0
   

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

 
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 09:01 pm
What was your purpose, c.i., in posting that week-old nonsense in this thread? I understand you are just back from another vacation and might not be aware of it, but the Democrats have their own "gloat" thread now, where I think your anti-Bush postings might really be appreciated, and quite on-topic. Plus, then you wouldn't have to spam this thread with this crap. Thanks in advance.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 11:35 pm
If the government's job, among other things, is to provide for the safety of its citizens, then New Orleans has been a catastrophic failure, whatever the resons might bave been.

But anyone who talks negatively about the federal government's slow response to the disaster is accused of using people's misery for political gain, that's how conservatives react since days.

Prior to the storm making landfall, the president signed an emergency declaration, in effect putting FEMA in charge of all emergency coordination. A four-day lag between disaster and mobilization is at the very least unacceptable.


I've read somewhere: While the hurricane may have been an act of God, the lack of preparation given the clear, repeated and insistent warnings was not divine providence but will be a persistent problem for the administration .

In the richest, most powerful nation in the world there is no excuse for letting citizens die and languish in misery for lack of an immediate response.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 11:37 pm
Bush's reaction a 'disgrace'
04/09/2005 10:33 - (SA)









Related Articles
'Katrina was Allah's soldier'

Louisiana senator slams Bush

Bush: We didn't do enough

Katrina: Fresh troops arrive

Bush: Response ' unacceptable'

Katrina: This is our tsunami

New Orleans 'a mess'

New Orleans mayor blasts Bush

'Zero tolerance' for looting

Recovery will take years - Bush

Bush's approval rating plunges








Washington - Complaints about President George W Bush's reaction to Hurricane Katrina echo past criticisms over crises like the Asian tsunami or the Iraq war.

Doubters are asking whether he reacted too slowly to the catastrophe, sent enough troops to keep order, or relied too much on rosy scenarios spun by senior aides while New Orleans descended into anarchy.

Some lawmakers and local emergency officials have called Washington's initial reaction "a national disgrace" and assailed the Bush administration as having a too-little, too-late response.

On its Internet site, CNN on Friday quoted upbeat assessments of relief efforts by US officials, which contrasted sharply with the grim conditions on the ground.

Two senators have announced hearings into Washington's reaction to the disaster, focused on the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.

The president himself, asked why the world superpower had not acted more quickly and could not get food and water to the needy in one of its major cities said on Friday his administration had reacted quickly.

But Bush, facing poor approval ratings of his handling of the disaster, acknowledged that the critics had a point, saying: "I am satisfied with the response. I'm not satisfied with all the results."
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 11:52 pm
Perhaps not, but in spite of all the shoulda, woulda, coulda's, we are first and foremost a nation of laws. One of the most important Constitutional protections is limitations on the very government charged with our defense. The Federal government is prohibited from seizing power rightfully assigned to the various states, and the law requires that the state authorities request intervention by Federal authorities, most specifically the military.

The President can request such authority from the governor. President Bush did that in advance of the hurricane and declared a national emergency that would allow the use of federal troops. He was turned down. The President requested the governor take action that the Federal government would have taken; ie mandatory evacuation in advance of the storm. She did not. Prior to the levee breaking, FEMA through its associated agencies had trucks in place to deliver food and water to the Superdome. They were turned away on pretext they did not want to attract more people to that shelter.

I suppose it will be debated for decades whether the federal government should have declared martial law and run roughshod over the governor's authority. Had they done so, lives might have been saved. But it would have set what some would say was a dangerous precedent, and it would not have lessened criticism of federal response and it would have added another layer of condemnation by those who would surely accuse the President of jumping the gun.

Note that even though the devastation was as severe in Mississippi and Alabama, you don't hear the same criticisms and complaints that is coming from Louisiana. Why? Because the governors there did their jobs and worked with instead of against FEMA. They didn't expect FEMA to take the point and they didn't expect FEMA to do it all.

Did the bureaucracy get in the way of efficiency and effectiveness. Absolutely and those things should be looked at an should be corrected.

But the most criticism is from a flooded city that should have been evacuated and wasn't.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 12:02 am
So e.g. the levees were higher - or at least high enough - in Mississippi and Alabama and food supplies arrived earlier ... due to the governors that did their jobs and worked with instead of against FEMA?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 04:59 am
Lash wrote:
Funny, Foxy.

You're right. I'll behave. <kicks can>


lash

That little bracketed flourish at the end there made me smile. Nice touch.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 05:50 am
walter writes
Quote:
So e.g. the levees were higher - or at least high enough - in Mississippi and Alabama and food supplies arrived earlier ... due to the governors that did their jobs and worked with instead of against FEMA?


It was not a matter of the levees being high enough. It was a matter of carrying out emergency plans worked out before there was a crisis situation. Are you blaming the present government(s) because New Orleans is built in a hole below sea level and below the level of an enormous fresh water lake? Better blame the French since they are the ones who put it there.

As has been abundantly posted by others, Louisiana is one of 50 states and has received substantially more money in Federal flood control than any other state. It has been known for decades that the levee system would stand up to a Cat 3 hurricane, but not a direct hit from a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane. Was it negligent of the State of Louisiana not to upgrade those levees to withstand a Cat 5 rather than roll the dice that they won't be hit and appropriate the money for other things? I won't make that call as any U.S. city is subject to a Cat 5 tornado and all take their chances there too.

Some compare the Louisiana system with that of the Netherlands. Well, I don't recall the Netherlands being subject to either hurricanes or strong tornadoes. The occurence of either might tax their safety system too.

Federal food supplies arrived in Louisiana about the same time as they did in Alabama and Mississippi. If you read my previous post, the food trucks were turned away so as not to 'draw more people to the shelter'. They wanted the people out of there. And remember that FEMA is not and has never been intended to be the first responder after a massive disaster.

You can look at the photos and see roofs still intact and relatively mild wind damage on New Orleans buildings. The crisis there was mostly due to the fresh water--not sea water--flooding. Had the Mayor and Louisiana governor carried out their own emergency plans, they could have gotten all the people out who were willing to go. You cannot blame the government at any level for the deaths or injury of people who are ordered out and are provided transportation out but who refuse the order.

And as heartless as it sounds, you cannot blame the government at any level for thirst and hunger when you are told to stock several days of food and water ahead of a storm and fail to do so. In the wake of massive storm damage, the government simply is not going to be able to get to everybody immediately. There is some personal responsibility involved.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 05:54 am
Foxfyre wrote:

The President can request such authority from the governor. President Bush did that in advance of the hurricane and declared a national emergency that would allow the use of federal troops. He was turned down.


That's not true. It was several days after the hurricane hit that the president asked the governor to cede her authority over Louisiana National Guard. Yes, he was turned down, but this did not happen before the hurricane hit.

Quote:
The President requested the governor take action that the Federal government would have taken; ie mandatory evacuation in advance of the storm. She did not.


They had already decided to do the mandatory evacuation when he requested it, and they did do it. They might could have done it sooner, but that sounds like shoulda, woulda, coulda to me.

Quote:
Prior to the levee breaking, FEMA through its associated agencies had trucks in place to deliver food and water to the Superdome. They were turned away on pretext they did not want to attract more people to that shelter.


No, that was Red Cross and again, several days after the storm. I don't know if I agree with the reasoning behind the decision or not, but if I were in charge and already had a situation that was out of my control, I might have made the same error in judgment.

Quote:
Note that even though the devastation was as severe in Mississippi and Alabama, you don't hear the same criticisms and complaints that is coming from Louisiana.


Actually, there were quite a few complaints coming out of Biloxi, they are just harder to find because the mass devastation in NO was a headline grabber.

Quote:
Why? Because the governors there did their jobs and worked with instead of against FEMA. They didn't expect FEMA to take the point and they didn't expect FEMA to do it all.


I keep hearing this. If you are aware of something that the governors of Missip and Bama did that the governor of Louisiana did not, please present it. I've not seen it. Nobody expects FEMA to do it all, but the declaration of emergency clearly stated that they expected the storm would overwhelm their resources and their ability to respond. If you read the National Response Plan from DHS, that is precisely when the federal government is supposed to take control of the relief effort. This plan should have gone into effect before the storm hit but it didn't.


Quote:
Did the bureaucracy get in the way of efficiency and effectiveness. Absolutely and those things should be looked at an should be corrected.

But the most criticism is from a flooded city that should have been evacuated and wasn't.


Agree with the first part. As for the second part, I wonder how well my town would react to a disaster a fraction of that size. They just don't have the resources. NO is a city of 1/2 a million residents and who knows how many tourists. I agree that a mandatory evacuation should have been called earlier, but that is the greatest of all second guessing. Yes, it should have been completely evacuated, but after the storm, where was the cavalry?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 06:00 am
You need to read up again Freeduck. FEMA coordinates efforts in part through the Red Cross and each knows what the other is doing. Your time lines are wrong. There is plenty of evidence of that posted in this thread or you can look it up yourself. And the fact remains, the cavalry was offered far earlier than the Louisiana governor finally agreed to it.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 06:01 am
Actually, I posted a timeline in this thread that you should check. It is based on archives from the Times-Picayune. You might should also have a look at that National Response Plan on the DHS site. My corrections stand.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 06:37 am
The timeline you posted is one of dozens on the internet with variances and shadings depending on how those posting them want them to perceive. Some are at least honorably correcting erroneous data as new information comes in.

Can you say with absolute confidence that yours is the real deal with no amendment necessary?

I will stand by the information I and others have posted as well, and will trust the bipartisan Congressional investigation to come up with the final timelines for this.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 06:41 am
Foxfyre wrote:
And the fact remains, the cavalry was offered far earlier than the Louisiana governor finally agreed to it.
Here we go again. Because Governor Blanco did not agree for the Federal government to take over the entire city of New Orleans before the storm hit, the Bush supporters are maintaining that the Feds could only sit idly by and watch it happen.

Another variation on this theme is that FEMA "are not first responders".

Bunk.

FEMA are first responders, as the following quote shows, and they DO NOT have to wait for the city to be turned over to them before they can commence preparing before the storm, or commencing rescue operations after it.

Please note this quote from FEMA's own website, bragging about how well they did Florida in 2004. FEMA are both preparers and rescuers. It is NOT necessary for the governor to sign over control of the whole city for them to act.

FEMA, in it's press release, wrote:

*A first shipment of 30,000 tarps is en route to Atlanta, Ga., to be pre-staged for delivery to areas affected by Frances once the storm has cleared.

*FEMA is working to provider 10 trailers of generators at the request of Florida that will be used to provide power to critical facilities affected by the hurricane. Generators will be staged at Warner Robbins Air Force Base.

**Two Disaster Medical Assistance Teams (DMAT) have been deployed to Florida to support medical facilities and hospitals that are not fully operational following the storm. Two additional DMATs are staged in Atlanta, three are enroute to Atlanta, and one Veterinary Medical Assistance Team is on standby. An additional four DMATs have been placed on alert, The DMATs are comprised of doctors, nurses and medical technicians trained to handle trauma, pediatrics, surgery and mental health problems. DMATs bring truckloads of medical equipment and supplies with them.

*Five pharmaceutical caches, containing emergency medical supplies, are being pre-positioned, and are currently en route to Atlanta and Tampa.

*FEMA's Mobile Emergency Response Services (MERS) communications staff and equipment are available to provide telephone, radio and video links in support of response and recovery efforts. About 100 MERS personnel and about 75 vehicles - including Mobile Emergency Operations Center (MEOCs) equipped vehicles and Mobile Radio Vans (MRVs) to provide radio capability have been assigned to support Hurricane Frances response and recovery operations.
Source.

This bit about not signing control of the whole city to the Feds is just a dodge, among many dodges, to try to disguise the clear fact that the Federal response was totaly inadequate.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 06:49 am
FEMA responds to requests from the local officials in charge. FEMA is not intended nor designed to push in and run disaster control from the get go. Had the governor of Louisiana asked for federal help to effect evacuations sooner, she would have gotten it. Until she asked, the feds could not go in and start taking people out.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 06:55 am
Foxfyre wrote:
FEMA responds to requests from the local officials in charge. FEMA is not intended nor designed to push in and run disaster control from the get go.


I thought your side was complaining that the problem was that Blanco did not turn the whole city over to the Feds before the storm even hit. Now you are telling us the Feds are not designed to take control from the get-go? Which is it?
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 07:01 am
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 07:06 am
Foxfyre wrote:
The timeline you posted is one of dozens on the internet with variances and shadings depending on how those posting them want them to perceive. Some are at least honorably correcting erroneous data as new information comes in.


Did you look at it? It's the only one I could find that was sourced and updated.

Quote:
Can you say with absolute confidence that yours is the real deal with no amendment necessary?


Can you say that about yours?

Quote:
I will stand by the information I and others have posted as well, and will trust the bipartisan Congressional investigation to come up with the final timelines for this.


What you're stating and what I'm disputing is not supported, as far as I can tell, by anything anyone has posted. Feel free to point one out and I'd be happy to offer a correction.
0 Replies
 
satt fs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 07:17 am
Sorry, but I could not resist posting this..

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/9087/election20001nb.png
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 07:22 am
Another reminder of the integrity level of the covert shitheels presently running the US
Quote:
Woe to whistleblowers
By Thomas Oliphant | September 8, 2005

WASHINGTON
SUSAN WOOD and Bunnatine Greenhouse, senior government officials, had nothing to do with Hurricane Katrina or the government's disgraceful, tardy response to its horrid aftermath.

But just as civic collapse produces price gougers and looters, these gutsy women are examples of what can go on when the nation's attention is diverted by catastrophe: Bad people behave really badly, taking cowardly cover behind the explosion of other news.

Just as Katrina was being upgraded to a dangerous hurricane headed straight at the Gulf Coast, Dr. Wood's political bosses at the Food and Drug Administration decided to circumvent procedure and probably law to block approval of over-the-counter sales of the birth control medicine known as the morning-after pill. Their circumvention of process made the position of the widely respected public health official untenable and, in an act of commendable integrity, she resigned last week.

And just as Katrina was bearing down on the coast on that fateful Sunday, Greenhouse's bosses at the Army Corps of Engineers, with Donald Rumsfeld ultimately responsible, demoted her for following procedure strictly and raising detailed objections to contracts awarded more than two years ago under shady circumstances to a subsidiary of Halliburton Co. The obvious, underhanded retaliation against Greenhouse occurred even as the Corps's inspector general, together with officials from the Justice Department, was continuing an investigation into the contracts based on the information supplied by the very same Greenhouse.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/09/08/woe_to_whistleblowers/
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 07:24 am
And a cute little piece on Arnold the Governator, grabbin' some ass, ogglin' some titties and making some money.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-video12sep12,0,3102028.story?coll=la-tot-promo&track=morenews
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 07:44 am
Random question.

This picture today on Yahoo News .de, in a feature on next week's German elections:

http://eur.news1.yimg.com/eur.yimg.com/xp/dpa_wahl/20050912/11/1857180108.jpg

"During an election campaign event of Chancellor Schröder [..], individual supporters of the Christian-Democratic Union were present too. They held up placards saying "Its over, Gerd!" and "Change! Now!"."

What's your feelings about the picture?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 07/29/2025 at 01:53:29