’s abandonment of its principals for political advantage. Deficits? No problem. Aggressive war? Saddle up! Wilsonian idealism? We can change the world! They have changed it all right – 3 and 4 bucks a gallon.

Paul Arther is absolutely correct that we should all step back and learn a few lessons form this. However, what gets me about the administration’s response to Katrina is the political nature of the response. They pretend to be “above” politics, but it’s all about politics and how the response helps or hurts GWB. We must all learn lessons here, but the “blame game” is A-OK if we are talking about school busses or bureaucratic screw-ups at the state and local level. They whine and moan about the “blame game” and then proceed to assign blame through false statements by "anonymous Senior Bush officials" and "leaks" to the press. (The WaPo lies about when Blanco declared a state of emergency are Exhibit A.) McClellan avoids answering questions in the daily press briefings and cites the “blame game”, but their mouthpieces talk about “Nay-ger” mayors and faux federalism and anonymous officials lie “undercover”, so to speak. The “lessons learned” must be learned after passing through an ideological prism – so we certainly can’t have any commission to study the response not controlled by those, like Kim, with the correct ideological underpinnings. The fixations with the mistakes made by the locals (school busses and the like) are just spin to cover up what they clearly understand, but will never admit - their own failings. If they really didn’t get it, why fire “heck of a job” Brownie? According to the polls, only their base is buying it.

Keep on truckin’ Etienne!

kim

Hey, don't take my worldview, take the Iraqis'.

Direct sourcing, my point. No ideology about this except from the left and the MSM.
===================================================

Seven Machos

Come on, Tex. What about the Plame sacndal. Surely, after all the propaganda you have spewed here about evil Karl Rove and his minions, you can't think a measly weather-related event will affect politics. While we are on the subject, though, where are all those indictments. anyway?

Also, Tex, according to a poll taken in November 2004, the people favored having Reublicans control the legislative and executive branches of the federal government and well over 60 percent of the country.

Lastly, I love how the loony left has spent the last several days doing nothing except BLAMING Bush and the Republicans for Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, but it's Bush playing the blame game. You guys are audacious. I'll give you that.

kim

What we've done in Iraq is not just a good thing because kim says so. Wouldn't you say it was a good thing? Don't the Iraqis? Show me a list of those who don't think it was a good thing.
============================================

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame