"No one could have anticipated this kind of disaster"- Page 3

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 9/4/05 at 6:52pm

If we don't find out the fundamental cause of the failures, how can we prevent them from happening again?

Given this government's ability to re-write history and recast situations, I think you have no choice but to say loudly and clearly how they screwed up. If you wait, then the spin of responsibility will result in somehow, this being at someone else's doorstep.

Perhaps they can find a reporter to throw in jail for this one as well.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/4/05 at 6:56pm

"Given this government's ability to re-write history and recast situations..." in other words, "let's wait until all of the facts are out."

[dededarlin]

Posted: 9/4/05 at 6:57pm

i understand your point. being from new orleans myself, i guess i was just wishing that it was nobody's fault and that we would all just get through it together, without having to blame others. once again, i was just being an idealist. i do appreciate that everyone cares so much though.

[Greg-4now]

Posted: 9/4/05 at 6:58pm

Findingnamo: All of these things that you want to point to, to place the blame on Bush, I will support you on 100% if what you are saying is 100% factual. I take your word on the funding issues; but you are not correlating that to what happened in New Orleans? The local and state govt's have the primary responsibility to have a plan and execute it. Its only when they can't perform their own plan, of their own design, when they turn to the federal gov't for help, BEFORE its a crisis. They never asked for help prior to the hurricane. In the city of NO, the news was showing aerial photos of hundreds school buses that were NEVER called upon prior to the storm to get these poor people out of harms way? Don't you even want to know why those buses weren't used? Why didn't they make it point to get as many people out of town that they could? The storm was a CAT 5 just before land fall, but at least CAT 4 that everyone knew of. You haven't made the case that the massive loss of life is Bush's fault, or that the massive devastation is Bush's fault. Ok, lets all agree that FEMA responded late. How does that explain and excuse the fact that thousands and thousands of people were left in harms way?


Dededarling is right. Its not the time for finger pointing; and its also not the time to be defending anyone...but I think that is our human nature; especially when you are not directly effected by the crisis. Thinking back to 9/11, nobody that I can remember in the NYC/ NJ area was talking about "whose fault"...it was mostly "let's get the bastards that did this" and unbearable sorrow.

[dededarlin]

Posted: 9/4/05 at 6:59pm

ah exactly!

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 9/4/05 at 7:03pm

The spinning continues, as Bush and Chertoff begin to point fingers elsewhere -- "this isn't the time to assign blame" my ass!

-------------------------------------

Mr. Chertoff in turn seemed to cast some blame elsewhere. He said earlier that "our constitutional system really places the primary authority in each state with the governor."

Today, Senator Landrieu, a Democrat whose father, Moon Landrieu, was once the mayor of New Orleans, dropped her earlier reserve about criticizing federal failings.

Mr. Bush had said that the enormousness of the crisis had "strained state and local capabilities."

Local authorities took this as a deeply unjustified criticism, and a distraught Ms. Landrieu said that if she heard any more criticism from federal officials, particularly about the evacuation of New Orleans, she might lose control.

"If one person criticizes them or says one more thing - including the president of the United States - he will hear from me," she said on the ABC program "This Week." "One more word about it after this show airs and I might likely have to punch him. Literally."

She also referred angrily to comments Mr. Bush had made Friday at the New Orleans airport about the fun he had had there in his younger days.

"Our infrastructure is devastated, lives have been shattered," Ms. Landrieu said during a helicopter tour of the area with an ABC interviewer. "Would the president please stop taking photo-ops?"

Mr. Chertoff warned that Americans, already horrified by scenes of misery and chaos in New Orleans, should brace for worse.



Bush Faces Rising Complaints About Handling of Disaster

Updated On: 9/4/05 at 07:03 PM

[Greg-4now]

Posted: 9/4/05 at 7:15pm

I've met Michael Chertoff at a political function (a democrat function actually) several years ago. He's a brilliant prosecutor/attorney. He's about as egotistical as they come. I don't like the man at all and frankly was very disappointed when they named him. As much as some people didn't like Ridge, he was a much better administrator. Most lawyers I know, are lousy businessmen; they wouldn't have a clue on even how to bill me if it weren't for their office managers. Chertoff is no different.

EDIT - lousy businessmen=Chertoff=not knowing how to effectively manage the busines of DHS.

Updated On: 9/4/05 at 07:15 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:13am

Greg, I'd like to hear by some point on Tuesday that you have called both the White House and the Department of Homeland Security and left a message to your president and to Chertoff instructing them that now is not the time for them to be pointing fingers. Tell them that you understand it's human nature, but since they are the top dogs in this scenario they really, for once in their arrogant lives, need to take the high road.

I would (and will) add that they fumbled the ball, and therefore it makes them look desperate and pathetic, but I know that's too much to ask of you.

If you really want to go all the way, please inform the president that incompetence and greed just aren't going to cut it from here on in.

And if you think it's a stretch to imagine the myriad ways in which this hurricane is going to have a profound impact on my and every other (non-filthy-rich) American citizen's life, then you're even less creative than I give you credit for.

Updated On: 9/5/05 at 12:13 AM

[Greg-4now]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 1:57am

Namo - this is your typical response...you answered none of my questions and just made another laundry list complaints that you want to dump on Bush's doorstep. You have refused to even acknowledge that some of the problems in New Orleans is because of local and state failures, or that failure on the local and state level is even possible.

And you've once again taken my words out of context. I said we shouldn't be finger pointing until all the information is out; those that have responsibilities in the matter shouldn't be pointing fingers either. And I said that we weren't being directly impacted by the hurricane: by that I mean, you still have a roof over your head, you still have running water, your street isn't flooded, you are free to go out and have a beer at a local pub...etc. That's why I said "directly". Some point down the road we will be impacted to some minor degree; when you compare it to what the people from New Orleans are going through. Like, right now, we are seeing higher prices at the pump; that makes people angry, but pales by comparison, don't ya think.

At least answer this.
Aren't you even little curious why the Director of National Hurricane Center called the Mayor of New Orleans and pleaded with him to evacuate the city? Aren't you curious to know why the Mayor didn't take the advice and mandate the evacution? Aren't you curious why the Governor wouldn't sign off on the FEds taking over the entire evac operation? Aren't curious to know why the State and Local officials didn't execute all of the elements of their Emergency Management Plan? Or are you just going to sit back and settle for just blame the current administration?

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that the President is nothing more than a greedy incompetitent bastard, and that will no longer "cut it"...what are you going to do about it? The guy is in his last term. He will never run for office again.

I did send my two Senators (both Democrats) and my Congressmam (a republican) an email to warn them about making this a partisan dog fight.

On a positive note; I helped out at car wash today with a bunch of high school students; these kids raised over $1,200.00 to donate to the Red Cross. I haven't had this much fun in a long time. It was a blast. This one kid (I think his name was Franky) said that he worked all summer to save up for a new bass guitar; he said that he just saved enough for the one he wants, but now is going to donate half of that money to the Red Cross Relief effort. I think thats great that kids understand how important it is to help out.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:03am

"...those that have responsibilities in the matter shouldn't be pointing fingers either..."

And AGAIN, I hope we can count on you to make those calls on Tuesday to tell THEM that. How am I taking THAT out of context. I'll do it, but the words will carry so much more weight coming from one of their own.

Do I need to look up the phone numbers and post them for you, or can we trust you'll do it on your own?

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:04am

Well, Bush does want a good legacy--and he can't accomplish anything in this second term to do that if he doesn't have capital and/or Congress becomes Democratic controlled next year.

[Greg-4now]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:26am

Still avoiding my questions Namo??? Why???

JRB - You're right about the legacy thing...but that's no different for any President, but not having Congress under the same party doesn't determine the legacy. There have been many Presidency that didn't have party power in the House, but yet had a great legacy. The same holds true for the reverse - same party in the White House and capital hill; and now have a horrible legacy - just look at Carter. I actually think most Americans really like it when the White House party is different from Capitol Hill - no rubber stamp Congress. It has merit.

But don't hold your breath for a change in either House - many of the seats aren't even remotely vunerable. Statewide races and Congressional races don't play to the National sentiment about a particular party. While everyone in the country might be mad at Bush and his administration, the Senators and Congressmen (generally speaking ) are viewed by the local electorate as "my guy is OK, its the other guys in Congress that are the problem". Besides the DNC is under the management of the very extreme fringe of the party - Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi - they've highjacked the party and its not playing well in middle America. They are viewed by most as Extreme Liberals - which is fine for their home States. I actually like Howard Dean, seems like a very intelligent guy, someone who cares and is really passionate about his agenda. Time will tell.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 4:05am

Just one point of clarification - at least at this moment.

The Mayor did issue the Mandatory Evacuation Order:

" New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin declared a state of emergency Sunday and ordered a mandatory evacuation of the city. (Watch video of mayor's announcement)"

See: http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/08/28/hurricane.katrina/

What he did not do was forcible place people on transportation out of town.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 11:41am

Just stop, Greg. Your treading water is getting increasingly desperate.

What do you want me to respond to? The school busses? Yeah, they should have been mobilized, but, golly, let's use your line of reasoning, "all of the facts are not out regarding why" they were not.

But the facts that are MOST damning are the facts that are coming out now about the three days of foot dragging by Bush and the cronies about whose job it was to help. By the time that's all clear and agreed upon, I fully expect you to quote Ronald Reagan: "facts are stupid things."

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:00pm

Greg, you are accurate when you say much policy is local, but I think that much of the disparity of wealth and its distribution is purely Republican. The allocation or resources in this country has been skewed and distorted based upon Republican pet project - which is no different from Democrats, except that many of these pet project serve few, if any citizens.

I cannot imagine the bridge fiasco in Alaska will not be played time and time again to show what this Republican Party stands for. The gutting of the infrastructue due to tax cuts benefitting the wealthy because of something made up called "supply-side economics."

The redistrubution of wealth and resources from those who need it most to those who already have. Leave the infrastrucure to the private sector. This has been the Republican domestic agenda for the past five years (actually longer, but they really got it going with Bush). Many Republicns may be in safe districts, but others are not. And, small government, which the Republicans advocate, clearly does not work in times of crisis. This is the government that Bush, Rove and company brought us, and many senators and congressmen were only too happy to drink the cool-aid and ride the coat-tails. Environmental policies that ingore science in favor of a quick buck and a new development.

So, I think there will be consequences. And I think Bush's second term agenda is thankfully compromised.

[Greg-4now]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 7:37pm

NAMO - "yeah...but"...there is no "yeah...but". Local authorities have fist line of response for the complete execution of Emergency Response Plans. And you are right, we need to let all the facts be known before deciding where to place the blame; Maybe they couldn't find anyone to drive the buses, maybe 1000 of their 1500 member police force walked off and there was no way to coordinate it - Maybe the Mayor had too much pride to ask for the help he needed BEFORE the storm hit. But before anyone could even begin to understand what was happening in New Orleans, you were already here blaming Bush, because YOU had all the facts long before anyone else, right?


YOUWANTITWHEN -

The allocation or resources in this country has been skewed and distorted based upon Republican pet project - which is no different from Democrats, except that many of these pet project serve few, if any citizens.

Can you explain this further? Do mean what amounts are spent in the Federal Budget? It that's the case, I am not sure if I agree. The Dept of Health & Human Services from a budget standpoint is the largest department budget of all departments. Its about $580 billion. After that, Social Security @ $500 billion then Defense coming in at 3rd at $460 Billion, Interest on Debt $375 billion ;then a bunch of agencies with entitlement programs, Veterans Affairs, Education, Agriculture and so on. Explain what you mean be resource allocation for the Republican pet projects.

"supply-side economics." YOu may not like this, but it does work.

The redistrubution of wealth and resources from those who need it most to those who already have. Leave the infrastrucure to the private sector. This has been the Republican domestic agenda for the past five years (actually longer, but they really got it going with Bush).

Again, I am not sure what you mean here, but if you mean to say the our system is designed to make the rich, richer...I won't agree with that. Some level of government got 49.2% of the money I made last year, in some form of tax (income, sales, capital gains, property). Its a lot of money. I'm not complaining because there was still more than enough for me and my family; now, if you think that I am just going to sit around and the let Government give my money away to other rich folk, that's just plain crazy. Taking 35% of my income and spending 70% of it on some entitlement program is wealth redistribution, but not for the rich. When I die, my kids get everything. But they are really only going to get half of everything...the government is getting the other half. Is that fair?

Many Republicans may be in safe districts, but others are not. And, small government, which the Republicans advocate, clearly does not work in times of crisis.

I will agree to an extent with you; just remember, in crisis, its the local and state that have the plan, that "know the lay of the land"; where the buses are, where the shelters are, where the nursing homes are; Can you imagine the Federal Government trying to collect this information? What happens when it changes? Will the State and local government update the Federal? It get too complicated, which is why local control is vital.

This is the government that Bush, Rove and company brought us, NO, NO NO...this is the Government that 54% of voting Americans voted for
and many senators and congressmen were only too happy to drink the cool-aid and ride the coat-tails. Environmental policies that ingore science in favor of a quick buck and a new development.

Cite examples...please. I look at one example of ANWAR ;the Ecology crowd doesn't want drilling, yet it would save us a bunch of money in not having to import, yet we won't do. From an environmental standpoint, not drilling in ANWAR is good. Right? But economically it hurts us. Wouldn't that be a case of Environment losing to "Big Business"?

So, I think there will be consequences. And I think Bush's second term agenda is thankfully compromised.

Not nearly as much as some are hoping. The mid-term elections are far enough away, there aren't many Senate contests that are at risk contests for the GOP, in fact the GOP might even pick a seat or two; Wisconsin if Tommy Thompson runs, he's the only GOP'er that could beat Kohl; Minnesota is ripe especially after the Senator closed his DC office in fear of a terrorist attack there are few others.

As a footnote - the Democrat members of the Senate are the wealthiest - Kohl (of the department stores), Kerry, Kennedy, Corzine...did I forget anyone???

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 8:37pm

Greg:

1. I was specifically referring to the 200+ million dollar bridge in Alaska that serves approximately 50 people (at least according to multiple sources site) and is a project of the head of the approrpriations committee. The current highway bill is itself an example of pork of epic porportions. As for the specific quote - this is the Bridge to Nowhere that cost over $200 million dollars: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/08/09/bridges/index_np.html

2. Supply-side economics - I don't think it works for the whole. It benefits some, sure. Me included. But, it seems that the progressive tax system is being thrown away, with those with the highest ability to pay finding ways to pay the least. Between federal/state and social security, I probably paid as much, if not more than you in taxes.

When I talk about reallocation of resources, I am also referring to abandoning the country's infrastrucutre. Money is not being reinvested in ways that benefits the whole, but seems to favor those already benefitting from society. Granted, this we are a capitalistic society, but, if you look in terms of who is making what these days, the top level of corporate america's wages and earnings have risen to an amount that would equal a minimum wage of approximately $20.00. Credit Card companies and banks get to rewrite our bankruptcy code, while the states cannot regulate much of what banks do because of federal regulation.

And, given their druthes, the Republicans will permanent abolish the estate tax, so who knows, your kids, who had the benefit of a hard working and successful family, will be rewarding with all of your estate.

Here is more on how the wealth is being distributed and resources allocated and how pork is being built into so much government spending:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/8/10/125548.shtml

Highway bill: MONTGOMERY, Ill. -- President Bush on Wednesday signed a whopping $286.4 billion transportation bill, touting it as bringing the nation's transportation network "into the 21st century."

With fanfare, Bush signed the more than 1,000-page highway bill into law even though it was more costly than he preferred. It includes cash to bankroll some 6,000 pet projects for lawmakers in their home districts.

. . .
Keith Ashdown, vice president of policy for Taxpayers for Common Sense, however, called the measure a "bloated, expensive bill" that the Bush should have vetoed.

"It is only fitting that the president is signing this legislation in Speaker Hastert's district, because the speaker's district has the third highest amount of highway pork in the nation," Ashdown said.

The bill contains more than 6,371 special projects valued at more than $24 billion, or about 9 percent of the bill's total cost, he said. The distribution of the money for these projects "is based far more on political clout than on transportation need," Ashdown said.


3. I agree that there will be hell to pay at many levels of government. But, this President has run on his ability to lead. In this instance, he, along with many in LA, failed. I believe there will be consequences. You may disagree, that is fine.

4. People who voted for Bush, many of them, voted because they were afraid of two men kissing, and were told that Bush would be there to lead. Many saw him standing on top of the ruins in 9/11 as the image of a strong leader, and voted accordingly. Many did not look into the policies underlying the Administration - though of course some did. Bush won the popular vote. I don't disagree. But it is his government. His policies. He is the one that sets the tone. Again, this is my opinion. You have a different one. Some of these issues are based upon perception. Yours is different than mine.

5. I was specifically address the permission to build on wetlands when many environmental groups warned of the possible consequences of removing natural protection and defenses against such things as Hurricanes. Bush 1 and Clinton had very stringent policies against building on Wetlands. Bush 2 removed many of these restrictions and said build away.

This Administrations environmental and energy policies ignore gloabal warming, and the enviromental consequences associated with some of our industry practices. It effectively reveresed many of its 2000 campaign promises once it came into office. I am to tired now to get all of the sites. But, in the words of Christie Todd Whitman: http://www.mypartytoo.com/:

"First, we have to decide on the issues that are of the most importance . . . environmental policies that promote a balanced approach to environmental protection."


As for Anwar - I am actually torn - if I trusted that business would not detroy the area, I might be more comfortable. But history does not support this hope. Had previous administrations, both Republican and Democrat, focused on alternate energy rather than being on an Oil IV . . .

6. As for the kool-aid reference, I was actually thinking about the meshing of church and state, and the willingness to use one's religious belief to dictate public policy. Stem-cell research being impeded based upon the President's religious belief. Religion should not be injected into our political process to the extent it has.

And, the Bush/Rove group has talking points and strategy bullets that are repeated almost like a Mantra by his followers. They have their talking points, and away people go. The Democrats are just not as good at doing this.

7. Mid-term elections are a year away. Maybe the American public has a short memory, but even our political ADD will not forget the images of those dying asking for help. And, while the Republicans still want to change social security and end permanently the estate tax, I think people will look more cloesly at the consequences of these practices, and think twice at the underlying objectives.

Again, no one knows. But I think that the consequences of this event will impact the ability of Bush/Rove et al to argue that small government is best.

With regard to the other issues raised, I don't make stuff up out of my ass, but cannot at this moment get my hands on all of the sites.

You and I can agree to disagree on politcs. You have the right to your opinion. As I do to mine.


OK - now I am going to open a bottle or wine. I feel like I just finished a homework assignment.
Updated On: 9/5/05 at 08:37 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 9:59pm

Greg, I am just not sure what you want from me? Applause that you are regurgitating Karl Rove's latest brainchild: "blame the mayor and governor!"?

Clap

clap

claaaaaap

Good boy, Greg. We can, however, officially blame FEMA for turning away water from WalMart, air boats from Florida, etcetera, etcetera, etfrickincetera... and what spin will Karl tell you to repeat ad nauseum until THAT becomes the received wisdom? Black is white, white is black and most importantly war is peace?

Your are truly a double plus good foot soldier.

Updated On: 9/5/05 at 09:59 PM

[Greg-4now]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 11:34pm

Youwantitwhen????

Your response is tremendous. Its filled with facts, references and clearly you put a great deal of thought into your response. More importantly, I appreciate your honest debate and the absence of a "personal" attack. I know you're not making any of it up. Now it just boils down to our opinions on the issues, and you are right, we are both entitled to our opinions.

I can only guess that you are fed up with "pork" projects - to a degree, I am too. But regardless who's been in power, the pork projects will happen. Just look at the "Big Dig" in Boston. I am not condoning it. (This is the problem with the two party system - this is what really needs to change!!)

The big transportation bill is over a long period of time. The Transportation Department's annual budget is a fraction of that. And frankly, looking at some of the roads that I have driven on in the North east...we need a massive "pork" projects to fix the roads...hell, just mid-town Manhattan is nightmare!

I agree 100% regarding the wetlands...its our ocean water's natural filter...they must be protected.

Bankruptcy law is very complicated. The Banks (who extend the credit cards) were getting ripped off by individual bankruptcy. When someone realizes how deep of hole they are in; they take out several cards; run them up and then declare bankruptcy. Something needed to be done to close that. The fact that banks are federally regulated is important. It all revolves around controlling the flow of currency and the National interest rate; but also protecting bank customers money. Back in 1860's (When Lincoln was President) he started a small department called Secret Service - it had one function - track down bogus currency and there was tons of it. At the time, there was over 30,000 banks (and Drug stores and other places of commerce) printing their own currency - legally - it was a nightmare. (Ironically, it wasn't until later that the Secret Service was used to protect the President.

As for the public...they do have a short memory. Do you remember how people acted after 9/11? Everyone was so much kinder to each other - and it was real, not phony. Much of that is gone - we remember to be bitter about some things, but we can't remember just to say thank you to clerk for bagging our groceries - or to just have patience with a small child. I know, its not everyone. But after 9/11 everyone seemed so different. Most have forgotten - not the event - but how we treated each other afterwards.

NAMO - I'm not sure what you want from me either, but fair and honest discourse would be a good start. Comments not filled with sarcasm and snide remarks. I don't regurgitate anyone's talking points but my own. If they happen to have a familiar ring, it’s not because I am trying to repeat Karl Rove. The blame game wasn't started by Bush and the administration. If they feel like they need to get involved with that game, then that's a mistake on their part. I understand a few republican congressmen are suggesting that House Hearings should be held on what happened in Louisiana. Apparently, some of the leaders in Louisiana aren't too receptive to this idea. I wonder why.

Namo- In all of your other posts, you sound like you’re a good decent person. I like healthy, honest and intellectual debate and hopefully that's what you and I will do from time to time.
Have a good night.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 9/6/05 at 12:23am

Greg -

You are correct with regard to many issues about the banks and credit card companies. But, they also take advantage and the new bankruptcy bill is clearly drafted with their interests in mind.

Many times, credit is loaned out to risks that are not reasonable, and then interest is charged at rates that would be usurious under state law. The states cannot do anything about. Then, when the bad risk defaults, after racking up debt at 18-24% interest, the credit card companies get protection again in the bktcy courts. So, they get the rates that the states cannot regulate, and now, get more protection in the bankruptcy courts. One or the other, not both.

They have agreements among themselves, and other institutions that people pay bills to, for a provision and practice known as universal default: If you are late on one bill, it automatically triggers a provision with other carriers whereby and lower interest rate that you previously qualified for is terminated. How is this not a violation of anti-trust laws? And, why does my payment to organization Z have any bearing on my payments to organization Y?

I do not deny that there are people taking advantage, but in a time of record profits for many of these companies, they still get the legislation they want. The new 6 month lookback period is going to wreck havoc on those who file for bktcy because of things like medical bills, illness, and, yes, natural disasters. It does not reflect a true change in circumstances. It will be interesting to see of these provisions are modified in light of the millions of people affected by Hurricane Katrina. If not, they will not be able to get a fresh start because 6 months ago, they had a job, a house, and a life. Now, they don't.

And, you are right, we do have short memories, and there is such partsianship in the nation that it just make things more difficult. You can blame both sides for this. But, to me, after 9/11, the true breakdown started with the War in Iraq. And things went downhill from there. This Administration's unwillingness to admit mistakes, and Bush's statements that he is on a mission from God change the whole equation. There are some that believe in fact that the policies of the Christian Right intentionally ignore long term issues like the enviornment because they believe that Jesus will come back in their lifetime. If that is the case, why care about global warming anyway? But for the rest of use who may not have the same beliefs, it is a problem.

I just feel that the interests of this President is not with all of the people, but with business that backed him and those of a similar faith. am not againts all Republicans or all Conservatives. Just this particular Administration. Because it is not truly republican in its spending practices, and not truly conservative in its meshing of church and state.

But, that will be it for me tonight. You have your view, and I have mine, and on a few issues, they may meet, but on many they will not.