Bush: The Disaster President

[mirror]

The Disaster President

As the fourth anniversary of September 11 approached, Americans were increasingly disquieted by the costly quagmire in Iraq, rising gas prices and an economy that benefits only CEOs. Then the destruction visited upon the Gulf Coast by Hurricane Katrina, and the grossly negligent government response to the flooding that followed, exposed the full scope of George W. Bush's misrule. The failures were so outrageous they roused even our embedded media from its slumbers.

But the incompetence revealed by the response to the hurricane is deep-rooted, and can be traced to the twenty-five-year project, begun in the Reagan era, of discrediting government, "starving the beast" of resources and exalting private markets and faith-based charities. Tax cuts for the wealthy and Congressional corruption have drained government of the imagination and resources to address human needs. Katrina has brutally exposed Americans to the costs of this folly.

The spending squeeze that delayed the strengthening of the levees in New Orleans--despite repeated warnings from experts--reflects this Administration's skewed priorities: money for war and occupation in Iraq but not for protection of life at home. With one-third of the troops and half the equipment of the Louisiana and Mississippi National Guard in Iraq, Americans saw stark evidence of the domestic price of the war this President has chosen to fight on credit. And the chilling scenes of calamity visited on the most vulnerable exposed to the world America's reality: a country ever more divided by race and class.

It appears that Bush and the Republicans are now going to pay the political price of of the American frustrations that have been building ever since Ronald Reagan took office. something certainly needs to be changed down there as they appear to be spiraling out of control. Good luck America as you are going to need it.

[B. Max]

You should try something new. That garbage has already been discredited. The left was out of the gate before they new the facts. It never was about the facts anyway, so it didn't matter. It was about bashing bush. However as the facts have begun to get out we find that the state and local officials have bungled big time and right from the beginning. The hildibeast has was calling for a big investigation. I agree, there should be. It will expose the local democrat mayor and govenor as totally incompetent. The dems have circled the wagons and began shooting inward on this one.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46224

[Black Dog]

FEMA was unprepared for Katrina Relief Effort, Insiders Say

...75 cents out of every $1 spent on emergency preparedness goes to anti-terrorism programs. Well before Katrina, FEMA insiders were sounding the alarm.

...

All of us were just shaking our heads and saying, 'This isn't going to be enough, and the director has to know this isn't going to be enough.' But nothing more seemed to be happening," said Leo Bosner, president of the FEMA Headquarters Employees Union.

Bosner has been with FEMA since it began 26 years ago. He says the agency has been systematically dismantled since it became part of the massive Department of Homeland Security.

"One of the big differences I see," said Bosner, "besides taking away our staff and our budget and our training, is that Homeland Security now, in my view, slows down the process."

Oh and B. Max, your little Red Cross meme has already been demolished: by the Red Cross themselves

When the storm came our goal was prior to landfall to support the evacuation. It was unsafe to be in the city. We were asked by the city not to be there and the Superdome was made a shelter of last resorts and, quite frankly in retrospect, it was a good idea because otherwise those people would have had no shelter at all.

We have our shelters north of the city. We're prepared as soon as they can be evacuated, we're prepared to receive them in Texas, in other states, but it was not safe to be in the city and it's not been safe to go back into the city. They were also concerned that if we located, relocated back into the city people wouldn't leave and they've got to leave.

-Interview with Marty Evans, Red Cross president and CEO on Larry King Live, Aired September 2, 2005

There wil be an investigation, headed by Republicans. The mandate will be to absolve the administration of any blame whatsoever. This is the Bush administration, after all: truth is irrelevant and accountability non-existent.

As for the absurd notion that "the local democrat mayor and govenor (are) totally incompeten", let's reflect for a second on the fact that local officials were ale to evacuate 80 per cent of New Orleans, when FEMA projections from 2004 indicated that only about 1/3 of the population would be evacuated in the event of a catastrophic hurricane. Let's also not forget that, while Nagin and company were in the thick of disaster response operatons, the President was on vacation, plucking his guitar and attending fundraisers.

Undoubtedly, there were failures, errors and missteps taken by the local government, as is bound to happen in an event of this magnitude. But let's not ignore the fact that Katrina was an event of national importance affecting a number of communities in a number of states along the Gulf Coast: in other words, this was precisely the kind of incident the federal government is suppossed to respond to. The only people interested in assigning blame, at least here on MLW, are G.O.P. partisans.

[B. Max]

FEMA was unprepared for Katrina Relief Effort, Insiders Say

...75 cents out of every $1 spent on emergency preparedness goes to anti-terrorism programs. Well before Katrina, FEMA insiders were sounding the alarm.

...

All of us were just shaking our heads and saying, 'This isn't going to be enough, and the director has to know this isn't going to be enough.' But nothing more seemed to be happening," said Leo Bosner, president of the FEMA Headquarters Employees Union.

Bosner has been with FEMA since it began 26 years ago. He says the agency has been systematically dismantled since it became part of the massive Department of Homeland Security.

"One of the big differences I see," said Bosner, "besides taking away our staff and our budget and our training, is that Homeland Security now, in my view, slows down the process."

Oh and B. Max, your little Red Cross meme has already been demolished: by the Red Cross themselves

When the storm came our goal was prior to landfall to support the evacuation. It was unsafe to be in the city. We were asked by the city not to be there and the Superdome was made a shelter of last resorts and, quite frankly in retrospect, it was a good idea because otherwise those people would have had no shelter at all.

We have our shelters north of the city. We're prepared as soon as they can be evacuated, we're prepared to receive them in Texas, in other states, but it was not safe to be in the city and it's not been safe to go back into the city. They were also concerned that if we located, relocated back into the city people wouldn't leave and they've got to leave.

-Interview with Marty Evans, Red Cross president and CEO on Larry King Live, Aired September 2, 2005

There wil be an investigation, headed by Republicans. The mandate will be to absolve the administration of any blame whatsoever. This is the Bush administration, after all: truth is irrelevant and accountability non-existent.

As for the absurd notion that "the local democrat mayor and govenor (are) totally incompeten", let's reflect for a second on the fact that local officials were ale to evacuate 80 per cent of New Orleans, when FEMA projections from 2004 indicated that only about 1/3 of the population would be evacuated in the event of a catastrophic hurricane. Let's also not forget that, while Nagin and company were in the thick of disaster response operatons, the President was on vacation, plucking his guitar and attending fundraisers.

Undoubtedly, there were failures, errors and missteps taken by the local government, as is bound to happen in an event of this magnitude. But let's not ignore the fact that Katrina was an event of national importance affecting a number of communities in a number of states along the Gulf Coast: in other words, this was precisely the kind of incident the federal government is suppossed to respond to. The only people interested in assigning blame, at least here on MLW, are G.O.P. partisans.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The responsibility to respond is with the local officials, that is the way it works. It's clear they botched it right from the beginning. Bush does not have to be in washington to make decisions, which he made. He did declare a state of emergency even before the storm hit and was the won who told the mayor to evacuate the city. After that the mayor and the governor screwed up. However bush could have done this but he wouldn't have done it until after they new the levve broke and the mess that followed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/09/national...agewanted=print

[Toro]

The Republicans will lose seats during mid-term elections. They will not lose the senate. There is an outside shot they lose the House.

[Black Dog]

The responsibility to respond is with the local officials, that is the way it works.

I'll tell you what I told your hive-mate Mr. Burns.

Bush declared a state of emergency August 27, giving the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA the authority to coordinate all disaster relief efforts. Two days before the levees were breached.

Certainly, the idea that a disaster of this magnitude is strictly a local problem is ridiculous. According to DHS's own response plan: "ALL PRESIDENTIALLY DECLARED DISASTERS AND EMERGENCIES UNDER THE STAFFORD ACT ARE CONSIDERED INCIDENTS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE."

Surely an incident of national significance would require leadership and action on a national level. Evidently Bush had better things to do.

t's clear they botched it right from the beginning.

I think, under the circumstances, getting 80 per cent of the population out is anything but a botched job.

But hey, for shits and giggles, let's assume that the ex-Republican Nagin and Blanco, as well as all the other local officials along the Gulf Coast, are utter incompetents. Surely at that point someone should have stepped up, someone at the federal level (again: DHS and FEMA's role, following the presidential declaration of a state of emergency is to to coordinate all disaster relief efforts). So where were they? Why did it take Bush almost two days to get his ass to the area? Why did FEMA take its time, only dispatching people into the flood zone after the storm hit, and giving them two days to get there? Why did it take almost a full day for news of the levee break to reach the DHS (by Chertoff's own admission)?

Really, there was a catastrophic failure of leadership. Even if one assumes the absolute worst of the local officials, your argument falls apart when you consider the subsequent (in)action of the administration.

[Argus]

The responsibility to respond is with the local officials, that is the way it works. It's clear they botched it right from the beginning. Bush does not have to be in washington to make decisions, which he made. He did declare a state of emergency even before the storm hit and was the won who told the mayor to evacuate the city. After that the mayor and the governor screwed up. However bush could have done this but he wouldn't have done it until after they new the levve broke and the mess that followed.

The Bush loonies always respond the same way; completely ignore everything said and focus on attacking the local governments.

I have not seen a single one of you even address the issue of why Bush loaded the senior ranks of the Federal Emergency Management Agency with incompetents and idiots who had no experience with emergency management, or why he should not pay a price for that. Even Republican senators and congressmen are unhappy about FEMA's incompetence, but I have not seen a solitary word, nor even a hint of criticism from the Bushies here. Likewise none of you will answer the question I began asking last week: why did the White House drastically slash funding for flood relief in New Orleans? And why should Bush not pay a price for that either?

I have to confess that I have never understood political fanatics and ideologues of any stripe. I do not understand what drives their blind fanatisicm in support of this or that party or ideology. All ideologies are deeply flawed. All political parties are corrupt, at least to some degree (the Republicans are both corrupt and deeply flawed, of course). So how can people who grow up in western society become so determinedly ignorant of the flaws of their own party, particularly when it's led by such corrupt and flawed men as Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld? Is the desperation to follow so great you simply have to pretend they're great men so you can be their faithful follower? Is your life really so utterly empty without someone you can worship telling you how to think, act, and behave?

[Argus]

The Republicans will lose seats during mid-term elections.  They will not lose the senate. There is an outside shot they lose the House.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh that won't happen. The righteous will be protected by the great Lord God! For the Republican Party is the Party of God and will always prevail!

FEMA, btw, has been urging Americans to give to charities which will help flood relief victims. In particular they have been officially urging Americans give to a preferred charity. It's called "Operation Blessing", operated by none other than ---- Pat Robertson! Well, I suppose given that all the top people in FEMA are Bush patronage appointees, and given the frightening degree of influence Robertson has over the current Republican Party we shouldn't be surprised to find FEMA pimping for the crazed Robertson's "charity".

Operation Blessing has a somewhat shaky past, having been caught paying to transport equipment and personnel to Robertson's privately owned diamond mine instead of helping starving African refugees. And the biggest single beneficiary of Operaton Blessin is Robertson's "Christian Broadcasting Network", from which he issues assasination edicts against foreign leaders.

[Shady]

The Bush loonies always respond the same way; completely ignore everything said and focus on attacking the local governments

I find the opposite to be true of the anti-Bush loonies such as yourself. They completely ignore everything associated with the local governments and focus on attacking the federal response.

[Argus]

The Bush loonies always respond the same way; completely ignore everything said and focus on attacking the local governments

I find the opposite to be true of the anti-Bush loonies such as yourself. They completely ignore everything associated with the local governments and focus on attacking the federal response.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's so much BS. I have said numerous times on these threads that the locals may well have screwed up, but that since this is a national (really international forum) it is impossible to really get a grasp on who these figures are or what the political circumstances were. It is American politics, ie politics at the Federal level that we discuss here, not what some hack politician in a backwoods state did. And no matter what they did it does not excuse what Bush did - and what once again, you cannot bring yourself to even talk about.

BTW, I evidenced nothing fanatical. Rather, I have evidenced judgement. I am no great Democrat supporter, never having even lived in the US, and I am aware of that party's failings, as well. My disgust with Bush is of the same nature as my disgust with Chretien, by way of a worthy example. For his shortcomings are numerous and his strengths - beyond the superficial - nearly non-existent. He is a hypocrite of the worst sort, and I cannot for the life of me understand anyone who would admire him, much less vote for him.

[mirror]

Dear Shady,

Do you even take the time to reflect on the other points of view to see whether or not they make any sense?

From my observation of your posts, and a few others here, Bush could go out and kill his mother in plain daylight and you would find some excuse to rationalize his behaviour as appropriate.

I find it very offensive that you accuse Argus of being an anti-Bush loonie. I am shocked that you would ever suggest such a thing. Of course he may be very concerned with what we have observed surrounding the US government's actions in relation to Hurricane Katrina, but seriously, who in their right mind would not be? If you take the time to review what has been written here, instead of churning out your blind Republican dogma, you might be surprised to find out there is not a shred of evidence to support your claim.

Bush appointed one of his political buddies with few qualifications to one of the most crucial positions in the country. Some people have probably died unnecessarily because of Brown's mistakes. Today because of the political crisis this is creating for the Republican future election opportunities, Brown had to be and was removed from his role at FEMA.

There are already obvious problems with Brown's qualifications. On my way home from work today I heard on the radio that Brown's resume has been discovered to contain falsehoods. If proven to be true I would imagine serious criminal charges will be pending.

If I were in your position I would be saying to myself right about now, there are obviously some very serious mistakes that have been made by my president, and myself for having supported such a regime, and we need to make some wholesale changes to correct things. Where is your sense of responsibility? Right now you are looking more and more like a passenger on the Titanic. Do you really want to hit the iceberg?

Cheers,

[Cartman]

Brown had to be and was removed from his role at FEMA.

I also heard this today. But just yesterday, I heard the President saying something to the effect that 'Brownie" was doing a good job. Would you remove a person who was doing a good job? Either Bush was not willing to stand by a person who was doing a good job since he suffered political criticism or he hired a person who did not do a good job. Either way, Bush made a serious mistake.

I have to confess that I have never understood political fanatics and ideologues of any stripe. I do not understand what drives their blind fanatisicm in support of this or that party or ideology. All ideologies are deeply flawed. All political parties are corrupt, at least to some degree (the Republicans are both corrupt and deeply flawed, of course). So how can people who grow up in western society become so determinedly ignorant of the flaws of their own party, particularly when it's led by such corrupt and flawed men as Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld?

Probably the most intelligent thing I have ever read here. OTOH, I think that people consistently vote Liberal for fear of being "fanatical".

[Montgomery Burns]

Argus:

I have not seen a single one of you even address the issue of why Bush loaded the senior ranks of the Federal Emergency Management Agency with incompetents and idiots who had no experience with emergency management, or why he should not pay a price for that.

Bush Derangement Syndrome is still running amok on this forum.

The fact is FEMA head Mike Brown was overwhelmingly confirmed by the Senate when it was controlled by the Democrats.

[Montgomery Burns]

From the FAQ posted at redcross.org

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

• Acess [sic] 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.

Proof from the horse's mouth that Fox News, World Net Daily, and Hugh Hewitt were correct.

Governor Blanco, your legacy is calling you.

[newbie]

Bush Derangement Syndrome is still running amok on this forum.

The fact is FEMA head Mike Brown was overwhelmingly confirmed by the Senate when it was controlled by the Democrats.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The senators were relying on and believing in Mr. Brown's resume. Unfortunately, there were some obvious descrepencies.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1103003,00.html

What's next for Mr. Brown? Supreme Court nomination?

[Montgomery Burns]

Newbie:

What's next for Mr. Brown? Supreme Court nomination?

Nope. Head of the DNC.

YEEAARRGGHH!!

[mirror]

Last superpower finds itself more alone

How sad for America to have not realized that when people such as Axworthy suggest an alternate approach to world affairs they do so with the best of intentions towards America. If they continue along these lines the sooner Canada disengages the better.

[Montgomery Burns]

Well, if the far-left Toronto Star (the home of the anti-semitic Eric Margolis who hasn't been on Fox News for months after being humiliated time and time again, the radical Linda McQuaig, and the radical Jew-hating Antonia Zerbisias) says so, then it must be true!

[mirror]

As I suspected Bush's popularity is sinking like a stone. It has dropped even more now and less than 40% of Americans approve of the job he was doing. How said that the president of the USA is not supported by his people. It is even worse that the Americans have to wait to 2008 to get rid of him:

Bush: "The breach of levees was a surprise"

[Argus]

Argus:

I have not seen a single one of you even address the issue of why Bush loaded the senior ranks of the Federal Emergency Management Agency with incompetents and idiots who had no experience with emergency management, or why he should not pay a price for that.

Bush Derangement Syndrome is still running amok on this forum.

The fact is FEMA head Mike Brown was overwhelmingly confirmed by the Senate when it was controlled by the Democrats.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So let me see if I've got you straight here; it's not Bush's fault that 5 of the top 8 men in FEMA are his political cronies with no experience with or ability to handle disasters - it's the Democrats fault for not stopping him?

[Argus]

Last superpower finds itself more alone

How sad for America to have not realized that when people such as Axworthy suggest an alternate approach to world affairs they do so with the best of intentions towards America. If they continue along these lines the sooner Canada disengages the better.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Axworthy, once dubbed "pink Loyd" by the media, has never evidenced any real understanding of international politics. He is one of those 70s era socialists who believe that if you just smile and be nice everyone will love you. Naive and dangerous. As to the author of the piece you cite above, I'm afraid his congratulatory tone on Jean Chretien's more "realistic" handling of things made my eyes glaze over a mite. In particular the phrase "Jean Chrétien managed that well by making the border a priority while sending troops to Afghanistan but not to Iraq. "

This implies Chretien ever did anything about the border - which he most assuredly did not, nor has Paul Martin. The Canadian border, all of them, are as wide open and vulnerable today - in every possible respect - as they were five years ago, and there are no plans to do anything about that.

[Black Dog]

I find the opposite to be true of the anti-Bush loonies such as yourself. They completely ignore everything associated with the local governments and focus on attacking the federal response.

That's because you don't read.

Undoubtedly, there were failures, errors and missteps taken by the local government, as is bound to happen in an event of this magnitude. But let's not ignore the fact that Katrina was an event of national importance affecting a number of communities in a number of states along the Gulf Coast: in other words, this was precisely the kind of incident the federal government is suppossed to respond to. The only people interested in assigning blame, at least here on MLW, are G.O.P. partisans.

This bears repeating:

The Bush loonies always respond the same way; completely ignore everything said and focus on attacking the local governments.

I have not seen a single one of you even address the issue of why Bush loaded the senior ranks of the Federal Emergency Management Agency with incompetents and idiots who had no experience with emergency management, or why he should not pay a price for that. Even Republican senators and congressmen are unhappy about FEMA's incompetence, but I have not seen a solitary word, nor even a hint of criticism from the Bushies here. Likewise none of you will answer the question I began asking last week: why did the White House drastically slash funding for flood relief in New Orleans? And why should Bush not pay a price for that either?

[mirror]

Things just seem to be going from bad to worse for the president.

Katrina fallout echoes earlier criticism

The report also called for a strong presidential lead in times of disaster, saying "presidential leadership creates a powerful, meaningful perception that the federal government recognizes an event is catastrophic, is in control and is going to use every means necessary to meet the immediate mass care needs of disaster victims."

The current Bush White House has been criticised for appearing slow to grasp the magnitude of Katrina's impact. A Pew Research Center poll found 67 per cent of Americans believed Bush could have done more to speed up relief efforts, and just 28 per cent believed he did all he could.

[B. Max]

The responsibility to respond is with the local officials, that is the way it works.

I'll tell you what I told your hive-mate Mr. Burns.

Bush declared a state of emergency August 27, giving the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA the authority to coordinate all disaster relief efforts. Two days before the levees were breached.

Which they did, but you can't respond to something that hasn't happened yet. The key word here is corrordinate. The state dropped the ball on their end. Leaving the feds to pick up the slack which takes time to organize the logistics.

Certainly, the idea that a disaster of this magnitude is strictly a local problem is ridiculous. According to DHS's own response plan: "ALL PRESIDENTIALLY DECLARED DISASTERS AND EMERGENCIES UNDER THE STAFFORD ACT ARE CONSIDERED INCIDENTS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE."

That still doesn't change the way it is handled.

Surely an incident of national significance would require leadership and action on a national level. Evidently Bush had

better things to do.

t's clear they botched it right from the beginning.

I think, under the circumstances, getting 80 per cent of the population out is anything but a botched job.

80% got themselves out. The mayor got no one out.

But hey, for shits and giggles, let's assume that the ex-Republican Nagin and Blanco, as well as all the other local officials along the Gulf Coast, are utter incompetents. Surely at that point someone should have stepped up, someone at the federal level (again: DHS and FEMA's role, following the presidential declaration of a state of emergency is to to coordinate all disaster relief efforts). So where were they? Why did it take Bush almost two days to get his ass to the area? Why did FEMA take its time, only dispatching people into the flood zone after the storm hit, and giving them two days to get there? Why did it take almost a full day for news of the levee break to reach the DHS (by Chertoff's own admission)?

Really, there was a catastrophic failure of leadership. Even if one assumes the absolute worst of the local officials, your argument falls apart when you consider the subsequent (in)action of the administration.

The facts don't fall apart especially under your assuptions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well maybe if you ever get the chance to manage something instead of playing monday morning quarterback you'll know. I guess if you can't make it as a republican you become a democrat.

What the hell was bush going to do down there bail the water out. He's a manager, and doesn't have to be there to do that. He relys on the chain of command. Fema isn't going to send people in there until after the storm. To do otherwise would be stupid. When they did send people in there, the people they were suppose to rescue started shooting at them. The governor failed to call out the guard for security and protection and everything came to a stand still.

[newbie]

Under Fema, "The National Response Plan...establishes protocols to help

save lives and protect the health and safety of the public, responders, and recovery workers;...protect property and mitigate damages and impacts to individuals, communities, and the environment;..."

That makes it clear they should have definitely been in New Orleans prior to Katrina coming onshore. That was in their mandate.