I'm Tired Of These Ungrateful Hurricane Victims

[tr2267]

Grand total of 13%, according to today's USA Today poll. About the same
number that would find fault with him saving a baby seal from clubbing.

Are you talking about those worthless self-selecting polls? Because a
search of the USA today web site for "poll" and "13%" turned up absolutely
nothing for the past 2 weeks. Again, everyone with a clue in both parties
knows that Bush fucked up.

-------------------------------------------------------------------- By Jim
VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 5, 2005; A17

Bush is trying to undo what many Republicans described as considerable
damage to the White House inflicted by Bush's crisis management. "Almost
every Republican I have spoken with is disappointed" in Bush's
performance, said William Kristol, a conservative columnist with close
White House ties. "He is a strong president . . . but he has never
really focused on the importance of good execution. I think that is true
in many parts of his presidency."
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Then why don't they EVER offer alternative solutions? I mean, /anything/???

Do you have any idea how the government works? All of the Dem proposals
die in congressional subcommittees because they don't have the support
of a "majority of the majority". Its pretty obvious the Dems would love the
chance to "contribute something" but that it is impossible until after the
next elections. In the last election there were 7 Democrats with 7
different health care proposals for the 45 million uninsured population and
every one was light years better than Bush's. Has everyone noticed that Bush
forgot all about his "health care proposal" the instant he squeaked thru the
election?

 

[Bill Sornson]

Are you talking about those worthless self-selecting polls? Because a
search of the USA today web site for "poll" and "13%" turned up
absolutely nothing for the past 2 weeks.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

 

[Petal and Leif]

Can anybody imagine President Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter,

LBJ, or John F Kennedy doing the piss poor job Bush did in the aftermath
of losing an entire US city?

I think it is time to remember the force of mother nature.
George Bush are very conserned about war, terrorism, giving democracy to
the people in Iraq.
And while he is considering building a "star war programme" to be able to
shoot missiles from outer space, mother nature is flexing her mussles.

This is for sure not the last time she does that. And we must not forget
that it is less than a year ago since over 200.000 people were killed in the
tsunami disaster in Asia. What will be next?

I think it is time to change focus a little. What can we do to prevent these
things to happen again. What will happen next time mother nature strike
back. We know it will happen. But we dont know where and when. But we know
the areas that are in the risk zone. And must prepare for bad things to
happen.
This hurricane have shown a complete incapability of acting in the early
stage. It has shown a complete incapability to prevent things that we knew
could happen. We must make sure we are better prepared next time.

LA

 

[Kurt Ullman]

If only because the more afluent urban areas might tend to elect more
responsible local and state government... (think "Florida").

One of the mailing lists I am on was discussing the biggest
difference between 9-11 and NOLA. A participant, and a rather
left-leaning one at that, said "There was no Guiliani". The Local
response is SO important during the first couple of days while
everybody gets ramped up.
BTW: A major piece of the NOLA plan was to put people in the
Dome. It was specifically mentioned in the plan that there was to be
no supplies since it was just to ride out the storm and then teams
would come in and clear it out. However, there was no plan as to
what to do if the teams couldn't get to it or if there was no place
to clear them too.

 

[Lloyd Parsons]

I've got less than no problem with those who are calling for better
response from the feds and FEMA... none at all. But there's no way to
believe that those who are unconcerned about the horrible local
government's handling of the crisis, but are rev'd up about GWB's
personal involvement are doing so for anything other than political
reasons.

In today's political weather, you think it might be political?

That is really funny, it IS political -- the fact that all of the finger
pointing is true just makes it better.

I don't want the locals/state/fed officials let off the hook on this.
It was a pee-poor job by all involved, from the top to the bottom.

State and local - you betcha. The feds could have done better too,
they were later than they should have been, but that, in the grand
scheme of things - particularly considering the amazing job they've
done after they did arrive - is a relatively small part of the
problem, IMHO.

Nah, the feds were just as FUBAR. Still are at this moment. We've got
a bunch of our first responders sitting on there ass in Baton Rouge
waiting for FEMA to tell them where to go and what to do. I believe it
is 4 days and counting now.

If only because the more afluent urban areas might tend to elect more
responsible local and state government... (think "Florida").

Mark Hickey

You might like to think that, but there is no indication that politics
in Florida is much better than politics in the other states. Political
hacks do what political hacks do, regardless of party affiliation.

The more affluent would get better results partially because when they
were told to get out, they would and would have had the means to do so.
Which is exactly what happened in NO. The haves got out of dodge, the
have-nots didn't. And it doesn't matter at this point why they didn't
go.

 

[Kurt Ullman]

Nah, the feds were just as FUBAR. Still are at this moment. We've got
a bunch of our first responders sitting on there ass in Baton Rouge
waiting for FEMA to tell them where to go and what to do. I believe it
is 4 days and counting now.

FEMA doesn't make those decisions. IT is the locals who are in
charge of such things. FEMA is supposed to facilitate, not send the
troops out.

The more affluent would get better results partially because when they
were told to get out, they would and would have had the means to do so.
Which is exactly what happened in NO. The haves got out of dodge, the
have-nots didn't. And it doesn't matter at this point why they didn't
go.

But it does matter that the locals had no plans for them. The
NOLA hurricane plan from the LA Emergency Ops department stated
specifically that people would be going to the Dome as a temporary
shelter WITHOUT supplies or other support until the winds blew over
and then teams would come inmove them out. However, there was NO
plan as to how the teams would get them out and no plan as to what
was supposed to happen if the teams did not show or the other they
could not be parsed out to other shelters. Last I heard, there were
only 150 NG troops assigned for crowd control.


LOUISIANA HOMELAND SECURITY

http://www.loep.state.la.us/plans/EOPSupplement1a.pdf



B. Last Resort Refuge
The definition of Last Resort Refuge is a place for persons to be
protected from the high winds and heavy rains from the storm. Unlike
a
shelter, there may be little or no water or food and possibly no
utilities. A Last Resort Refuge is
intended to provide best available survival protection for the
duration
of the hurricane only.
1. Once evacuation routes are closed, people who were unable to
evacuate
the risk area will be directed to last resort refuge and /or staging
areas.
2. When it is determined that weather conditions permit, rescue
teams
will be sent into areas designated for Last Resort Refuge to
transport
evacuees to designated shelters.


That is it. No plans for what to do if the rescue teams can't help
them or get them out. A friend of mine, who teaches this kind of
stuff and has about 25 years of experience called this plan
comical..and criminal.

Also, the Convention Center was NEVER mentioned in any plan as
an evacuation center. The state or the locals opened it up, if you
want to call that "open" and never did pass that fact along to the
Command Center. Thus came about the infamous "I knew nothing about
it comment".

 

[Bill Sornson]

One of the mailing lists I am on was discussing the biggest
difference between 9-11 and NOLA. A participant, and a rather
left-leaning one at that, said "There was no Guiliani". The Local
response is SO important during the first couple of days while
everybody gets ramped up.
BTW: A major piece of the NOLA plan was to put people in the
Dome. It was specifically mentioned in the plan that there was to be
no supplies since it was just to ride out the storm and then teams
would come in and clear it out. However, there was no plan as to
what to do if the teams couldn't get to it or if there was no place
to clear them too.

Exactly right. They didn't want people to "flock there" for "freebies".
Unbelievable.

 

[Bill Sornson]

In today's political weather, you think it might be political?

That is really funny, it IS political -- the fact that all of the
finger pointing is true just makes it better.

ALL of the finger-pointing is true? Even ones pointed in opposite
directions?!?

I don't want the locals/state/fed officials let off the hook on this.
It was a pee-poor job by all involved, from the top to the bottom.

They're doing amazing work. (Latest I heard was ~200 grand /per evacuee/ by
the way; but the feds don't care.)

The more affluent would get better results partially because when they
were told to get out, they would and would have had the means to do
so. Which is exactly what happened in NO. The haves got out of
dodge, the have-nots didn't. And it doesn't matter at this point why
they didn't go.

DOESN'T MATTER?!? So it's important to assign blame if it's Bush
Administration, but not if it's Nagin/Blame-co?!?

As Neil would say, fascinating.

 

[RD MEYER]

I'm so gratefull for people like Harry Connick Jr and some of the great
Jazz musicians who are in the thick of it in what they lovingly refer
to as "OUR CITY". Some of the celebrities I see at the Dome come in,
photo op in th emiddle of a crowd and are gone in 60 seconds. There
just long enough to spew 30 seconds worth of sound bites on the
national News. Our local news here in Houston has gone out of its way
to find some of the celebs who are behind the scenes doing the "dirty
work" like sorting used clothing, cleaning, etc. These are some of the
unsung heroes. Uncredited, unknown. They don't come into town with
their entourages and press people.
Me, I'm tired of the poverty pimps like Jesse Jackson, Sheila Jackson
Lee, Oprah Winfrey, the Clintons, standing in the middle of our
Astrodome calling for another investigative commission. And you want to
talk about political gain? I'm sick of come of these people playing the
race card everytime something happens.
I don't have a PhD in Govt, but I do know that State and Local laws
prevent federal meddling in some instances. Bush can't just call out
the Nat Guard on a whim. I do think the local authorities are in charge
of that.
Don't people believe in personal responsibility anymore. Oh, I'm sorry,
I forgot... Cradle to the grave baby, cradle to the grave...
Sigh.....

Ron

 

[Kurt Ullman]

I don't have a PhD in Govt, but I do know that State and Local laws
prevent federal meddling in some instances. Bush can't just call out
the Nat Guard on a whim. I do think the local authorities are in charge
of that.

Actually he can't call the NG domestically at all.
Constitutionally, section 8 of article says:
The Congress shall have Power To
Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the
Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Kurt's note: This certainly wasn't an insurrection and only the
hurricane invaded.

Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the
Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in
the Service of the United States, reserving to the States
respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of
training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by
Congress;

Kurt's note-part deux. This states that they can only govern
those on active duty with everything else being in the control of
the states.

 

[tr2267]

Grand total of 13%, according to today's USA Today poll. About the

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

The Sludge Report is the official web site for USA Today polls in place
of their own web site?

I have conducted a poll recently but I don't have any disk space at all
on my web site to post these results. Maybe Matt Drudge can help me out
and publish these poll results on his site?

%94 People who think Drudge is an kook.

 

[tr2267]

The more affluent would get better results partially because when they

DOESN'T MATTER?!? So it's important to assign blame if it's Bush
Administration, but not if it's Nagin/Blame-co?!?

This was a national catastrophe with effects well outside of New Orleans.
The country was in desperate need of some leadership. Why wasn't Bush
on national TV on _Tuesday_ (instead of flying to California to speech on
Iraq) telling us his response plan for the biggest disaster in American
history. Why wasn't he requesting every city and town in the 48 states to
figure out how much shelter space they would be able to provide if or when
necessary? Why didn't he immediately negotiate reduced or suspended hotel
rates with the national chains for the masses of refugees already in hotels?
Why didn't Bush order the many naval ships capable of helping to go there
immediately? When didn't Bush immediately order a Berlin Airlift type
operation out of the New Orleans airport? Why didn't he send troops in
immediately? Why didn't he make sure there was a large fleet of vehicles
and busses getting the refugees out round the clock? The president could
have made all of these happen and I would have expected _any_ president
to do these things and more and do them _Tuesday_.

 

[The Wogster]

This was a national catastrophe with effects well outside of New Orleans.
The country was in desperate need of some leadership. Why wasn't Bush
on national TV on _Tuesday_ (instead of flying to California to speech on
Iraq) telling us his response plan for the biggest disaster in American
history. Why wasn't he requesting every city and town in the 48 states to
figure out how much shelter space they would be able to provide if or when
necessary? Why didn't he immediately negotiate reduced or suspended hotel
rates with the national chains for the masses of refugees already in hotels?
Why didn't Bush order the many naval ships capable of helping to go there
immediately? When didn't Bush immediately order a Berlin Airlift type
operation out of the New Orleans airport? Why didn't he send troops in
immediately? Why didn't he make sure there was a large fleet of vehicles
and busses getting the refugees out round the clock? The president could
have made all of these happen and I would have expected _any_ president
to do these things and more and do them _Tuesday_.

What do you think the President does all day, wait for the NO mayor and
LA governor to screw up so he can bail them out? The NO mayor should
have talked to the governor Friday, when Katrina was growing and looked
to hit them head on, especially considering that the walls around the
sinking city have not been maintained properly in 20 years. The
governor should have called in the guard, Saturday to get everyone out,
then evacuate by Sunday noon at the latest. If it be required, the
Governor could have call the President Saturday, and put things into
operation, BEFORE the storm hit.

W

 

[Kurt Ullman]

This was a national catastrophe with effects well outside of New Orleans.
The country was in desperate need of some leadership. Why wasn't Bush
on national TV on _Tuesday_ (instead of flying to California to speech on
Iraq) telling us his response plan for the biggest disaster in American
history. Why wasn't he requesting every city and town in the 48 states to
figure out how much shelter space they would be able to provide if or when
necessary? Why didn't he immediately negotiate reduced or suspended hotel
rates with the national chains for the masses of refugees already in hotels?
Why didn't Bush order the many naval ships capable of helping to go there
immediately? When didn't Bush immediately order a Berlin Airlift type
operation out of the New Orleans airport? Why didn't he send troops in
immediately? Why didn't he make sure there was a large fleet of vehicles
and busses getting the refugees out round the clock? The president could
have made all of these happen and I would have expected _any_ president
to do these things and more and do them _Tuesday_.

Ah, because he legally couldn't, with the exception of the
California trip. Constitutionally, legally and traditionally (going
all the way back to the old Civil Defense days) Feds can't do
anything without being asked by the locals. Tain't legal. Berlin
airlift would not have been possible anyway because of damage to the
airport. Active duty troops can only be sent at the request of the
locals and then only under very specific conditions (both liberals
and conservatives are hesitant to deploy active duty troops in the
US, albeit for different reasons and the Active Duty guys have
always encouraged that since they feel they have enough to do (even
w/o Iraq) keeping the rest of the world in shape). The NG, again by
the constitution, are under the command and control of the governor
and when other state's units are sent to a state, they automatically
are chopped to the governor.
The REAL interesting piece of the post-action report will be
when the Feds started asking the state to take over and what the
response was.

 

[Ben Tyner]

Ah, because he legally couldn't, with the exception of the
California trip. Constitutionally, legally and traditionally (going
all the way back to the old Civil Defense days) Feds can't do
anything without being asked by the locals. Tain't legal.

You are wrong. Do you know anything about the Department of Homeland
InSecurity? This was Bush's baby, wasn't it?

http://www.alternet.org/story/25227/

But Chertoff's Sept. 1 statement ignored the administration's own homeland
security response plan, which directed the federal government to act on its
own authority to quickly provide assistance and conduct emergency operations
following a major catastrophe, pre-empting state and local authorities if
necessary. According to DHS' December 2004 National Response Plan (NRP),
"catastrophic events," such as what occurred in New Orleans, call for
heightened and "proactive" federal involvement to manage the disaster. The
response plan listed "guiding principles" to govern the response to these
major events. The "Guiding Principles for Proactive Federal Response" make
clear that, in these "catastrophic" cases, the federal government will
operate independently to provide assistance, rather than simply supporting
or cajoling state authorities:

a.. The primary mission is to save lives; protect critical infrastructure,
property, and the environment; contain the event; and preserve national
security.

b.. Standard procedures regarding requests for assistance may be expedited
or, under extreme circumstances, suspended in the immediate aftermath of an
event of catastrophic magnitude.

c.. Identified Federal response resources will deploy and begin necessary
operations as required to commence life-safety activities.

d.. Notification and full coordination with States will occur, but the
coordination process must not delay or impede the rapid deployment and use
of critical resources. States are urged to notify and coordinate with local
governments regarding a proactive Federal response.

e.. State and local governments are encouraged to conduct collaborative
planning with the Federal Government as a part of "steady-state"
preparedness for catastrophic incidents."

The NRP also says that, when responding to a catastrophic incident, the
federal government should start emergency operations even in the absence of
clear assessment of the situation. "A detailed and credible common operating
picture may not be achievable for 24 to 48 hours (or longer) after the
incident," the NRP's "Catastrophic Annex" states. "As a result, response
activities must begin without the benefit of a detailed or complete
situation and critical needs assessment."

A Sept. 5 Los Angeles Times article quoted former FEMA chief of staff Jane
Bullock saying that "[t]he moment the president declared a federal disaster
[on Aug 29], it became a federal responsibility. ... The federal government
took ownership over the response." Moreover, DHS' own website declares that
DHS "will assume primary responsibility on March 1st [2005] for ensuring
that emergency response professionals are prepared for any situation. This
will entail providing a coordinated, comprehensive federal response to any
large-scale crisis and mounting a swift and effective recovery effort.

BT

 

[Bob the Cow]

This was a national catastrophe with effects well outside of New Orleans.
Why wasn't Bush
Why wasn't he requesting every city and town
Why didn't he immediately negotiate reduced or suspended hotel
rates with the national chains
Why didn't Bush order the many naval ships
When didn't Bush immediately order a Berlin Airlift type
operation out of the New Orleans airport?
Why didn't he send troops in immediately?
Why didn't he make sure there was a large fleet of vehicles
and busses getting the refugees out round the clock?

Because if he'd done any or all of the above things, extremists of all
stripes would be waxing poetic and using words like Gestapo, Storm Troops,
Jackboots, and Federal usurpation of state and local authority.

Katrina, like 9/11, was unprecedented in our nation's history. There was a
"failure of imagination" in even comprehending that either could take place
on our soil. The responses you've suggested, while certainly appropriate in
hindsight, were also unprecedented, and similarly unimagined. You've vastly
overestimated the agility of ANY Governmental agency in responding to ANY
crisis. It takes seven people in any Government organization to do the job
one person could do in the private sector, and if even ONE of those seven
isn't there, or doesn't care, the thing doesn't get done. That's bad, but
that is how Government has evolved. There's a lot of fault to go around.

By the way, although one might speculate that "busses" might have made the
"refugees" feel better, and maybe given the President some great photo ops,
"buses" might have been more useful in the situation at hand. Got a
dictionary? ;-)

Those buses that sat in the flooded parking lot weren't under Federal or
even State control. If there's one picture that illustrates the overall
lack of response to the emergency, that might be it.

 

[Ben Tyner]

Because if he'd done any or all of the above things, extremists of all
stripes would be waxing poetic and using words like Gestapo, Storm Troops,
Jackboots, and Federal usurpation of state and local authority.

Katrina, like 9/11, was unprecedented in our nation's history. There was
a "failure of imagination" in even comprehending that either could take
place on our soil. The responses you've suggested, while certainly
appropriate in hindsight, were also unprecedented, and similarly
unimagined. You've vastly overestimated the agility of ANY Governmental
agency in responding to ANY crisis. It takes seven people in any
Government organization to do the job one person could do in the private
sector, and if even ONE of those seven isn't there, or doesn't care, the
thing doesn't get done. That's bad, but that is how Government has
evolved. There's a lot of fault to go around.

By the way, although one might speculate that "busses" might have made the
"refugees" feel better, and maybe given the President some great photo
ops, "buses" might have been more useful in the situation at hand. Got a
dictionary? ;-)

Those buses that sat in the flooded parking lot weren't under Federal or
even State control. If there's one picture that illustrates the overall
lack of response to the emergency, that might be it.

The picture that best illustrates the overall lack of response to the
emergency is http://www.boingboing.net/2005/08/31/_a_tale_of_two_photo.html

Nero fiddles while Rome burns.
Bush does some pickin' and grinnin' while the Gulf Coast drowns.

Yee-haw!

BT

 

[Petal and Leif]

Katrina, like 9/11, was unprecedented in our nation's history.

Was it?
I was once watching a very interesting programme about hurricanes on
Discovery Channel.
And one of the worst case scenarios for USA, was said that a powerful
hurricane would come into the area of New Orleans, making the water go over,
or break the dikes that protect the city from flooding.
So, it can not have been that unpredicted, can it?
After all, New Orleans is in the region that hurricanes occur every year.
We knew Katarina were coming. We knew she was a category 5, long before she
reached the city....


Leif

 

[Bob the Cow]

Discovery Channel.
And one of the worst case scenarios for USA, was said that a powerful
hurricane would come into the area of New Orleans, making the water go
over, or break the dikes that protect the city from flooding.
So, it can not have been that unpredicted, can it?

Note that I said "unprecedented". Meaning -- without PRECEDENT. Nothing
like Katrina, inundating an entire city like New Orleans has EVER happened
on our shores before.

Watch the same Discovery Channel long enough and you'll see a PREDICTION
that a major earthquake will kill thousands of people in Southern
California. It HAS been predicted. It HAS NOT happened. Therefore, it is
NOT unpredicted, but it IS unprecedented.

I sense that we're divided by a common language by your sentence structure
and your spelling of "programme". My statement was accurate, as was yours.

 

[Bill]

Ah, because he legally couldn't, with the exception of the
California trip. Constitutionally, legally and traditionally (going
all the way back to the old Civil Defense days) Feds can't do
anything without being asked by the locals. Tain't legal.

You are wrong. Do you know anything about the Department of Homeland
InSecurity? This was Bush's baby, wasn't it?

http://www.alternet.org/story/25227/

But Chertoff's Sept. 1 statement ignored the administration's own homeland
security response plan, which directed the federal government to act on its
own authority to quickly provide assistance and conduct emergency operations
following a major catastrophe, pre-empting state and local authorities if
necessary. According to DHS' December 2004 National Response Plan (NRP),
"catastrophic events," such as what occurred in New Orleans, call for
heightened and "proactive" federal involvement to manage the disaster. The
response plan listed "guiding principles" to govern the response to these
major events. The "Guiding Principles for Proactive Federal Response" make
clear that, in these "catastrophic" cases, the federal government will
operate independently to provide assistance, rather than simply supporting
or cajoling state authorities:

a.. The primary mission is to save lives; protect critical infrastructure,
property, and the environment; contain the event; and preserve national
security.

b.. Standard procedures regarding requests for assistance may be expedited
or, under extreme circumstances, suspended in the immediate aftermath of an
event of catastrophic magnitude.

c.. Identified Federal response resources will deploy and begin necessary
operations as required to commence life-safety activities.

d.. Notification and full coordination with States will occur, but the
coordination process must not delay or impede the rapid deployment and use
of critical resources. States are urged to notify and coordinate with local
governments regarding a proactive Federal response.

e.. State and local governments are encouraged to conduct collaborative
planning with the Federal Government as a part of "steady-state"
preparedness for catastrophic incidents."

The NRP also says that, when responding to a catastrophic incident, the
federal government should start emergency operations even in the absence of
clear assessment of the situation. "A detailed and credible common operating
picture may not be achievable for 24 to 48 hours (or longer) after the
incident," the NRP's "Catastrophic Annex" states. "As a result, response
activities must begin without the benefit of a detailed or complete
situation and critical needs assessment."

A Sept. 5 Los Angeles Times article quoted former FEMA chief of staff Jane
Bullock saying that "[t]he moment the president declared a federal disaster
[on Aug 29], it became a federal responsibility. ... The federal government
took ownership over the response." Moreover, DHS' own website declares that
DHS "will assume primary responsibility on March 1st [2005] for ensuring
that emergency response professionals are prepared for any situation. This
will entail providing a coordinated, comprehensive federal response to any
large-scale crisis and mounting a swift and effective recovery effort.

BT

It is only the DHS when they think guns, bombs or drugs are involved. In
every other case it is "Screw you, you aren't a terrorist so we don't care."
Great President we (you, not me) elected. Florida and Texas deserve
massive hurricanes and then let's see what he does on his family states.
Bush hater,
Bill Baka