Difference between the fires and Katrina

[disneyfan67]

I don't understand some of the responses on this thread. I may not be the sharpest knife in the kitchen, but even I can see there's plenty of blame to go around.


You got the residents of N.O, some of who should have taken more responsibility in preparing for the worst and evacuated, if they had the means to do so.

You also had a thug element who took advantage of the disaster to cause even more problems and mayhem than usual.

You had a incompetent local and State government who should of did more and really dropped the ball. Nagin and Blanco are synonymous with the words failure and incompetency.

You have the Federal government and an agency that's sole purpose is to provide relief in disasters, made sure everyone clearly saw how incompetent and slow they were as well. The words of: "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." will be always known as sarcastic slang for things done/ performed very poorly and half *****.


You have a President and his staff who waited way too long to take action, regardless of who they thought should be doing the relief work, they should have done more sooner. There's no reason in the age of communication why the administration didn't see what we all did on our TV's. As the CEO of the country, the POTUS should have realized that his popularity and poll numbers would be affected by this. Him flying over the affected areas in Air Force One and looking out the window, really hurt his image. I can still remember the political cartoons blasting him over that. Those kind of mistakes usually end most political careers.


To me it seemed like there's more than enough blame to go around and it's more than just one person. I think as a nation, lessons were learned from that disaster. I think California is proving that.

 

[What the Heck]

There is blame to go around , as I have said many times. However, too many refuse to place any blame on the place the "buck stops". The decider, George Walker Bush.

If you are so strong on this belief, then why in 2 years have you not answered my question? Why would you want to give him dictatorial powers that are not his in the Constitution?

 

[LakeAriel]

http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-us&bra...l:ns:MSNVideo_Top_Cat:ps:10:sd:-1:ind:1:ff:8A

 

[JMD]

I'm getting the impression you think I only want to blame the Feds. I don't. Nagin and the other local and state officials acted like morons. It was a joint effort in stupidity. Regardless of who these trapped people were and why they stayed, they deserved to be treated better than they did. Period.

I apologize. I singled out your post, but I was referring to comments from several people that are placing blame on the government. Local or federal.

Nagin and the local officials there were completely incompetent. The fact that he was reelected as mayor is just mind-boggling.

As always, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Could these people have been treated better? Sure. Should they have made a better effort to protect themselves? Absolutely.

 

[What the Heck]

You have the Federal government and an agency that's sole purpose is to provide relief in disasters, made sure everyone clearly saw how incompetent and slow they were as well. The words of: "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." will be always known as sarcastic slang for things done/ performed very poorly and half *****.

You have a President and his staff who waited way too long to take action, regardless of who they thought should be doing the relief work, they should have done more sooner. There's no reason in the age of communication why the administration didn't see what we all did on our TV's. As the CEO of the country, the POTUS should have realized that his popularity and poll numbers would be affected by this. Him flying over the affected areas in Air Force One and looking out the window, really hurt his image. I can still remember the political cartoons blasting him over that. Those kind of mistakes usually end most political careers.


To me it seemed like there's more than enough blame to go around and it's more than just one person. I think as a nation, lessons were learned from that disaster. I think California is proving that.

I don't think Californian learned from Katrina at all. I think California, as a soverign state was better prepared and had state agencies ready to go in (although they are still learning from their mistakes made this time around, not those from Louisiana.

The paragraphs I kept from your statement, please inform us of what the President should have done? Granted, the things he did do, the business as usual were very very poor politics, but what should he have done? The powers were with the Governor, all of the powers were with the Governor. These were her people. We have a President of the United States, not a President of America. There are certain powers he is not allowed to have, and this situation is one of them, unless you are prepared to give him dictatorial powers.

All of this "oh the horror, the president should have acted" ignores that the Governor waited. And waited. And waited. And waited to excerise her authority, the rightful authority. THe National Guard troops moved when she finally told them too. Those were her troops, not the President's. And those were the troops that were needed in that area to establish supply and control of the situation.

Blame the President for poor political choices during that time, and even for poor leadership (if he had landed Air Force One at the Capital in Louisiana, maybe he could have got the stick out of Blanco's *** so she could get off the fence), but for not getting water to the refugee's? Not his. For not sending in troops? Not his. Like in California. Like in Florida (year after year after year).

If he had done what some people here (and in the press) think he should have, he would have been impeached within months - and rightfully so.

 

[What the Heck]

http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-us&bra...l:ns:MSNVideo_Top_Cat:ps:10:sd:-1:ind:1:ff:8A

Talk about wanting it both ways! So if the President shows up at a disaster area, he's doing the wrong thing. If he doesn't show, he is doing the wrong thing. That guys definately one of the 24%.

I bet if it was Clinton coming out, he would be drooling all over himself.

 

[What the Heck]

I'm getting the impression you think I only want to blame the Feds. I don't. Nagin and the other local and state officials acted like morons. It was a joint effort in stupidity. Regardless of who these trapped people were and why they stayed, they deserved to be treated better than they did. Period.

On this we can agree, we just disagree on who had the responsibility and authority to treat them better.

 

[mickeyfan2]

I don't understand some of the responses on this thread. I may not be the sharpest knife in the kitchen, but even I can see there's plenty of blame to go around.


You got the residents of N.O, some of who should have taken more responsibility in preparing for the worst and evacuated, if they had the means to do so.

You also had a thug element who took advantage of the disaster to cause even more problems and mayhem than usual.

You had a incompetent local and State government who should of did more and really dropped the ball. Nagin and Blanco are synonymous with the words failure and incompetency.

You have the Federal government and an agency that's sole purpose is to provide relief in disasters, made sure everyone clearly saw how incompetent and slow they were as well. The words of: "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." will be always known as sarcastic slang for things done/ performed very poorly and half *****.


You have a President and his staff who waited way too long to take action, regardless of who they thought should be doing the relief work, they should have done more sooner. There's no reason in the age of communication why the administration didn't see what we all did on our TV's. As the CEO of the country, the POTUS should have realized that his popularity and poll numbers would be affected by this. Him flying over the affected areas in Air Force One and looking out the window, really hurt his image. I can still remember the political cartoons blasting him over that. Those kind of mistakes usually end most political careers.


To me it seemed like there's more than enough blame to go around and it's more than just one person. I think as a nation, lessons were learned from that disaster. I think California is proving that.

CA was prepared before Katrina even was named.

I agree with the rest of your post. I just don't understand the ones here who only want to blame the Feds.

I have lived through a hurricane, granted I would have high tailed it out of here if it was a Katrina, and the first line of defense was myself.

 

[eclectics]

I apologize. I singled out your post, but I was referring to comments from several people that are placing blame on the government. Local or federal.

Nagin and the local officials there were completely incompetent. The fact that he was reelected as mayor is just mind-boggling.

As always, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Could these people have been treated better? Sure. Should they have made a better effort to protect themselves? Absolutely.

I'm just saying that's a moot point, after the fact. They were where they were.... by whatever reason. If someone needs rescuing, you rescue them. You don't wag a finger and say "You should have been more prepared" (this comment not directed at you, btw). They didn't deserve what they got, which was little or nothing in some cases.

If we're all supposed to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and take care of ourselves (again, not directed at you), then for heavens sake disband FEMA altogether, along with all the state and local assistance orgs. Rely totally on yourself and private charity. Heck, it would save a lot of tax dollars, won't it.

 

[bigmerle1966]

FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency.

That's their job.

and to finish the sentence "That's their job.......once they are called upon BY THE STATE for assistance." The same people who love to bash FEMA for their so called lack of response will be the first ones SCREAMING their fool heads off about States rights when the Feds go in without an "invite" from the State and "trample" over them. This battle was fought over 100 years ago and more recently after 9/11--the first level of response lies with your local governments. Pay more attention to your local elections folks--THEY are your first responders and need to have the intelligence and foresight to call in the Feds when needed.

FEMA CANNOT go into a disaster area unless they are officialy asked too, and they weren't until days later.

I apologize. I singled out your post, but I was referring to comments from several people that are placing blame on the government. Local or federal.

Nagin and the local officials there were completely incompetent. The fact that he was reelected as mayor is just mind-boggling.

As always, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Could these people have been treated better? Sure. Should they have made a better effort to protect themselves? Absolutely.

I could not understand that one AT ALL!!!

 

[Charade]

http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-us&bra...l:ns:MSNVideo_Top_Cat:ps:10:sd:-1:ind:1:ff:8A

So the Lt Gov. of CA is critical of Bush's visit and his Iraq policies. That's supposed to mean what?

 

[Hound 109]

A question to all Californians potentially in harm's way:

Would you rather see Bush's entourage come see you tomorrow?

Or would you rather have 5,000 - 10,000 of your California National Guard (currently dodging bullets in Iraq) be available tomorrow to help out?

 

[hiwaygal]

If we're all supposed to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and take care of ourselves (again, not directed at you), then for heavens sake disband FEMA altogether, along with all the state and local assistance orgs. Rely totally on yourself and private charity. Heck, it would save a lot of tax dollars, won't it.

FEMA is there to respond to an emergency and manage (i.e. organize) whatever efforts are needed. They actually do that and more (by providing necessities). But they are not designed to be 'first responders'.

In a situation like Katrina you should be your own first responder. Do what you can to help yourself. The local government should be your "second" responder. Then the state and then the feds.

American citizens felt (at some point in the past) that a federal level organization to share information on preparedness and standards of response was needed. But to expect that agency to be the sole response is, IMO, not the intent or responsibility of that agency.

 

[Hound 109]

So the Lt Gov. of CA is critical of Bush's visit and his Iraq policies. That's supposed to mean what?

It means that if you invade a country it would be smart to contemplate (ahead of time) what the game plan is when you have to occupy.

It means when you confiscate tens of thousands of a state's national guard, you need to be prepared to fade the heat when they're not available to provide the services & assistance which they were created for.

It means that if you're a leader....doing smart stuff is better than doing dumb stuff.

 

[LakeAriel]

Here's an interesting article...dismiss if you wish..

BUSH AND KATRINA....For what it's worth, I'd like to make absolutely clear why I hold George Bush accountable for the federal response to Hurricane Katrina. First, though, here's what I don't blame him for.

I don't blame him for being on vacation when Katrina made landfall. I don't blame him for a certain amount of chaos in the initial response — that's inevitable no matter how good your plan is. I don't blame him for rolling FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security. I don't blame him for focusing more on terrorism than on natural disasters. That was a natural reaction to 9/11.

Nor do I think that Bush doesn't care about natural disasters. It's not as if he sat down one day and decided that hurricanes were no longer worth worrying about.

Obviously Bush deserves criticism for his listless lack of leadership and life-as-usual politicking in the first three days after Katrina hit. Beyond that, though, what happened was the result of a long series of decisions, all flowing out of Bush's natural conservative governing instincts, that added up to make Katrina more damaging than it had to be and at the same time eroded our ability to react to its aftermath. These decisions were deliberate and disastrous, and that's why I think Bush deserves a large part of the blame for what happened.

Because I think this is the most important part of the story, I'm going to reprint a chronology I originally posted last week. It tells the story of what happened over the past four and a half years of George Bush's presidency that led to the events of last week:


January 2001: Bush appoints Joe Allbaugh, a crony from Texas, as head of FEMA. Allbaugh has no previous experience in disaster management.


April 2001: Budget Director Mitch Daniels announces the Bush administration's goal of privatizing much of FEMA's work. In May, Allbaugh confirms that FEMA will be downsized: "Many are concerned that federal disaster assistance may have evolved into both an oversized entitlement program...." he said. "Expectations of when the federal government should be involved and the degree of involvement may have ballooned beyond what is an appropriate level."


2001: FEMA designates a major hurricane hitting New Orleans as one of the three "likeliest, most catastrophic disasters facing this country."


December 2002: After less than two years at FEMA, Allbaugh announces he is leaving to start up a consulting firm that advises companies seeking to do business in Iraq. He is succeeded by his deputy and former college friend, Michael Brown, who has no previous experience in disaster management and was fired from his previous job for mismanagement.


March 2003: FEMA is downgraded from a cabinet level position and folded into the Department of Homeland Security. Its mission is refocused on fighting acts of terrorism.


2003: Under its new organization chart within DHS, FEMA's preparation and planning functions are reassigned to a new Office of Preparedness and Response. FEMA will henceforth focus only on response and recovery.


Summer 2004: FEMA denies Louisiana's pre-disaster mitigation funding requests. Says Jefferson Parish flood zone manager Tom Rodrigue: "You would think we would get maximum consideration....This is what the grant program called for. We were more than qualified for it."


June 2004: The Army Corps of Engineers budget for levee construction in New Orleans is slashed. Jefferson Parish emergency management chiefs Walter Maestri comments: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay."


June 2005: Funding for the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is cut by a record $71.2 million. One of the hardest-hit areas is the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, which was created after the May 1995 flood to improve drainage in Jefferson, Orleans and St. Tammany parishes.


August 2005: While New Orleans is undergoing a slow motion catastrophe, Bush mugs for the cameras, cuts a cake for John McCain, plays the guitar for Mark Wills, delivers an address about V-J day, and continues with his vacation. When he finally gets around to acknowledging the scope of the unfolding disaster, he delivers only a photo op on Air Force One and a flat, defensive, laundry list speech in the Rose Garden.


So: A crony with no relevant experience was installed as head of FEMA. Mitigation budgets for New Orleans were slashed even though it was known to be one of the top three risks in the country. FEMA was deliberately downsized as part of the Bush administration's conservative agenda to reduce the role of government. After DHS was created, FEMA's preparation and planning functions were taken away.

Actions have consequences. No one could predict that a hurricane the size of Katrina would hit this year, but the slow federal response when it did happen was no accident. It was the result of four years of deliberate Republican policy and budget choices that favor ideology and partisan loyalty at the expense of operational competence. It's the Bush administration in a nutshell.

—Kevin Drum 1:33 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (0)

Comments

 

[Ride Junkie]

The video clips they're showing of Qualcomm Stadium certainly paint a different picture than the Superdome. Everything is going smoothly, and the volunteer effort has been amazing. If only all evacuations could be like this. I'm proud to be in CA!!

Wasn't part of the problem at the Superdome that they were having trouble getting supplies / relief in because the roads were flooded? I'll never forget that utter chaos.

Check out this little guy. He is so unfazed by the evacuation...just happy to have a blankie!

 

[eclectics]

FEMA is there to respond to an emergency and manage (i.e. organize) whatever efforts are needed. They actually do that and more (by providing necessities). But they are not designed to be 'first responders'.

In a situation like Katrina you should be your own first responder. Do what you can to help yourself. The local government should be your "second" responder. Then the state and then the feds.

American citizens felt (at some point in the past) that a federal level organization to share information on preparedness and standards of response was needed. But to expect that agency to be the sole response is, IMO, not the intent or responsibility of that agency.

Fine and good. I don't disagree. BUT, if I need more help than I can supply myself, I EXPECT, since my tax dollars go to pay for federal, state, and local assistance programs, adequate assistance IF I need it. I don't feel thats too much to ask, since in theory, I'm actually the one paying for it.

 

[disneyfan67]

What the Heck, let me try and answer your question and clarify my position a little.



I believe that every President and politicians in general, only have so much capital or goodwill built up with the American people. It's like a one time cash loan and once you spend it, it's gone and not coming back. That's why it's very important to make sure you eliminate and prevent any missteps if possible. When a POTUS is low in poll numbers it affects his ability to properly lead and push his agenda through, especially if members in his party are scared of being tainted by associating with him. It's hard to get re elected when your own President is dragging you down.

It was pretty clear after a day or so that the situation in N.O was turning into a big bag of crap. I was watching the same news channels as everyone else was and thinking what a "cluster (insert profanity) it was turning into. If I was the POTUS and essentially the CEO of America, I would have been on the scene. I would have applied pressure and force needed on those to get the job done, ball rolling, etc. I would have rather been slammed for doing too much and being too hands on, then be portrayed as doing too little or appear to not care. I would have put Blanco and Nagin on the spot, in front of the cameras for all the America to see. I would have tried to make sure made sure men like Lt. Gen. Russel Honore were on the scene sooner. When Gen Honore got off that helicopter and took charge, things started to get done and I will always remember the image of him and what good he did. To me, he made me proud of our military and my Country. He should have been on the ground much sooner, IMO.

In a nutshell, What the Heck:
You don't give your enemies or your opponents ammo to use against you. If this disaster would have happened on September 2004 instead of 2005, GWB administration's slow response would have cost him the 04 election. How this situation was handled was one of the reasons for the decline of GWB and his poll numbers.

 

[Mr Man]

Fine and good. I don't disagree. BUT, if I need more help than I can supply myself, I EXPECT, since my tax dollars go to pay for federal, state, and local assistance programs, adequate assistance IF I need it. I don't feel thats too much to ask, since in theory, I'm actually the one paying for it.

I think I understand your point and generally agree. For the most part, the system works just fine...... except when it is overwhelmed..... then it works not so good.

It's like the 911 service. Works fine most of the time. Except for Friday and Sat. nights. Then it bogs down due to all the alcohol related incidents etc that occur most often on the weekend (ok maybe not the best analogy but hope my intent is clear).

That is why I continue to stress making prudent preparations to take care of me and mine. One less family looking for assistance after all.....

Oh, one last thing, 1 tablespoon of bleach per 5 gallons of water and boiling in an attic is not an issue. It is still potable too.

Regards,

 

[basas]

Blizzards are similar to hurricanes - with our advanced weather technology, communities get some days' notice before a big storm.

And in the particular case of New Orleans, there had been dire predictions of "the big one" hitting for years and years. And of the perilous consequences that would have, based on the topography of that city. There's simiply no excuse for the local and state governments not to have planned better, ahead of time, for the vulnerable among their population (the poor, the sick, the elderly), and no excuse for so many to have ended up stuck on their rooftops or sitting in the Super Dome with no basic supplies of their own.

I just read an article in the Times-Picyune, that the population of NO is back to 86% of its' pre-Katrina level. But I'd bet money that the local and state governments are still not adequately prepared if another hurricane hits. It's just so much easier to blame President Bush, if that happens.

True but you usually don’t evacuate for a blizzard and you just never know how bad it’s going to be. They can tell days off if it’s a category 5 coming in to land. Not necessarily 100% accurate but at least they have a general idea. I live in an area that gets blizzards so I guess I’m pretty used to it now.

It is not lack of compassion like others have said. You can't expect the government to be there seconds after a natural disaster hits and bail you out immediately. It just isn't physically possible. For those that evacuated to shelters without taking basic supplies, again, shame on them. It isn't the governments fault they failed to prepare. The government can only do so much. People that were in shelters without water for 5 days, why didn't they bring water with them. A gallon of water at the store costs a DOLLAR. For 5 dollars they could have had water for 5 days.

Exactly. Sadly, once again, it's much easier for people to blame someone else (and then blame George Bush) for their actions (or lack thereof).

What does this have to do with Bush's approval ratings?

Apparently we support the suffering of natural disaster victims or something. I don’t get it either.

California is a much wealthier state than Louisiana. My guess is that CA also has much better disaster preparedness due to the earthquake threat and past wildfire tragedies. It is also easier to respond to a wildfire than it is to a hurricaine.

Very true.

I'm unsubscribing too...all this is, is a bunch of people who don't have the slightest clue or experience about what they are talking about, trashing people who DO have experience with what they are talking about. It's dumb, and pointless.

For the most part, I agree.

It really has become predictable. Regardless of the topic, there is guaranteed to be some comment about "Planet Bush" or the "24 percent". Doesn't matter how irrelevant it is to the conversation.

That does appear to be the case…