Sen Santorum Wants to Penalize Hurricane Victims

Of course, the good people of Louisiana will determine if local politicians' heads should roll. For most of us, it is the role of the Federal Government that needs to be examined. The Rovian tactic of trying to villify Blanco and Nagin is unconsionable.

santorum.... < shaking head in wake of another bizarre statement>

couple of thoughts:

1) folks that haven't got much of nothin' aren't real quick to leave what little they do have behind. so when you see a guy refusing to be picked up because he can't bring his dog, there's even more than the understandable attachment to a pet at work. no?

No. Poor people have no greater attachment to their pets than do the rich, and it doesn't cost a dime to pick up a new mutt or cat.

Surely there were people in New Orleans who did not want to leave their belongs behind. There were also people who thought that the waters would recede in 24 hours, and why go to the trouble of leaving their homes. There were probably even a few poor souls who thought that if they left NO, they would be eaten by mountain lions in Texas.

It is senseless to attempt to construct some sort of positive profile about the people who refused to evacuate to the extent that they appear to be of greater character than those who left.

2) most really poor folks haven't had a great education. if someone's mind isn't turned on to the idea of possibilities, they can't really get hold of the idea that you can get more stuff. being dead is kinda permenant. and religion has told them that they will at least improve their situation in death by going to heaven.

No they haven't, and many of them are fairly stupid to boot. This doesn't make them inferior citizens who are not worthy of sharing the entire spectrum of rights this country has to offer, but we are not talking about an enormous mass of people who have been forced into poverty because of the rapacious greed of an elite. I know Liberals like to think of the poor in America in such a way, but there is very little connections between the poor in modern America and say Russian serfs under the tsars.

One doesn't need to be educated to understand that material possesions are replaceable while lives are not. Even the least educated person in the world would have no problem understanding this concept. The stupidiest person might, but education is not part of the equation.

It seems clear that you subscribe to the notion that Religion is the opiate of the masses, and the uneducated masses at that.

I assure you that many of the people of means who managed to get themselves out of the city have every bit as much faith as those who remained behind - no more; and no less.

3) wouldn't it be hard for people who feel like they've been swept under the rug by society find it equally hard to really feel much in the way of civic duty i.e., hanging out and driving those busses out and back repeatedly ? when you must constantly scrounge around to get your's and make that the priority, doesn't looking out for #1 become automatic ?

Here I think you've hit upon something, but I strongly disagree with your suggested source of the problem. It's not poverty that destroys community - certainly not the relatively benign poverty of the United States, but a sense of entitlement, and a lack of personal accountibility. Generations of welfare recipients have developed a sense of the world as one where the government takes care of you - the fact that the government doesn't do a real good job of it is irrelevant. The government keeps them alive (if even only barely) and so in a life and death situation, isn't it reasonable for them to expect the government to keep them alive yet again? Obviously counting on the government is not a wise option, and yet these folks have been conditioned over generations to see this as the only real option.

The New Orleans disaster is an example of the unintended consequences of presumably generous social programs. If Society has actually failed in some way that has created an underclass, how much worse is its sin in failing in such a way to preserve it and undermine all hope to climb free of it?

something that the wife keeps pointing out is that n.o. made out fairly well during the actual hurricaine. and that they had given the all clear for people to come back into the city. then the levees broke down in the middle of the night.

so i guess a lot of people who had followed the evacuation orders then came back only to get caught in the flood...

A lot of people who followed the evacuation orders did not return to get caught in the flood. Following the evacuation order would not have placed one on the outskirts of New Orleans ready to come back in at the first All Clear call. The people who left the city went as close as Baton Rouge and as far away as Atlanta and Dallas. Very very few of them were in a position to return to their homes immediately upon the passing of Katrina over NO.

The people who got caught in the city when it flooded were, overwhelmingly, the ones who could not or would not evacuate. The city government failed those who would have evacuated, but could not. Those who remained of their own volition made a choice for which no one but themselves can be credited or blamed.

I think that people who can easily replace posessions can better see that they are replaceable. If you don't have much, you tend to hold on to it a little bit tighter. Even tighter still if you are old and retired and know that there won't be time to rebuild what it took you your whole life to get.

A couple of points:
1. Isn't it the states responsibility to take care of their citizens?

That may very well be a large part of the problem. Too many people believe it is the responsibility of the state (and the states) to take care of them.
I take your point though. Yes, it stands to reason that in a local disaster, one should, reasonably, look to local government for assistance. When the local government is overwhelmed, one should look to the State government, and ultimately the federal government. There will be disasters which, either because of their scope and size, or because of incompetence, will blow through the state and local governments, and in such instance we should be able to rely upon the feds. The pertinent question is how long should it take for the feds to realize the locals and state are flailing and how quickly and forcefully should they be expected to assume control?

Make no mistake, part of the problem with New Orleans was that neither the Mayor nor the Governor wanted to be seen as unable to deal with the disaster, and neither was all to keen on quickly ceding their responsibility (and power) to the feds.

Even now with the Feds paying for and overseeing virtually the entire reconstruction effort, the Mayor and Governor want to give orders and make demands.

There are few things more frustrating or futile than having responsibility without authority, and that is never more the case then in times of crisis.


2. It is the job of the federal gov't to take care of the country first and then to take care of the individual state.

3. How did Nagin take care of NO and how did Blanco take care of LA?

Poorly. It's hard to imagine how both will not pay a price come the next elections.

4. At what point do we hold people responsible for their inactions? ie not leaving.

I've asked the same question, but it will never be answered satisfactorily. Given a calm and measured discussion prior to Katrina, I suspect that a very large percentage of Americans would express a belief that people who ignore several evacuation orders are themselves responsible for their ensuing plights. However, once these plights are broadcast over national TV and the public gets an immediate and up front view of the situation, they will inevitably call for someone to intervene and save the fools.

Of course we need to distinquish between those who choose not to evacuate and those who do not have the means to.

For the latter it should be a priority of the local and state governments to provide these people with the means - especially if they are going to order a mandatory evacuation. There is simply no acceptible excuse for not doing so. Such a contingency has to be an intgral part of any disaster plan. If it wasn't in New Orleans, it's governmental malpractice and if it was and simply was not executed, its governmental incompetence.

Given that the public is not going to sit by and allow people to suffer horrible consequences of foolish decisions, such people should, to the best of government's ability, not be allowed to make foolish choices and should be physically forced to evacuate when a mandatory evacuation is orderd.

Still some people will remain and will be seen pleading for help on our TV screens. At that point government needs to spend the money and resources to save the fools simply because, as a society, we are not willing (whether we should or not) to sit back and let them pay the ulitmate price for their foolishness. If they are lucky enough to be saved, they will never "pay" for their foolish choices, but then being such a monumental fool seems to be punishment enough, and compassionate societies care for their village idiots even if they will not care for themselves.

5. Santorm is a jackass on his best day and I haven't seen him have to many good days.

Don't agree, but this really isn't about Santorum is it? He voiced, perhaps in less than senistive terms, what a whole lot of people have been thinking.

6.I know, I said a couple

7. self preservation always takes presidence. Just to stay don't bitch because help wasn't there immediately afterward.

Here you are expecting people will take responsibility for their own actions (or inactions). Would that they all will, but they won't.

8. Nagin is a bigger jackass for not having a well layed out evacuation plan.

Agreed

9. Can't anybody see that a big hurricane is getting ready to come over your house?

Imagine the times when there were no means of weather forcasting beyond looking up into the sky. Now there are though, and we can have days of notice concerning an impending hurricane.

Of course the forecasts are not perfect by any means and even two days out from landfall, no one can consistently predict with accuracy what track the storm will follow. The natural influences that drive storms like Katrina (water temperature, currents, high or low pressure fronts etc) are highly complex and can create significant changes in trajectory on an hourly basis.

The reality is that when there is enough time to substantially evacuate a city, the forecasts of where the storm will hit are more often wrong than right. Since evacuations cause all sorts of problems, government officials are not anxious to pull the trigger on them only to find they were not necessary. When a city "needlessly" grinds to a halt, the concept of better safe than sorry is swept away by anger and frustration.

All of this combines to tell us that we expect too much from post-disaster relief efforts and that preventive measures (like building levees that can withstand a #4 or #5 hurricane, or prohibiting development of coastal wetlands) are the best way to go. Might as well spit in the wind though. Whether it is representative of an admirable trait of can-do optimisim or a myopic sense of live for the day (and where is that manner of living exhibited more than in New Orleans?) people don't get their asses in gear until after disasters strike, and part of the reaction is to look to someone to blame for what is most likely the multiple follies of everyone involved.

ok I'm done

Me too

I tend to think the old and retired who stayed did so more because of their aversion to change and their comfort in the familiar than any sense that they needed to stay to hold on to their possessions.

Sounds like DTOM may have been poor at one time or another.

roger wrote:

Sounds like DTOM may have been poor at one time or another.

yep, been there. best thing that ever happened to me. sounds bizarre, doesn't it ? luckily, i was raised in an upper mid class home, so unlike most of the people we are talking about here, i had a halfway decent high school education that gave me a chance to work my way up and out.

anyway, i'd think that would give at least a little weight to my opinion on the poor down in nawlins.

finn: while i disagree with most of your post, the one thing that really stuck out is your opinion on people's pets. for a lot of people, their dogs or cats are their kids/family. there's a hell of a lot more to it than picking up another free mutt or cat.

i feel bad for you that you don't seem to have experienced that kind of unconditional love, man.

okay, i get ya.

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

okay, i get ya.

Good. Now don't let me find you giving me grief again.