It's All Bush's Fault
Rosemary Esmay
The nutjobs over at The Daily Kos are in a blame Bush frenzy. Bush is being blamed for not being in New Orleans sharing the pain of the people and perusing the damage. Maybe he isn't there because they are still trying evacuate the area and they don't have the time or the manpower to host a Presidential visit. Maybe he's not there because people are going nuts looting and shooting. I don't know but I do know that it's a bit early to be expecting Bush to head on over to the disaster.
Personally, I'd love to see Bush down there in a gondola looking at the damage. Then we could hear how insensitive he was for floating by in a gondola. The poor don't have gondolas and that would make them feel even worse. Bastard!
Bush and the Republicans are also to blame because New Orleans didn't evacuate everyone properly. I didn't know the mayor of New Orleans was a Republican...
As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure that Louisiana is run by Democrats. Is there a prominent Republican to blame from LA?
Bush also caused Katrina because...
Wait for it...
He didn't sign The Kyoto Protocol!
Yes, according to the whackjobs at Kos, global warming caused this and that is Bush's fault too! I guess the nuts didn't read the New York Times recently:
Because hurricanes form over warm ocean water, it is easy to assume that the recent rise in their number and ferocity is because of global warming.
But that is not the case, scientists say. Instead, the severity of hurricane seasons changes with cycles of temperatures of several decades in the Atlantic Ocean. The recent onslaught "is very much natural," said William M. Gray, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University who issues forecasts for the hurricane season.
From 1970 to 1994, the Atlantic was relatively quiet, with no more than three major hurricanes in any year and none at all in three of those years. Cooler water in the North Atlantic strengthened wind shear, which tends to tear storms apart before they turn into hurricanes.
In 1995, hurricane patterns reverted to the active mode of the 1950's and 60's.
Yeah, instead of imploring his readers to donate money for the victims, he's got them all hot and frothy, pointing fingers and whining about how bad they have it. Screw you, you pathetic babies. Fork over some of that evil money that is burning your pocket. Give all that you think should have been taxed away to Operation Blessing.
Screw 'em.
And remember, come next election.
Then again, BDS makes no sense, as Clinton Hatred and Reagan Loathing didn't either.
Photon Courier:
You are partly right. When it comes to natural disasters, their response is anger, either at the President, for not signing the Kyoto treaty to turn our economy over the the U.N.O. to reduce us to a "Third World" level of poverty (and then where would their foreign aid money come from?), or else they curse the God they don't believe in.
But when it comes to man-made disasters such as the destruction of the World Trade Center (in which 3,000 Americans were murdered) on September 11, 2001, then they have no anger, no anger at all, only caring and empathy for the poor, misunderstood terrorists. Again, President Bush's refusal to sign the Kyoto treaty was to blame.
Any article there can be considered as reliable or relevant as an Elvis story in the Weekly World News.
"Then again, BDS makes no sense, as Clinton Hatred and Reagan Loathing didn't either."
Right about the first two, but Reagan Loathing makes perfect sense, and, looking back, I'm rather surprised there isn't more of it. If I were a Communist or a socialist, I'd hate Reagan, too. It was President Reagan, more than any other man, who brought down Communism in Europe and Russia. It was Reagan, more than any other President, who began to bring socialism, Big Government, the welfare state, the mixed economy, into question, and to prepare the way to a return to capitalism (the Unknown Ideal). Bush is very liberal (in the modern, New Deal sense) compared to Reagan. Leftists, if they had any vision at all beyond the range of the moment, should stop hating Bush nearly so much and hate Reagan they way they still hate McCarthy.
President Ronald Reagan, like Senator Joe McCarthy, like Senator Barry Goldwater, like Whittaker Chambers, like Ayn Rand, like E. Merrill Root, was the arch-enemy of the collectivism of the Left.
Yes, like H. L. "Bill" Richardson (Slightly To The Right!), I am a name-dropping Conservative. J. Edgar Hoooooooover!
"Oh wait. It's Americans that are suffering. Well, they deserve it don't they?"
Once again the Left proves it has nothing to offer.
They died.
Much of this funding was apparently to raise the level of levees that were sinking, and there apparently was an unfinished bridge and levee project underway at the site of the 17th Street Canal failure, which is the most serious failure. I'm sure people will look into whether the cut in funding contributed to this disaster.
YMMV depending on which wacko group you belong to, I guess.
I'm sure crazy conspiracy theorists and Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers will scream and point to this, instead of asking real questions. How much was New Orleans spending to keep itself from going under? How much was Louisiana spending?
However, calling the destruction "like Hiroshima" or "our Tsunami" is hyperbolic and parochial. But human beings can be expected to exaggerate classify personal disasters over impersonal disasters. "My" disaster will always be greater than "Your" disaster when it comes to human relations. Its just human nature.
Interestingly, the people I have talked to today about New Orleans in particular have all reacted with three reactions: 1) Sympathy, 2) mild contempt for the arrogance of people who refused to take warnings seriously, and 3) wondering why people would live in a city 20 feet below sea level that just happens to be located right next to the sea. One commenter said "you have to wonder about the intelligence of someone who would live there."
That is an interesting mix of reactions. No one is suggesting that we shouldn't do everything we can to help those folks out. But people are questioning the wisdom of rebuilding a city that by all natural rights shouldn't even exist where it does. But the overriding reaction is "even stupid people should be helped."
What do you call that? Pragmatic benevolence?
Not everything is partisan. As a Republican, I would do everything I could to help Mary Landreau right now. And if that accrued to her political benefit, so be it. In the grand scheme of things, Senators are SUPPOSED to represent their states, not their parties.
That is what both Senators Landreau and Vitter are doing now. I just watched a news conference where they shared the stage, Landreau speaking first because of seniority. There was not one hint, nada, zippo, zero, of partisanship. There was only a genuine desire to help their people - as it should be.
If this hurricane had hit just 50 years ago odds are it would have been comparable in death and damage scale to a tsunami.
Exactly. He necessarily will be accused of indifference and/or political opportunism. If he smiles while answering a question about the disaster, that will show he's callous. If he looks grim, he's just pretending to care ...
caltechgirl: Furthermore, weather on this planet moves in complex cycles, which almost certainly are more than a century of our years long.
But less than a century of Martian years?
Almost any where people live, there is some kind of natural disaster that can occur. Except here in South Jersey were disasters are an extreme rarity - of course the local nuke could always turn into a mushroom cloud.
I would say people can choose to live any where they like. But they should take prudent steps, collectively and/or individually, to prepare for potential known disasters.
Actually- no. A nuclear power plant cannot turn into a mushroom cloud. Ever.
It was mentioned in an earlier thread that it is human nature to gamble with the forces of nature. Living on the coast is a gamble human beings are willing to make. Should the Federal government (ie- taxpayers) be required to fund rebuilding a city below sea level on the Gulf Coast? Good question. It will happen because we as a species don't like to admit defeat.
And these people claim to be smarter than conservatives??? Reality-based community my ass.
Indeed. We tend to be safer individually and collectively when we're wealthy.
On a semi-related note:
I assume that means someone thought it wouldn't be cost-effective to upgrade the levees because category 4/5 were highly unlikely to strike New Orleans.
Actually- no. A nuclear power plant cannot turn into a mushroom cloud. Ever.
I meant that as tongue in cheek.
On any potential calmity one makes a cost/benefit analysis. What is the cost, what is the benefit, what is the probability something extremely bad will happen. How much insurance do you have on your house, your car, your body? Resources are finite and any governmental body has to put them where citizens lobby the most. Had they spent the money to upgrade the levees, the local officials might very well have been riden out on a rail as spending the money foolishly just to give their brother-in-law a constuction contract.
I don't think there are any "atta-boys" in government, only "gotchas".
Thank you!
The combination of "below sea level", "coastal" and "hurricane" seem to me to be a real bad one. And, for the finale, let's add "Mississippi River".
Dude, living there is just asking for it.
People seem to think that those 24 years were "normal" rather than a divergence from the norm. In fact, catastrophic hurricaines aren't uncommon after all.
My wife's family is from the Tidewater area of Virginia, and they've got family stories to tell about bad years of 'canes. Then there's 1954, when Hazel flooded Toronto. Yes, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA.
Dyke [dik] (plural dykes) n. an offensive tern for a lesbian.
Dike [dik] (plural dikes) n. 1. embankment to prevent floods: an embankment built along the shore of a sea or lake or beside a river to hold back the water and prevent flooding; 2. barrier: a barrier or obstacle meant to keep something out; 3. causeway: a raised roadway across a swamp or body of water; 4. ditch: a drainage ditch or other artificial watercourse; 5. geology long mass of igneous rock: a vertical or near-vertical mass of igneous rock that has forced its way upward through overlying strata.
Hey Mike, it might be easier to behave if you used the correct spelling. (:o
Reliability is often the enemy of efficiency.
I've thought for a long while that we as Americans live in a fragile environment. Granted we have great capability to fix things that get shattered, but still I'd like to see a little more iron, and a little less plastic, if you catch my metaphor.
Of course, gov't actions tend to stifle the cutting edge, and they often cause corruption, but then strictly capitalist methods have their faults too. I'm not sure where to draw the line, although I'd tend to draw it pretty close to the capitalist end.
All systems and models are inadequate in usually multiple ways which is why we hybridize.
And, yeah, it sounds like the Dutch might have been smarter than us. But one of the great strengths of America is that we're shameless, we steal from the best.
1) Emergency Personnel diverted to Iraq (helecopters not showing up to help seal the dike)
2) Money diverted from the construction project to Iraq and the GWOT/GSAVE.
As For:
"How much was New Orleans spending to keep itself from going under? How much was Louisiana spending?"
This is definately an issue, but there's earthquakes in the west, tornados in the plains, riverfloods in a ton of places and hurricanes in the south east. That question rarely gets asked, and picking this one to start bitching that the locals didn't do enough is hardly fair. The federal gov bails out other places just the same. If we want to start pushing for that bailout to require qualifications, that's fine, but we need to put them in place before the disaster.
I shall honor the integrity and sanctity of a woman's body, whether she be gynosexual or androsexual. I hate all rapists. Sooner should I have my member severed than used to such dishonor.
Oooooh, even better...since they rotate on a decadial scale, are the 'first people'/native americans to blame? Or is it only us EEEEHHHHHVVVVUUUULLLL whitey asss folks that don't 'love earth mother/gaia' the way some wackjobs want us to?
Those are all retorical. I know, it's all some secret right-wing conspircy to control the weather and wipe out the stronghold of straight-ticket lefties. ;)
Rhianna wrote:
"Oooh, Ooooh, Ooooh...! Does the fact that these storms are replaying at the 50's and 60's era strenght mean it's JFK's fault too? How about RFK? (We all know Teddy's a blowhard, so these might be his fault too.)"
If you're on the Right, you might want to blame Lee Harvey Oswald. If you're on the Left, you may want to blame Joe McCarthy.
Yeah, upon reflection that occurred to me - long after I hit post. Like this morning.
Oh well, I'm good with words. Just not perfect.
More like the question rarely gets noticed. I live in a tornado-friendly state, and we do a lot to prepare against the worst. California has specific building codes for earthquake resistance. Each region prepares for its own disasters, and we have a Federal Emergency Management Agency to coordinate when the disaster exceeds local capabilities.
The Blame Bush reasons so far are from a position of ignorance, not knowledge, and that is why they are suspect. Every single form of it comes down to "we don't know how much this may have helped, so by not having it, it must be Bush's fault." "We don't know"'s aren't valid criticism, they're whinging.
On your two points, Tito:
1) There is a sufficiency of Army Corps of Engineers personnel and equipment. What is missing is a solid, reliable plan of action, and that is due to the lack of knowledge about the circumstance. It has been pointed out that dropping 3000 lb bags may not be such a good idea, as they could turn into more debris instead of helping to plug the gaps. Not to mention that the vast majority of our armed forces are NOT in Iraq. . .
2) Odd that someone should criticize a preventative action by claiming it inhibited another preventative action. As I pointed out, New Orleans and Louisiana had specific responsibility for maintaining their safety over and above the Federal involvement. But the best-case plans I have heard for the restructuring would not have had it completed until long after 2005, so we'd have watched several billion dollars of Federal construction money swept away by Katrina. Maybe, if you insist on Federal primary involvement, if a prior President had initiated such a project New Orleans would have been protected. . .
Except in 1953, when half the country flooded. The Dutch remember this as the worst event of the 20th century (with good cause!)
Okay, maybe not a hurricane, but "hurricane-force winds" counts for something.