He said it better than I could...

[Jessica]

Nick Coleman: The new American experiment: No heart
Nick Coleman, Star Tribune
September 9, 2005

Everyone is playing the blame game on Hurricane Katrina and New Orleans, and we at the top end of the Mississippi River can join the fun by pointing fingers close to home.
Part of what drowned New Orleans is a political ideology determined to shrink government and ignore scientific evidence of global warming. Well, "stuff" flows downhill, and some of those tainted ideas came straight from Minnesota.
Take a 1998 publication of the Center of the American Experiment, a conservative think tank in Minneapolis that has pooh-poohed global warming and pushed for "limited government." To some folks, that means government should cut taxes on the rich instead of wasting money on flood levees.
The results of such recent American Experiments are on view in New Orleans, where the most effective government initiatives have come in the form of supplying body bags and restricting journalists from recording images of the human costs of government inaction.
In "Global Warming: Divided Science and Unfounded Policy" (and many other papers) the center argued that even if global warming is real, the cost of fighting it is too high. Cutting back on emissions (by agreeing to the Kyoto Protocols), the report contended, would put a damper on the economic wealth that will save us from hurricanes that might take lots of lives in poorer countries but not here, by gum.
The piece was written by David W. Riggs, formerly a senior fellow at the center. Riggs now rails against global warming from the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a right-wing think tank in Washington, D.C., whose mission is preventing environmental concerns from interfering with business.
Fatality lists might be "tragically long" in Bangladesh, Riggs wrote. But storm fatalities in the U.S. -- even with global warming -- would be "few" because "our economic well-being reduces our exposure to risk and facilitates recuperation when disaster strikes."
Quoting another author, Riggs explains: "The wealth of our society makes it possible for people to incur the expenses of relocation."
Oh, really? Tell that to the people who drowned in nursing homes while waiting for help from "emergency" agencies that moved like molasses in January. Tell it to all the babies who have lost their mothers. Tell it to all those who hungered and thirsted and prayed and begged for help.
Once upon a time, Americans pledged each other their lives, their fortunes and their honor. Then those who hate government came to govern.
During the tragedy in New Orleans they stood by while poor people died, behaving like the fortunate folks in first class on the Titanic who rested on the oars of their half-empty lifeboats -- safely distancing themselves from the shouts and screams of steerage passengers until the waters quieted.
The destruction of New Orleans is a travesty of injustice and indifference that will haunt us for years, fueled by the blindness of ideologues who think global warming is good and government is bad and who don't see poor people in the path of destruction until they float to the surface.
In the past days, I have heard Fox News' Bill O'Reilly say you shouldn't count on government to protect you. I have heard radio's Rush Limbaugh say that expecting the government to build levees is an example of a welfare mentality. I have heard many ideological zealots excuse the appalling failure to save the sick, the elderly, the children, by shrugging their well-tailored shoulders and saying there is a limit on what government should do and the private sector should be called upon first.
Here's what they mean: Them that has big wheels and wallets can get out. Them that don't must sink or float.
That is not America. That is our stereotype of Bangladesh. But even Bangladesh works better in a disaster than we do.
I have a suggestion for another American Experiment. If anyone still thinks government should not be responsible for saving people, let's lock them in an attic where water is rising to the roof. Without an ax.
There are no atheists in foxholes. And there wouldn't be any government-haters in that attic, praying not to be saved by a firefighter who draws his pay from the public till.
Nick Coleman is at ncoleman@startribune.com.

[jmarie]

*YAWN*

You could have probably said it a lot better.
Joyce

[zwieback]

*YAWN*

You could have probably said it a lot better.
Joyce

I've asked this before in another thread but, I'll ask it again here. Seems as though no one on the Bush side of it can answer this question. To me, it doesn't seem like a very hard question but, why is it that the federal government (and yes, that's including the HEAD of the fed govt -- W) doesn't or shouldn't assume any responsibility in this disaster?

We all know that the local governments share some responsibility. Why not the federal government???? Can anyone answer that question??

[Jessica]

We all know that the local governments share some responsibility. Why not the federal government???? Can anyone answer that question??

Not so's you'd notice.

[ttubbs]

There may be things the federal government and W have done badly. Has anyone on the right really claimed total innocence? I do think a lot of the stuff being flung at them all over the news currently is crap though. I see the biggest different between the left and right view on this is that the left wants to start and stop assessing blame with the federal government, and the right thinks the assessment needs to start with the individual and go up the chain from there.

[Escher]

why is it that the federal government (and yes, that's including the HEAD of the fed govt -- W) doesn't or shouldn't assume any responsibility in this disaster?

We all know that the local governments share some responsibility. Why not the federal government???? Can anyone answer that question??


I can. The Federal Government does and should share in ther reponsibility for their response to this disaster. After all, no human agency is the actual _cause_ of the disaster. Well, you could argue about the levies needing to be improved, but the direct cause of the disaster is nature. Anyhow, I digress.

Beyond obvious partisanship, conservatives would have another motive for downplaying the responsibility at the federal level. Well, conservatives like me, anyhow--I can hardly speak for everyone. Anyhow, responsibility for _anything_ should be minimal at the top (Federal) and maximum at the bottom (Personal) level.

So, the responsibility for protecting my home and my health is prioritized like this:

1) Me. The most responsible person. I am most able to directly position myself out of harms way. I am the most efficient at providing myself care, as I have the most vested.
2) My Family. If for some reason I am unable to protect myself, my family bears the responsibility for assisting me.
3) My Neighbors/Church/Employer. This oft overlooked group can also play an important role in assisting it's members.
4) My City. In this case, New Orleans had the responsibility of maintaining it's levees and evacuating any citizens unable to move otherwise--including citizens under it's care, like the jails, instead of just cutting the criminals loose
5) My County. Obviously, moving all those folks was bigger than NO could handle. However, once you reach this level, things like "policy" and "law" can start to become major hinderences.
6) My State. Really, really big issues need massive resources. States can provide that.
7) My Country. The least responsible agency. Moves with the speed of a slug with cement shoes, and has the precision of a sledgehammer. Woefully inefficient. Does, however, command resources on a tremendous scale.

So, there, I've answered your strawman argument.

[Grace]

Love it, love it, LOVE IT! You speak for me too, Escher!! :D

Slug with cement shoes!!! :D :D :D :D

[Tizzylish]

To me, it doesn't seem like a very hard question but, why is it that the federal government (and yes, that's including the HEAD of the fed govt -- W) doesn't or shouldn't assume any responsibility in this disaster?



Because it was a natural disaster. Why should Bush, the feds, the locals or anyone take blame for a natural disaster? It is the before/and after disaster that we need to talk about.

We all know that the local governments share some responsibility. Why not the federal government???? Can anyone answer that question??

Some of the responsibility???? How about pretty much all of the responsibility before and after, Nagin and Blanco should be ashamed of themselves and removed from office. As to Bush, not sure exactly what he should be blamed for, if you have instances post them and I'd be happy to discuss them. If I read Bush denied aid, or didn't do what he was supposed to do, I would be happy to assess blame.

Here is the reason why I believe blame should be held at the state level first:

Bush made aid available 2 DAYS before the hurricane hit, 2 DAYS. Blanco did nothing with it. Nagin went onto advise those who couldn't get out to goto the Superdome, and bring enough food for about 3 days, which citizens didn't, then he did nothing to ensure those people would be fed. NOTHING. He didn't stock the Superdome, the National Guard supplied pallettes of food and not at Nagins request.

After the storm, the Red Cross was at the ready to lend aid, and the STATE officials didn't want them to come in and help, From an article I've read and a video I've seen state officials told the Red Cross not to enter the city because they were trying to get residents out, not encourage them to stay, because most of the city was still under water, and because armed gangs of looters were in the streets. Marsha Evans, president of the American Red Cross, said the agency was ready to go in. Its volunteers understood the danger and were willing to do their jobs.

Also, the Mayor emerged THURSDAY to say:

interviewer: What do you need right now to get control of this situation?

NAGIN: I need reinforcements, I need troops, man. I need 500 buses, man. We ain't talking about -- you know, one of the briefings we had, they were talking about getting public school bus drivers to come down here and bus people out here.

I'm like, "You got to be kidding me. This is a national disaster. Get every doggone Greyhound bus line in the country and get their asses moving to New Orleans."

That's -- they're thinking small, man. And this is a major, major, major deal. And I can't emphasize it enough, man. This is crazy.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/09/02/nagin.transcript/

What's crazy is he says the "they're thinking small" did you see the picture of all the school buses under water? Or the pictures of the buses in dry land a few miles from the superdome? Any idea how many people could have been bused out before the storm? There are also transcripts from a June 2005 meeting where they discussed this exact thing, making school buses ready for hurricane evacuation. Which obviously shows that there was NO plan in place to get the poor out. I read that even hospitals were exempted from the mayor's mandatory evacuation order. Hospitals.

Excerpt from Houston Chronicle:
Saturday evening, Hurricane Katrina had intensified to Category 4, with the possibility that it could strike land as a killer Category 5 storm.

About 8 p.m., Mayor Nagin fielded an unusual personal call at home from Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center, who wanted to be sure Nagin knew what was coming.

Still, Nagin waited to issue a mandatory evacuation, apparently because of legal complications, said Frazier. She said the city attorney was unavailable for an interview to explain.

But Kris Wartelle, spokeswoman for the attorney general of Louisiana, said state law clearly gives the mayor the authority to "direct and compel the evacuation of all or part of the population from any stricken or threatened area."

"They're not confused about it. He had the authority to do it," Wartelle said.

The mandatory evacuation order came at 10 a.m Sunday.

The bottom line is this, Louisiana state officials had the ultimate responsibility for evacuation plans before the storm hits, rescues, and evacuations after the storm hits, this is not the federal governments responsibility. The state failed miserably and should be held accountable.

[badunnin]

Because it was a natural disaster. Why should Bush, the feds, the locals or anyone take blame for a natural disaster? It is the before/and after disaster that we need to talk about.




I would assume that in this context, the "disaster" being referred to are the events leading up to and following the hurricane/levee breaks.

[badunnin]

Because it was a natural disaster. Why should Bush, the feds, the locals or anyone take blame for a natural disaster? It is the before/and after disaster that we need to talk about.



Some of the responsibility???? How about pretty much all of the responsibility before and after, Nagin and Blanco should be ashamed of themselves and removed from office. As to Bush, not sure exactly what he should be blamed for, if you have instances post them and I'd be happy to discuss them. If I read Bush denied aid, or didn't do what he was supposed to do, I would be happy to assess blame.

Here is the reason why I believe blame should be held at the state level first:

Bush made aid available 2 DAYS before the hurricane hit, 2 DAYS. Blanco did nothing with it. Nagin went onto advise those who couldn't get out to goto the Superdome, and bring enough food for about 3 days, which citizens didn't, then he did nothing to ensure those people would be fed. NOTHING. He didn't stock the Superdome, the National Guard supplied pallettes of food and not at Nagins request.


This was previously posted by Kristin, courtesy of Fox News.


Wednesday, Aug. 24:

— Tropical Depression 12 strengthens into Tropical Storm Katrina over the Central Bahamas; a hurricane warning is issued for the southeastern Florida coast.

Thursday, Aug. 25:

— Hurricane Katrina strikes Florida between Hallandale Beach and North Miami Beach as a Category 1 hurricane with 80 mph winds.

Friday, Aug. 26:

— Katrina weakens over land to a tropical storm before moving out over the Gulf of Mexico. It grows to a Category 2 hurricane with 100 mph winds, veering north and west toward Mississippi and Louisiana.

— 10,000 National Guard troops are dispatched across the Gulf Coast.

Saturday, Aug. 27:

— Eleven people dead in Florida from hurricane-related causes.

— Katrina becomes a Category 3 storm, with 115 mph winds; a hurricane warning is issued for Louisiana's southeastern coast, including New Orleans and Lake Pontchartrain, and for the northern Gulf coast.

— New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin declares a state of emergency and urges residents in low-lying areas to evacuate.

— Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour declares a state of emergency. A mandatory evacuation is ordered for Hancock County.

— Coastal Gulf residents jam freeways and gas stations as they rush to evacuate.

Sunday, Aug. 28:

— Katrina grows into a Category 5 storm with 160 mph winds and heads for the northern Gulf coast.

— Nagin orders a mandatory evacuation for New Orleans. But 10 shelters are also set up, including the Superdome, for those unable to leave.

— Evacuation orders are posted all along the Mississippi coast.

— Alabama Gov. Bob Riley declares a state of emergency.

Monday, Aug. 29:

— Katrina, a Category 4 hurricane with 145 mph winds, makes landfall near Buras, La., at 6:10 a.m. CDT (7:10 a.m. EDT).

— President Bush makes emergency disaster declarations for Louisiana and Mississippi, freeing up federal funds.

— Katrina rips two holes in the Superdome's roof. Some 10,000 storm refugees are inside.

— At least eight Gulf Coast refineries shut down or reduce operations.

— Airports close in New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Biloxi, Mobile and Pensacola. Hundreds of flights are canceled or diverted.

Tuesday, Aug. 30:

— The hurricane death toll in Mississippi rises to more than 100.

— Two levees break in New Orleans and water pours in, covering 80 percent of the city and rising to 20 feet deep in some areas. Many people climb onto roofs to escape.

— Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco says everyone still in New Orleans — an estimated 50,000 to 100,000 people — must be evacuated. Crowds swell at the Superdome and the New Orleans convention center.

— Rescuers in helicopters and boats pick up hundreds of stranded people in New Orleans. Reports of looting emerge.

— About 40,000 people are in American Red Cross shelters, not including New Orleans.

— Bush cuts short his vacation to focus on the storm damage.

Wednesday, Aug.31:

— Nagin offers a startling estimate of New Orleans' death toll: "Minimum, hundreds. Most likely, thousands," he says.

— "At first light, the devastation is greater than our worst fears," says Blanco, Louisiana's governor.

— The looting grows exponentially. Thieves use a forklift to smash into one pharmacy. Blanco asks the White House to send more people. New Orleans police are called off search-and-rescue missions to combat out-of-control looting.

— Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt declares a federal health emergency throughout the Gulf Coast, sends in medical supplies and workers.

— Army Corps of Engineers estimates it will be at least 30 days or more before New Orleans will be pumped out.

— Bush authorizes a draw-down from the nation's Strategic Petroleum reserve.

— Gasoline prices surge above $3 a gallon and shortages crop up.

— Five offshore Louisiana oil rigs are reported missing and two more are adrift.

— An estimated 52,000 people are in Red Cross shelters. An additional 25,000 are in the Superdome, where conditions are worsening by the hour.

— An exodus from the Superdome begins, with the first buses leaving for Houston's Astrodome, 350 miles away.

— Pentagon mounts one of largest search-and-rescue operations in U.S. history, sending four Navy ships with emergency supplies.

— Water levels stop rising in New Orleans. Engineers work to close a 500-foot gap in a failed floodwall.

Thursday, Sept. 1:

— Looting, carjacking and other violence spreads, and the military decides to increase National Guard deployment to 30,000.

— Outside the New Orleans Convention Center, the sidewalks are packed with people without food, water or medical care, waiting for buses that do not come. Tempers flare.

— Nagin, the New Orleans mayor, calls the situation critical and issues "a desperate SOS" for more buses.

— Crowds at the Superdome swell to 30,000 with another 25,000 at the convention center. The first refugee buses arrive at the Houston Astrodome. Elsewhere, 76,000 people are Red Cross shelters.

— Violence escalates. Rescue boats are stolen by marauders, shots are fired at helicopters evacuating hospital patients.

— Doctors at two New Orleans hospitals plead for help, saying food, water and power are almost gone. Helicopters evacuate up to 600 patients but an estimated 1,500 others remain stranded.

— The death toll in Mississippi hits 126.

— Bush asks his father and former President Clinton to lead a fund-raising campaign for hurricane victims.

— Texas agrees to take in 75,000 hurricane evacuees.

— Six hundred massive sand bags arrive to help shore up New Orleans' broken levees.

Friday, Sept 2:

— Bush tours hard-hit Gulf coast areas and acknowledges the failure so far of government hurricane relief efforts. "The results are not acceptable," he says.

— Thousands of National Guardsmen arrive in New Orleans in truck convoys carrying food, water and weapons.

— Congress approves $10.5 billion to cover the immediate rescue and relief efforts.

— The United States and European nations tap oil-and-gasoline stockpiles for 2 million barrels a day, hoping to stem gas shortages.

— Explosions rock a chemical storage plant in New Orleans and other scattered fires break out.

— Fifteen airlines get permission to fly up to 25,000 refugees out of New Orleans to San Antonio.

— Texas opens two more giant centers for victims after the Astrodome fills up. States as far away as Utah, West Virginia, Wyoming and Michigan offer to accept refugees.

— More than 50 nations pledge hurricane assistance.

Saturday, Sept. 3:

— Bush orders more than 7,000 active duty forces to the Gulf Coast.

— More than 25,000 residents have evacuated from New Orleans since Friday, the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency says.

— Coast Guard says has it has rescued 9,500 people since Katrina hit.

[newtricks]

Beyond obvious partisanship, conservatives would have another motive for downplaying the responsibility at the federal level. Well, conservatives like me, anyhow--I can hardly speak for everyone. Anyhow, responsibility for _anything_ should be minimal at the top (Federal) and maximum at the bottom (Personal) level.

So, the responsibility for protecting my home and my health is prioritized like this:

1) Me. The most responsible person. I am most able to directly position myself out of harms way. I am the most efficient at providing myself care, as I have the most vested.
2) My Family. If for some reason I am unable to protect myself, my family bears the responsibility for assisting me.
3) My Neighbors/Church/Employer. This oft overlooked group can also play an important role in assisting it's members.
4) My City. In this case, New Orleans had the responsibility of maintaining it's levees and evacuating any citizens unable to move otherwise--including citizens under it's care, like the jails, instead of just cutting the criminals loose
5) My County. Obviously, moving all those folks was bigger than NO could handle. However, once you reach this level, things like "policy" and "law" can start to become major hinderences.
6) My State. Really, really big issues need massive resources. States can provide that.
7) My Country. The least responsible agency. Moves with the speed of a slug with cement shoes, and has the precision of a sledgehammer. Woefully inefficient. Does, however, command resources on a tremendous scale.

So, there, I've answered your strawman argument.

So, as a conservative, do you feel any anger at *this* administration? The one that created a whole new department using billions and billions of dollars which is supposed to protect American citizens? Whilst in America? In my view Hurricane Katrina showed the Dept of Homeland Security to be a big fat freakin' failure. So although this may be a veer from the original question about "blame" isn't anyone disappointed with the Federal response?

I sort of agree theoretically with what you're saying but think that one of the largest natural disaster in our history maybe called for a federal response. Just maybe it was a little too much for the locals.

[Grace]

I've posted this before, but by Bush declaring the area a Federal Disaster Area TWO DAYS ahead, he gave Gov. Blanco carte blanche to order up whatever help she wanted or needed!!! It's incumbent upon her (or she could appoint someone if she didn't feel qualified to handle it herself) to call and ask for what she wanted!! The President called her from Crawford Texas to urge her to call for a complete evacuation - she didn't heed his advice!! It's not the Feds responsibility to go there ahead of time and just "take over" everything and decide what needs to be done and go over the heads of the local officials and just do it. If the local officials had worked the system the way it is set up (whether you like how it's set up or not), this wouldn't have happened. They had every opportunity to ask for all kinds of help in advance and they didn't take advantage of any of those opportunities. They just figured everything would be OK after the storm. Then when it wasn't, the poor planning on their part then constituted an emergency on everyone else's part, and now they blame everyone else for their poor planning.

[newtricks]

I've posted this before, but by Bush declaring the area a Federal Disaster Area TWO DAYS ahead, he gave Gov. Blanco carte blanche to order up whatever help she wanted or needed!!! It's incumbent upon her (or she could appoint someone if she didn't feel qualified to handle it herself) to call and ask for what she wanted!! The President called her from Crawford Texas to urge her to call for a complete evacuation - she didn't heed his advice!! It's not the Feds responsibility to go there ahead of time and just "take over" everything and decide what needs to be done and go over the heads of the local officials and just do it. If the local officials had worked the system the way it is set up (whether you like how it's set up or not), this wouldn't have happened. They had every opportunity to ask for all kinds of help in advance and they didn't take advantage of any of those opportunities. They just figured everything would be OK after the storm. Then when it wasn't, the poor planning on their part then constituted an emergency on everyone else's part, and now they blame everyone else for their poor planning.

You're talking about this as if it was a downtown fire. I don't get the sense from you or the response that anyone in the Federal gov't was even saying to themselves "well, just in case the levees do break we better be ready or have a plan ourselves". Isn't that what Homeland Security is supposed to be there for. Isn't that what Bush himself created - a FEDERAL agency of protection?? So why is it OK that it failed? I really don't get it.

[Grace]

Because it's clearly understood that when an unplanned disaster happens - as in a terrorist bombing (no one has advance notice that it's coming), it's clear from the beginning who's responsible (the Feds have a plan to react to that). When a disaster that's known about ahead of time happens, it's understood that the area government knows what they are doing to prepare for it and have things under control, and when the President calls the Governor ahead of time to say, here's carte blanche - order up whatever you need from us (he didn't need to call her directly - I would say he was being VERY proactive in doing that), he assumes that she's not a nit wit and knows what she's doing. Why would he assume that she didn't? She knows more about who's still left in the city and exactly where they are than he does, she knows what local resources she has as in supplies and manpower (he doesn't have that information readily available like she does) and if she says, "We're fine, thanks", what's he supposed to do?

I'm not saying AT ALL that the Feds have no responsibility in this. I'm saying that the way the system is set up, the locals have all the power to get everything squared away, get all the Federal help they need and want lined up both before the disaster and afterwards. If they had done that and the Feds didn't deliver, I would say that would be a HUMONGOUS failure and I'd be screaming right along with everyone else.

The local officials basically did nothing whatsoever while all along the Feds thought things were being handled (based on the discussions they'd had with the Governor ahead of time who said, "no thanks, we don't need anything at this point"). When it became clear that that wasn't the case, it DID take them about 24 hours too long to respond, I'll concede that. But it's not like they were supposed to be doing something from the beginning and just didn't. That's just not the case at all.

[zwieback]

On Friday, Aug. 26, Gov. Kathleen Blanco (Gov. of Louisiana), declared a state of emergency and requested troop assistance.

On Saturday, Aug. 27, Gov. Blanco declared a federal state of emergency, which gives federal officials the authority to get involved.

The feds were given the authority to "take over."

By the way, when I posted earlier, by saying "this disaster" I meant the response and everything that has happened after the hurricane. Certainly, it isn't anyone's fault that a hurricane struck. Yes, it was a natural disaster. But, the things that happened after are man made disasters.

[zwieback]

The local officials basically did nothing whatsoever while all along the Feds thought things were being handled (based on the discussions they'd had with the Governor ahead of time who said, "no thanks, we don't need anything at this point").

I wouldn't necessarily call this "basically doing nothing":
Timeline

Friday, Aug. 26: Gov. Kathleen Blanco declares a state of emergency in Louisiana and requests troop assistance.


Saturday, Aug. 27: Gov. Blanco asks for federal state of emergency. A federal emergency is declared giving federal officials the authority to get involved.


Sunday, Aug. 28: Mayor Ray Nagin orders mandatory evacuation of New Orleans. President Bush warned of Levee failure by National Hurricane Center. National Weather Service predicts area will be "uninhabitable" after Hurricane arrives. First reports of water toppling over the levee appear in local paper.

Monday, Aug. 29: Levee breaches and New Orleans begins to fill with water, Bush travels to Arizona and California to discuss Medicare. FEMA chief finally responds to federal emergency, dispatching employees but giving them two days to arrive on site.


Tuesday, Aug. 30: Mass looting reported, security shortage cited in New Orleans. Pentagon says that local authorities have adequate National Guard units to handle hurricane needs despite governor's earlier request. Bush returns to Crawford for final day of vacation. TV coverage is around-the-clock Hurricane news.

Wednesday, Aug. 31: Tens of thousands trapped in New Orleans including at Convention Center and Superdome in "medieval" conditions. President Bush finally returns to Washington to establish a task force to coordinate federal response. Local authorities run out of food and water supplies.

Thursday, Sept. 1: New Orleans descends into anarchy. New Orleans Mayor issues a "Desperate SOS" to federal government. Bush claims nobody predicted the breach of the levees despite multiple warnings and his earlier briefing.

Friday, Sept. 2: Karl Rove begins Bush administration campaign to blame state and local officials—despite their repeated requests for help. Bush stages a photo-op—diverting Coast Guard helicopters and crew to act as backdrop for cameras. Levee repair work orchestrated for president's visit and White House press corps.

Saturday, Sept. 3: Bush blames state and local officials. Senior administration official (possibly Rove) caught in a lie claiming Gov. Blanco had not declared a state of emergency or asked for help.

Monday, Sept. 5: New Orleans officials begin to collect their dead.

(Adapted from: Katrina Timeline, http://thinkprogress.org/katrina-timeline/ )

[jmarie]

It is my understanding that the Red Cross was poised to go into New Orleans, as soon as the wind stopped blowing. They already had the trucks full, ready to go.

BUT, The Homeland Security asked them not to come because they said that they needed the stranded to leave. They did not want them brought the food, water and blankets so that they would leave the Super Dome. The Red Cross had time to respond, but couldn't and according to the news report that I heard, there is an investigation regarding this.


Then the levees broke and the rest is history. I found this on the Red Cross Website.

Hurricane Katrina: Why is the Red Cross not in New Orleans?


Access to New Orleans is controlled by the National Guard and local authorities and while we are in constant contact with them, we simply cannot enter New Orleans against their orders.

The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city.

The Red Cross has been meeting the needs of thousands of New Orleans residents in some 90 shelters throughout the state of Louisiana and elsewhere since before landfall. All told, the Red Cross is today operating 149 shelters for almost 93,000 residents.

The Red Cross shares the nation’s anguish over the worsening situation inside the city. We will continue to work under the direction of the military, state and local authorities and to focus all our efforts on our lifesaving mission of feeding and sheltering.

The Red Cross does not conduct search and rescue operations. We are an organization of civilian volunteers and cannot get relief aid into any location until the local authorities say it is safe and provide us with security and access.

The original plan was to evacuate all the residents of New Orleans to safe places outside the city. With the hurricane bearing down, the city government decided to open a shelter of last resort in the Superdome downtown. We applaud this decision and believe it saved a significant number of lives.

As the remaining people are evacuated from New Orleans, the most appropriate role for the Red Cross is to provide a safe place for people to stay and to see that their emergency needs are met. We are fully staffed and equipped to handle these individuals once they are evacuated.

So everyone asks why I don't blame Bush? Because this was bipartisan.
Democrats and Republicans alike shoulder the blame. (Yes, this is what this is about, Bush haters taking another swipe, using this disaster as their means to do so.)

I really blame the hurricane....but that is beside the point. No one wants to talk about the hurricane's role and responsibility in all of this and I won't beleagure you with it now.
Joyce

[Escher]

So, as a conservative, do you feel any anger at *this* administration? The one that created a whole new department using billions and billions of dollars which is supposed to protect American citizens? Whilst in America?

Yes, I do. I inherently think that most expansion of government at the Federal level is misguided at best and dangerous at worst. But if you think the Democrats wouldn't have created a similar department (or larger) after 9/11 you are kidding yourself. My first reaction after 9/11 was the desire to nuke Mecca. After that feeling subsided, I realized that civil liberties were about to decrease, and the federal govt was going to increase. It was inevitable whether Bush or Gore was in office. But to directly answer your question, yes, I am angry at this administration over several things.

Actually, the thing I am most angry w/ this administration is the successful push for the prescription drug program, but noone really cares about that, and it hardly got any press. One can't responsibly cut taxes while increasing entitlements. That was a betrayal of conservative principals.

[luv2run]

it DID take them about 24 hours too long to respond, I'll concede that. But it's not like they were supposed to be doing something from the beginning and just didn't. That's just not the case at all.
How would you feel if one of your loved ones died in that "24 hours too long" that it took W to respond?
Or what if you were a nurse or doctor who watched countless die in that "24 hours too long"?

I'm sure that "24 hours too long" seemed like an eternity.

[Grace]

????? I conceded your point? What more exactly would you like from me? Concede means to agree that you're right on that point, just in case you weren't sure. So what more you're exactly trying to convince me of, I'm not sure.

[luv2run]

????? I conceded your point? What more exactly would you like from me? Concede means to agree that you're right on that point, just in case you weren't sure. So what more you're exactly trying to convince me of, I'm not sure.
I'm trying to convince you that conceding he waited 24 hours too long means he is clearly responsible for countless lives. That would make me question his leadership and you don't seem to have done that. How can you defend a man whose lack of insight has cost lives of innocent people?

[Grace]

I would defend anyone who I felt was being unfairly accused. I believe MANY people are responsible for what happened to those poor people who suffered, not just President Bush. He's responsible for HIS part, Governor Blanco is responsible for HER even bigger failures (since it's HER responsibility to get everything planned, set up and executed) and I also blame Mayor Nagin who was the one closest to the people who were truly unable to get themselves out, and to provide proper care at the Superdome, which he did not. They didn't even have hospital evacuation plans. Nothing. I don't blame Bush for that at all.

I blame the Bush Administration for being slow to respond when, IMO, they should have either never been needed at all (if the Mayor and Governor had done their jobs properly from the beginning and evacuated everyone properly since that was THEIR job), or, if the Governor had anticipated her needs a little better (and who knows a state's needs better than it's biggest city's mayor and the state's governor?? I mean, that's WHY the system is set up that way! THEY know their people and problems best!!), the Feds could have been called in ahead of time and gotten prepared early. Again, not the Feds job to coordinate that. But again, I do wonder why it took them at least 24 hours too long to arrive and get going. And I will be listening intently to find the answers to that. And I'm sure I won't be happy about what I hear.

I was watching a show about hurricanes today on the History channel (or was it Discovery?) Anyway, it was made several years ago, long before this whole fiasco with Katrina. They reported specifically who's job it was to evacuate people and to call in help. They said that ALL of that responsibility lies in the hands of the Governor. I wanted to tape that part and play it for everyone. The fact that people have no problem overlooking this whole aspect drives ME as crazy as your perceived lack of blame for Bush drives you.

There are plenty of things I disagree with Bush on. Things like the border, things like the environment and several others. I absolutely do not think he's great in all aspects. But conversely I do not feel the need to find fault with absolutely every single thing he does or says. I try to look at each situation on it's own merits and judge him on his actions in THAT situation. There are things I agree with him on 100% and support him on.

Many people on this board don't just disagree with him on policy or performance, but they demean him personally, blame him for anything and everything just because they want to believe it (it fuels their hate for the man), and I refuse to join in on that and I find it disgusting.

[honeygirl1971]

As usual, Grace's posts are repetitive and somewhat inaccurate, and usually I find it pointless to bother correcting them, but let me just say that from what I've read on this board recently, it is precisely in terms of POLICY and PERFORMANCE that BBers are attacking Bush. I haven't read one single "personal" attack here, no matter how much some people may or may not dislike him personally.

And as for everyone that thinks that all problems related to catastrophic natural disasters should be able to be handled by local authorities instead of FEMA et al., I only hope you never have to experience a natural disaster of this magnitude. Some things are just too enormous to be handled by local governments with limited resources, and I certainly think a category 5 hurricane belongs in this category.

[Grace]

Nice and pompous. Just like your usual. You're the only one who knows anything, and if we disagree with you, it's not that we see things from a different perspective, it's that we who disagree are wrong and you're RIGHT. :rolleyes: I didn't say FEMA had no business handling disasters (your spin on what I said). I said it was the local authorities job to coordinate their needs with FEMA and "order up" (for lack of a better term) whatever they need from FEMA in advance, or even simply turning things over to FEMA if they didn't feel qualified or prepared to handle things themselves. That didn't happen.

And if you think no one here has posted personal attacks about Bush then you haven't been reading the same things I have.

[Andrea_2]

I agree fully that the local authorities had responsibilities, and that they failed miserably in carrying those out. The problem I have with Bush is that he just sat back essentially saying "it's not my job". I know the president has many responsibilities and can't get involved in every issue that comes up in the country, however when something of this magnitude comes up, where an entire major US city is facing destruction, he really has to get involved. If the local authorities were failing, then he should have stepped in and done something about it.

[Escher]

I agree fully that the local authorities had responsibilities, and that they failed miserably in carrying those out. The problem I have with Bush is that he just sat back essentially saying "it's not my job". I know the president has many responsibilities and can't get involved in every issue that comes up in the country, however when something of this magnitude comes up, where an entire major US city is facing destruction, he really has to get involved. If the local authorities were failing, then he should have stepped in and done something about it.


But then he'd have people like me upset at him for even FURTHER expanding the Federal role. And Bush fears Escher. Big time.

[newtricks]

Yes, I do. I inherently think that most expansion of government at the Federal level is misguided at best and dangerous at worst. But if you think the Democrats wouldn't have created a similar department (or larger) after 9/11 you are kidding yourself. My first reaction after 9/11 was the desire to nuke Mecca. After that feeling subsided, I realized that civil liberties were about to decrease, and the federal govt was going to increase. It was inevitable whether Bush or Gore was in office. But to directly answer your question, yes, I am angry at this administration over several things.

Actually, the thing I am most angry w/ this administration is the successful push for the prescription drug program, but noone really cares about that, and it hardly got any press. One can't responsibly cut taxes while increasing entitlements. That was a betrayal of conservative principals.

I'm not comparing Bush to Democrats, I'm comparing him to conservatives. I'm signing your song, Escher. This is why I begged my parents not to vote for him.; He's not a conservative, not fiscally at least.

Sorry for the highjack. What is this thread about again? ;)