That's really, really depressing when our leadership compares unfavorably to Fidel Castro.

Fidel Castro doesn't have to be liked to be effective. George Bush is just an empty suit for the right-wing nut bars who helped him smear his way into the oval office. The empty suit has an empty head, and the American people get nothing and gave everything. (It reminds me of Orwell's Animal Farm where "some [pigs] are more equal than others.")

A joke I read on Wonkette went something like this; Chief Justice Renquist actually died at home four days ago, but FEMA just found him Saturday.

...maybe Rove's finger prints were on the pillow?

I couldn't agree more. And of course, I understand that being liked doesn't mean being effective. I'm merely pointing out that for all the vilification that gets thrown his way (and presumably, at least some of it's deserved), he's remarkably effective at protecting his people from natural disaster. I'm simply saying that while he is demonized by America, he has taken better care of his people than we have. And it saddens me.

Your assessment of Bush is 100% on, by the way.

Amy, I watched the video, and I can't tell you how distressing it is. FEMA turning away goods and services that were desperately needed. I need to understand why, and I don't. Because they didn't have the necessary personell to protect the water and the diesel fuel and they were afraid it would get looted? Because they didn't want to be shown up by Wal-Mart?

And that poor woman drowning, after being reassured day after day that someone would come and get her.

What do the Bush supporters say? They're being awfully quiet about all this. They afraid of disturbing Bush during his backswing on the eighth hole?

I think they're saying "now is not the time to cast blame...", hoping that whenever it is time, people won't remember.

At every press conference, someone should ask, "Is it time to cast blame, yet?"

Perfect, Tood, just perfect.

Good grief. I had the idea at one time that people could take a hint, and perhaps remember some basic civics lessons, etc., but damn! Why is it so hard to think?

The American Public decided that Civil Defense was no longer necessary. Don't you remember the cries about the "peace dividend", once the USSR fell and the Berlin Wall came down? That was just the highlight, so to speak, of American defunding of basic catastrophe preparedness begun in the '60s. Those of you with no or little memories of times past may also remember the ardent cries of "peaceniks" who stated that being prepared for disaster was equivalent to preparing for war.

It's Congress, not a President, who is charged with this duty; without the authorization and the funding, nothing can happen.

Oh, by the way - Mr. Clinton wasn't impeached for lying about sex; it was for lying to a grand jury. You would be in jail for doing that, but he gets to write books, etc., about stuff he couldn't remember while in office. Since the public thinks his Administration only engaged in sexual activity - some of which is actually criminal, but that's OK because he's, well, Bill Clinton! - the smokescreen remains intact. Quick quiz: Where is John Huang?

By the way - how is it that no one notices that camera crews have all the time in the world to shoot video, but not one second to save the life they fight over to show being lost?

Radwaste writes:

It's Congress, not a President, who is charged with this duty; without the authorization and the funding, nothing can happen.

And the President has to ask for it. Where were Bush's budget requests, by the way? Perhaps he misplaced them on the fourteenth hole?

And when did the American Public decide that civil defense was no longer necessary? When was this decision reached, and when did Congress vote on this legislation based upon this public outcry for "no more civil defense"?

As for camera crews, well, they are charged with the responsibility of bringing in personnel and equipment. I don't think they have the room to airlift civilians out and relocate them, nor the medics on hand to take care of it. Can you imagine the lawsuits that would come their way if they did something wrong? Also, I think they served a much greater purpose in bringing this to the nation's attention, don't you?

A news broadcast, after all, reaches millions of people, making them aware of the situation, so they can all decide individually how to act in response to this tragedy. A camera crew, should they put aside the equipment, and decide to evacuate civilians could do what? Maybe save a single family? The footage they provide motivates far greater numbers to do far greater good.

All in all, a very weak and disingenous argument, with more holes in it than Bush's golf course. I'm just a little bit weary of these mindless lemmings of Bush supporters, who exonerate him no matter how much he fucks up. Do you guys ever think for yourselves? Would it be the absolute death of some of you to say, "Hell, yeah. Bush fucked up."

I guess it would. Thanks for playing, anyway.

Again, funds were diverted from repair of the Louisiana levees, however it's spelled, to Iraq. Which administration bears the responsibility for that decision? And which 'empty suit' has been running his mouth during press conferences lauding Brownie, his cronie in FEMA, for doing such a great job. Get a grip rad.

Also, Clinton's 'lie' didn't kill thousands of people.

Check out a righteous rant by Keith Olbermann here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

Yeah, righteous rant is just about all we're seeing here, everyone is so indignant about what's happened. But tell us, please, who are the first responders in any emergency situation -why, it's the local municipal and elected officials, that's who! And did said local and state officials have an emergency plan of evacuation? Why, yes they did! In fact, they practiced just such a scenario less than 13 months earlier.

Just one little problem here - why did the Mayor and the Governor wait until it was too late to order the mandatory evacuations, despite personal calls from the White House over 24 hours earlier, urging them to do so? Why did the Mayor and Governor not request National Guard assistance, once it became clear that the local services were being overwhelmed? Remember, the Federal Government cannot become involved in any of these decisions WITHOUT a request from a local controlling authority. The same determination of State and Federal responses kicked in during Hurrican Andrew and Ivan earlier.

Did Bush and FEMA fail here? No question about it, but it's interesting to note that neither the Mayor nor the Governor are discussing their own peculiar responses during this emergency. Perhaps that's because their own actions border on a level of incompetency that's not been repeated by their neighboring states.

Here's an excellent article in today's NYT outlining just what an effective evacuation plan should entail. It all starts on the local level, as Bill Clinton has been saying many times over at this point.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/06/opinion/06tierney.html?hp

...and yet another.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05249/566101.stm

According to Trent Lott, things aren't quite as peachy in Miss. as Gov. Barbour is portraying them.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/05/katrina.lott/

Yes, I believe Lott lost his home, along with his entire hometown. But the Governor did issue the mandatory evacuation order 72 hours before the hurricane's landfall (as Florida has done in the past, since Andrew hit), and with the initial storm surge reportedly over 30 feet, the loss of life would have been catastrophic had he not done so.

Radwaste, you're totally off base. Yeah, Congress is responsible for appropriations, but that doesn't mean the president plays no part in how the executive branch is funded, or what his priorities are. FEMA wasn't downgraded when "civil defense" fell out of vogue with the public - in fact, the federal government wasn't even significantly involved in disaster relief until the end of the cold war. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-fema5sep05,0,685581.story?track=hpmostemailedlink

Bush downgraded FEMA, folded it into Homeland Security, cut its funding, and made it focus almost exclusively on terrorism. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that terrorist attacks - no matter how horrific - occur far, far, far less often and affect far fewer people than natural disasters. Even a Bush scientist, trained to ignore science in favor of politics, could grasp that. Worse, Bush used key FEMA positions to reward unqualified cronies who apparently weren't even remotely interested in learning how to do the job - but are supremely interested, we now know, in CYA.

I'm sure the local and state officials share some of the blame, but had they ordered mandatory evacuation, it's clear they still would have needed federal assistance to carry it out (if only to muster and coordinate resources from several states), because several hundred thousand people had no transportation and/or no resources to get them out of town (exacerbated by Katrina hitting at the end of the month, when fixed incomes run out and before payday for the working poor).

As Bill Maher said last week, the Bushies' position on Katrina was essentially "What's the problem? You just load up the Range Rover and go!"

OK, now, who else wants to blame one guy for years of neglect in disaster preparedness? Who wants to say that their candidate never did or would do such a thing?

Wrong is wrong - but no matter who you wanted to be President, one guy did not screw this up.

By the way, somebody needs to read up on the Federal budget process. From http://www.house.gov/rules/96-912.htm : "The President's budget is only a request to Congress; Congress is not required to adopt his recommendations. Nevertheless, the President's budgetary proposals often guide congressional revenue and spending decisions, though the extent of the influence varies from year to year and depends more on political and fiscal conditions than on the legal status of the budget.

The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, as amended, establishes the congressional budget process as the means by which Congress coordinates its various budget-related actions."

The article is out of date on one point - line-item veto was declared un-Constitutional because it subverted the clear duty of Congress.

There is another point people love to ignore. The Lemuel Penn case established travel as a human right. This means that absent due process, government cannot tell you you may not travel between the states - nor can it tell you you MUST travel. Consider the idea that Fidel Castro moves his people easily. If you think that Americans will put up with being told what to do, you just aren't looking. Today, people are refusing to leave New Orleans. If their numbers are large enough, what next? Arrest them? For remaining at their home? What does that do, or prove?

Hint: this isn't Cuba. If you think that's a bad thing, try checking how many people risk drowning to reach Cuba.

Melissa - read the first paragraph of your link. It says that defunding has occurred over the last 25 years. That backs my point.

Maybe you'll recognize these guys.

Radwaste writes:

OK, now, who else wants to blame one guy for years of neglect in disaster preparedness? Who wants to say that their candidate never did or would do such a thing?

Well, since you ask, I do. Remember where Clinton was when the Mississippi flooded? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't on the seventeenth green?

You seem to be forgetting about whom has been front and center during this crisis, defending this administration's response to it - and that's been (wait for it) - Bill Clinton!

Now, gee, why would Bill and James Carville be taking such pains to try to educate the clueless about how the municipal, state and federal governnents actually work in reality? Perhaps because, having been in this responsibility themselves, they know how things really operate around NO and LA?

Please, get a grip here, folks.

Radwaste, maybe it's not solely one guy, but it's clear that the Republicans are primarily to blame for the debacle that is today's FEMA.

I don't currently subscribe to the Wall Street Journal (which you must acknowledge is not exactly a left-wing apologist organ), but here is a quote from today's NY Times - if the WSJ says the Bushies are the ones who have crippled FEMA, I'd take that to the bank:

"Yesterday, The Wall Street Journal showed how the Bush administration had systematically stripped power and money from FEMA, which had been painfully rebuilt under President Bill Clinton but had long been a target of Republican "small government" ideologues. The Journal said state officials had been warning Washington - as recently as July 27 - that the homeland secretary, Michael Chertoff, was planning further disastrous cuts."

Btw, Radwaste, you're wrong about the "right to travel" in the current scenario. I don't know if we're talking about the same case, but the Supreme Court case on this subject related to interstate travel only (which is all the federal government has the right to regulate anyway). And in any event, the government has the right to require citizens to evacuate a particular area for reasons of public safety. True, they can't force the citizens to go to Texas vs. Arkansas vs. staying in a different area of Louisiana, but there is nothing unconstitutional about evacuating a disaster area.

Melissa - then you should have no problem showing me an empty New Orleans right now. Troops and the police cannot arrest people for simply staying home. That's why it's not happening. Although incorporation of Federal Constitutional restrictions on government is spotty at best, just try the idea of a governmental agency keeping you from traveling within a state and see what happens.

Thank you for noting the role of Congress!

It seems Broussard was lying on NBC. He was in charge of safety at Jefferson Parrish.

Lying? In what way? He was supposed to prevent the levees from being breached by singlehandedly marching on Washington and sucking money out of Congress that was supposed to go to not finding Osama and instead warring on Iraq?

Hmmmm.