Did Bush and the Federal Govt Fail New Orleans

[RiverwoodCLT]

Bill O'Reilley on Fox to night blame:

1: Mayor of New Orleans - for not getting people out of NO.

2: The governor Of Louisiana - for not getting Nation Guard in before storm.

3. Bush: For taking 24 hrours to act on calls for help.

I think all 3 needs to explain their actions.

I do not think anyone blame Bush for the flooding. The shortage of funds for the last 30 or 40 years brings in alot of people who can share blame for this.

Interview with Newt Gingrich.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168567,00.html

[monsoon]

Viper - the only real way to win here would be for you, I and any other clear-thinking individual to just let the libbies have their little internet Bush-hate fest.  No amount of facts we can throw at them is going to change their minds.

This whole arguement with the libbies reminds me of something my grandfather used to tell me when I was young...  "Never argue with an idiot...  they'll simply drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."

That is not to say that all our fellow Urban Planet posters are idiots, but it should give you insight into what we're dealing with when it comes to politics on this board.

The last time I checked, this was URBAN PLANET, not BASH BUSH WORLD.  Can't we just talk about skyscrapers or Atlanta's sprawl or Jacksonville's Shipyards never getting built or something?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Seems to me that using terms such as "libbies", "Bush-hate fest", and "idiot", you are just as guilty at bashing as those you choose to criticize. I will say this is a page out of the book of George Bush but as you also mention not all of us are idiots and we see right through the hyprocracy of your post.

Last time I checked, nobody is forcing you to participate in this thread nor even on this forum. If you want to present some facts that actually matter then do so, but don't start crying to mommy when people question these "facts".

The fact of the matter is I don't blame Bush for the failure of the levies. I blame him for the uncaring response to that failure. Uncaring in that he choose to remain on vacation while people were drowning, so that he could play golf, make speaches about Iraq, and refer to NO as a "temporary disruption". Temporary disruption while people are dying. He only got off his ass and did something about it when it became apparent there was going to be a political price to pay. Those are the facts.

[Spartan]

I haven't had a chance to read thorugh the previous 8 pages, but this is what I think- sorry if some of this has been said.

They mayor of NO is entirely too hot-tempered. I think he is more at fault than people are willing to admit. The governor seems to always be too slow to respond. I don't understand why the states didn't go ahead and say to the Fed: "Hey, we have a big mess coming up, go a head and get into position to come help." Makes sense to me. The President is certainly at fault too, but it is not his fault (oranyone else that is living) that the hurricane hit New Orleans, nor is it his fault that the city is located in the absolute worst place possible except maybe Venice, Italy.

I think that blaming just Bush is sheer ignorance. There are many more parties at fault than him.

[Gusterfell]

Amen, monsoon. Attacking your opponent is a sure sign that you know the opponent has won the debate.

It isn't the presidents job to respond to emergencies, it's FEMA's and if you'd look at that one post I quoted, you'd see how much they are screwing up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Once again, FEMA is a part of the executive branch of the federal government. Bush is the head of that branch. If FEMA screws up, the president is ultimately responsible. Just like in any other organization, the buck stops with the chief executive.

[Viper]

2 things.

1: I believe in personal responsibility. If I screw up, blaming my boss is completely irrational and pointless. It is then his job to fix it, yes, but it wasn't his fault I messed up. See how that works?

2: Read this please. I know it's lengthy but it if you like shared responsibility, you'll like this.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168567,00.html

[Gusterfell]

2 things.

1: I believe in personal responsibility.  If I screw up, blaming my boss is completely irrational and pointless.  It is then his job to fix it, yes, but it wasn't his fault I messed up.  See how that works?

I too believe in personal responsibility. On the eve of the D-Day invasion, FDR prepared two speeches. One, which he used, was for a successful invasion. In the other, for a failure, he himself took personal responsibility for the failure. He didn't blame his generals, he didn't say he couldn't have foreseen the strength of the enemy, or any other excuses. He said, in effect, 'I have failed you, and I'm sorry.' As we saw on Wednesday, Bush likes to compare himself to Roosevelt, so why isn't he leader enough to do the same?

2: Read this please.  I know it's lengthy but it if you like shared responsibility, you'll like this.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168567,00.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It sounds to me like O'Reilley wants to blame the Department of Homeland Security for being to large and cumbersome. I agree, but whose idea was it to combine all those different agencies into one department? I seem to remember Bush pushing very hard to create the DHS.

I've said before that I believe all levels of government failed here. However, I don't get to vote for the mayor of New Orleans or the governor of Louisiana. It is up to their constituents to decide whether or not they should be held responsible for those failures. As Americans, we must likewise decide to what extent the president and his administration failed, regardless of what local and state failures may have taken place.

[Viper]

I too believe in personal responsibility.  On the eve of the D-Day invasion, FDR prepared two speeches.  One, which he used, was for a successful invasion.  In the other, for a failure, he himself took personal responsibility for the failure.  He didn't blame his generals, he didn't say he couldn't have foreseen the strength of the enemy, or any other excuses.  He said, in effect, 'I have failed you, and I'm sorry.'  As we saw on Wednesday, Bush likes to compare himself to Roosevelt, so why isn't he leader enough to do the same?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

FDR was in a proactive environment, Bush is in a reactive environment.

Not just that but the war plan was DFRs, ot his generals. The Emergency Response policies ae not Bush's, they are FEMAS.

[sleepy]

FDR was in a proactive environment, Bush is in a reactive environment.

[Viper]

FEMA is an agency operating under the Secretary for Homeland Security, which is a cabinet level position.

The president appoints his cabinet secretaries--Homeland Security for example--and the president also appoints the head of FEMA.

Bush hired these people, no one else. 

Who is responsible for hiring the wrong people for the job?

Isn't it sort of Business 101?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK, glad you understand government structure but get this. Before Katrina, Michael Brown had done a very commendable job. 9/11, California fires and mudslides, 4 major hurricanes hitting Florida, Columbia Shuttle disaster...over 160 federal emergencies and everything was great. As far as everyone was concerned, Bush hired a great person for the role but now that something goes wrong, suddenly he's a bad director?

FEMA is in charge of the response.

Over 160 Federal Emergencies go off perfectly except this one. What happened to make this one so different?

^That right there is more important that trying to assign blame on a sitauation that cannot be pinpointed to any one person.

NO mayor waited

LA governor waited

Newt Gingrich says that there was too much red tape this time.

Everybody was waiting for answers from everybody else

[MikesLogic]

lol hate to add gasoline to this fire but had to share this, not sure if it has been posted or not.

FEMA sends evacuees to wrong Charleston

[UptownGrrl]

We all pay taxes, for the government to protect us

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But, what kind of protection? The government is capable of broad types of protection for the general public - national defense, safety-net economic programs, disease prevention research, etc. They're not action movie heroes who can guarantee anything to any one individual. Even "rights" so clear cut as to be written in the Constitution are eroded and trampled on a regular basis. Show me any government "promise" and I'll show you any number of people who managed to fall through that shield of protection. It's been a long time since the federal government has been the standard-bearer for efficiency and effectiveness.

I just think people need to be aware of the limitations of the government and manage their expectations, and change their behavior accordingly.

As has been said elsewhere, 9/11 was 10 square blocks, whereas Katrina turned 90,000 square miles into a disaster area. The government just can't fix that. Couldn't everyone have done better? Surely. Did Bush make bad choices - yes. Did the mayor make bad choices - yes. Did FEMA make bad choices - yes. Did people who stayed behind because the didn't consider the warnings to be as dire as they were intended, make bad choices - yes.

Certainly, there were people completely incapable of evacuation, but what about the decision by the people who could have evacuated, but didn't? They then took the resources that could have been more directly given to the most fragile.

In the final analysis, which single factor among hundreds of thousands created the tipping point to disaster?

For those calling for the head of FEMA to be fired or other such actions -- is that your guarantee that the next time something like this happens, the outcome will be different?

[rusthebuss]

Heh, so leaving citizens, yes Americans, to die on the streets is perferable to socialism?  I don't think so.  We all pay taxes, for the government to protect us and it is not unreasonable to expect the government to come in and assist people after a disaster (natural and/or manmade).  I find the cold disregard for the suffering of a segment of our society because they are getting government aid simply disgusting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How do welfare recepients pay taxes???? I don't think they do cause if they did they wouldn't be living in public housing and food stamps. The problem is that they are content in staying there. The govt tries to educate them but they don't want to be. I went to a high school in the ghetto and the ones that wanted out got out. There really is no excuse with all the money that is out there for poor people and the people that are there to show them how to get it. The major problem is they spend more time trying to play or break the system than becoming self suficient. Of course there are the few that just can't make it without govt. help and have no problem with my tax money going to assist them to live. 75% of them can work but are to busy sitting on the corner drinking forties and such. They want to make the quick money instead of putting in hard earned time in to earn it. I've heard multiple times that white people are stupid cause we don't try to play the system.

All in all the mayor of NO and the Govn. of LA dropped the ball point blank. They had city buses they could have driven them upstate away from the city. Also another thing that people don't want to say is that the crime is so bad in NO that no one wants to leave their houses cause they are scared it will be stolen. Most people wouldn't have left anyways because of material things and the others just to loot and run utter chaos across the city.

[RiversideGator]

To avoid being suspended again, I will post no more on this thread. I do want to leave y'all with a parting gift though: a column regarding the hurricane and its aftermath: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/commo...55E7583,00.html

[Charleston native]

lol hate to add gasoline to this fire but had to share this, not sure if it has been posted or not.

FEMA sends evacuees to wrong Charleston

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You've got to be frickin' kidding me!

Are people in government generally that dumb? Geographically, wouldn't it make more sense to see Charleston, South Carolina as the place to fly? I mean, it is a TAD bit closer than WV!

I don't absolve Bush for what happened. IMO, he was one day too late in calling in federal help. He gave the mayor and the governor plenty of leeway for them to do their job, and when they couldn't hack it, he should have immediately stepped in. Most companies work this way: the CEO allows his/her managers to do the job, and if they show ineptness in its completion, he/she will step in.

The point is, in referring to how proactive leadership should be, more of the blame should be pointed to local and state officials. You can find numerous examples of competant local and state governments that did a good job in hurricance preparedness, evacuations, and disaster reilef. With Hurricane Hugo, Charleston and SC officials made sure most people on the coast were evacuated, declared martial law to stop looters (BTW, looting was completely 100% prevented), and relief came in about 3-4 days later because most of the flood waters from the storm receded out of the city by then. Another example: since everybody's Bush-bashing, how about the president's brother Jeb Bush? Florida had 4 hurricanes in a 2-month period inflicting damage to many major cities, and yet the security and response were completely different to the sitation in NO...I think that shows tremendous proper management of local, state, and federal resources. He had far more to deal with than NO's mayor or LA's governor, and he still did a much better job!

All the liberals here need to be intellectually honest with what happened. I just wish we could all just forget these differences and concentrate on what is important: helping the survivors and their familes throughout the entire Gulf Coast.

[monsoon]

How do welfare recepients pay taxes???? I don't think they do cause if they did they wouldn't be living in public housing and food stamps. The problem is that they are content in staying there. The govt tries to educate them but they don't want to be. I went to a high school in the ghetto and the ones that wanted out got out. There really is no excuse with all the money that is out there for poor people and the people that are there to show them how to get it. The major problem is they spend more time trying to play or break the system than becoming self suficient. Of course there are the few that just can't make it without govt. help and have no problem with my tax money going to assist them to live. 75% of them can work but are to busy sitting on the corner drinking forties and such. They want to make the quick money instead of putting in hard earned time in to earn it. I've heard multiple times that white people are stupid cause we don't try to play the system......

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So are you suggesting these people should be punished and left to die because of their economic status? I don't see any other point for posting that in a thread about the government letting people die during a disaster. It is a very sad day in America when we are so selfish and cold that we treat our fellow citizens like this.

I am often amazed the same people that say they are supportive of Bush because of his moral values, then have this regard for the poor. "Oh they are lazy, they deserve it".

Maybe I am old fashioned but I am in the camp of putting America and Americans first and trying to help people to do better, rather than kicking them when they are down.

[rusthebuss]

So are you suggesting these people should be punished and left to die because of their economic status?  I don't see any other point for posting that in a thread about the government letting people die during a disaster.  It is a very sad day in America when we are so selfish and cold that we treat our fellow citizens like this. 

I am often amazed the same people that say they are supportive of Bush because of his moral values, then have this regard for the poor.  "Oh they are lazy, they deserve it". 

Maybe I am old fashioned but I am in the camp of putting America and Americans first and trying to help people to do better, rather than kicking them when they are down.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How do you get that from my statement. Please elloborate on it so I can understand how you got that! I don't want no one to suffer and never said that but i blame the mayor and the govenor for this not the president. The ball starts in local and state not the feds. The feds step in after the problem has occured. The mayor is trying to distract the peoples attention away from his screw up onto Bush. and same for the gov. of LA.

[Charleston native]

To avoid being suspended again, I will post no more on this thread.  I do want to leave y'all with a parting gift though: a column regarding the hurricane and its aftermath:  http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/commo...55E7583,00.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This article is dead on. Thanks man...it sure puts the correct perspective on this.

[rusthebuss]

This article is dead on. Thanks man...it sure puts the correct perspective on this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree. All this is, is a reason for the bush haters to point fingers with a bunch of false accusations. Why isn't the mayor or the govenor being blamed by the same libs attacking bush. Because it would make the libs look bad to speak bad on their own.

[prahaboheme]

anyone interested in what Jon Stuart has to say on this issue? Go here, watch the clip:

Jon Stuart

[Gusterfell]

I don't absolve Bush for what happened. IMO, he was one day too late in calling in federal help. He gave the mayor and the governor plenty of leeway for them to do their job, and when they couldn't hack it, he should have immediately stepped in. Most companies work this way: the CEO allows his/her managers to do the job, and if they show ineptness in its completion, he/she will step in.

There were warnings at least two days before the storm's impact that the city might very well flood. Do you really think it was reasonable to expect the local government to be equipped to handle that? The federal government should have started preparing for relief days before the storm, not days after.

I know that ordinarily it is a good idea to let local and state officials do their jobs. However, the Department of Homeland Secuity has the ability to declare a "situation of national consequence," which allows it to immediately step in and take over. Don't you think this qualifies?

To continue your analogy of a company: If the lower managers aren't able to handle a desperate situation and the CEO doesn't immediately step in (say he plays golf while the company collapses), don't you think the shareholders would be calling for his head?

Another example: since everybody's Bush-bashing, how about the president's brother Jeb Bush? Florida had 4 hurricanes in a 2-month period inflicting damage to many major cities, and yet the security and response were completely different to the sitation in NO...I think that shows tremendous proper management of local, state, and federal resources. He had far more to deal with than NO's mayor or LA's governor, and he still did a much better job!

Florida had a terrible hurricane season last year, but it experienced nothing like what New Orleans is going through. Sure there was plenty of destruction, but no major cities were destroyed. Also, don't you think that the governor being the president's brother had anything to do with the rapid availability of federal resources?

All the liberals here need to be intellectually honest with what happened.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Likewise the conservatives. All I hear from them is excuse after excuse for the most spectacular failure in the federal government's history. This administration has proven itself incapable of admitting a single mistake, and its supporters likewise turn their backs on any reality they don't like.

How do welfare recepients pay taxes???? I don't think they do cause if they did they wouldn't be living in public housing and food stamps. The problem is that they are content in staying there. The govt tries to educate them but they don't want to be. I went to a high school in the ghetto and the ones that wanted out got out. There really is no excuse with all the money that is out there for poor people and the people that are there to show them how to get it. The major problem is they spend more time trying to play or break the system than becoming self suficient. Of course there are the few that just can't make it without govt. help and have no problem with my tax money going to assist them to live. 75% of them can work but are to busy sitting on the corner drinking forties and such. They want to make the quick money instead of putting in hard earned time in to earn it. I've heard multiple times that white people are stupid cause we don't try to play the system.

The premise of that paragraph is the right-wing myth that virtually all of these people could get out of their poverty if they really wanted to. The implication is that they are too lazy to get out, so the government shouldn't help them. It seems to me that you're saying they don't deserve prompt federal disaster relief, because they didn't have to be too poor to help themselves.

All in all the mayor of NO and the Govn. of LA dropped the ball point blank. They had city buses they could have driven them upstate away from the city. Also another thing that people don't want to say is that the crime is so bad in NO that no one wants to leave their houses cause they are scared it will be stolen. Most people wouldn't have left anyways because of material things and the others just to loot and run utter chaos across the city.

Right... all those poor black people saw this as a chance to run amok now that the white man has left.... I'm sure that's what it was.

The vast majority of the looting was a result of being abandoned with absolutely no resources whatsoever. It was not the work of opportunist criminals.

Also, about all these buses the city had... Who was the mayor going to get to drive them? Where were they going to go? The mayor can't just call up another city and demand that thousands of his most destitute citizens be sheltered there for months.

[rusthebuss]

There were warnings at least two days before the storm's impact that the city might very well flood.  Do you really think it was reasonable to expect the local government to be equipped to handle that?  The federal government should have started preparing for relief days before the storm, not days after. 

I know that ordinarily it is a good idea to let local and state officials do their jobs.  However, the Department of Homeland Secuity has the ability to declare a "situation of national consequence," which allows it to immediately step in and take over.  Don't you think this qualifies?

To continue your analogy of a company:  If the lower managers aren't able to handle a desperate situation and the CEO doesn't immediately step in (say he plays golf while the company collapses),  don't you think the shareholders would be calling for his head?

Florida had a terrible hurricane season last year, but it experienced nothing like what New Orleans is going through.  Sure there was plenty of destruction, but no major cities were destroyed.  Also, don't you think that the governor being the president's brother had anything to do with the rapid availability of federal resources?

Likewise the conservatives.  All I hear from them is excuse after excuse for the most spectacular failure in the federal government's history.  This administration has proven itself incapable of admitting a single mistake, and its supporters likewise turn their backs on any reality they don't like.

The premise of that paragraph is the right-wing myth that virtually all of these people could get out of their poverty if they really wanted to.  The implication is that they are too lazy to get out, so the government shouldn't help them.  It seems to me that you're saying they don't deserve prompt federal disaster relief, because they didn't have to be too poor to help themselves.

Right... all those poor black people saw this as a chance to run amok now that the white man has left....  I'm sure that's what it was. 

The vast majority of the looting was a result of being abandoned with absolutely no resources whatsoever.  It was not the work of opportunist criminals.

Also, about all these buses the city had... Who was the mayor going to get to drive them?  Where were they going to go?  The mayor can't just call up another city and demand that thousands of his most destitute citizens be sheltered there for months.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow! The city should have worked with the LA Gov to move those people first of all. If the city needed the help they sure didn't ask for the help of the feds days before the storm either. Ball still dropped by the city and the state govt. My dad is from that town and they have extremely high crime rate so you take it how you will. If the crime rate is already high i wonder what was on their mind and also they aren't just stealing food they are stealing guns, TVs(there is no power to watch them) and just rapping innocent women. The same people are shooting at army corp of engineers contractors and national guardsman trying to help them. Those people shouldn't have to worry about being shot by the people they are trying to save. What excuse do you have for that?

[Gusterfell]

Wow! The city should have worked with the LA Gov to move those people first of all. If the city needed the help they sure didn't ask for the help of the feds days before the storm either. Ball still dropped by the city and the state govt.

Again, the DHS should have stepped in and coordinated what they knew would be among the most massive evacuations in history. The feds had the physical assets and the legal means to take control of the situation, and they didn't do it. When it became clear to everyone that the city and state were overwhelmed, they still didn't do it. Again, that is indefensable.

My dad is from that town and they have extremely high crime rate so you take it how you will. If the crime rate is already high i wonder what was on their mind and also they aren't just stealing food they are stealing guns, TVs(there is no power to watch them) and just rapping innocent women.

There were horrible thinngs going on after the fact, sure. I'm not saying these were wholesome people. However, I still find it absurd to suggest that most of these people chose to stay behind specifically to rape and loot. maybe a handful did, but why punish the rest for that?

The same people are shooting at army corp of engineers contractors and national guardsman trying to help them. Those people shouldn't have to worry about being shot by the people they are trying to save. What excuse do you have for that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Reality time... The contractors were shot by NO police officers, and the "helicopters being shot at" story was retracted days ago.

[rusthebuss]

The NO police shot the guys that were shooting at the contractors.

[Gusterfell]

You're right about that... I misread the article.

[rusthebuss]

I really wish people would put the politics aside just long enough to get this disaster fixed. We know everytime we make something like this is turns into a political war towards the end. I try to express myself without insulting people.