The absentee.
By trevino Posted in Republicans — Comments (129) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The NYT's bizarre fantasies of being ravished by the Leader notwithstanding, there is a definitive public role for a President in these circumstances. Regrettably for that dwindling band among us who feel the Republic is strengthened by every inactive, hands-off officeholder, modern democracy demands that an elected representative involve himself in the great events of the day. At a bare minimum, he must appear informed and active, lest the perception of leaderlessness engender its own reality.
President Bush is failing to meet this minimum.
The President's lackluster afternoon address yesterday was followed by a truly disastrous Good Morning America interview this morning. (No video or transcript yet, but a BBC writeup is here.) In it, the President went from making the usual minor errors -- stating that the number of "missing" was unknown, when he probably meant the dead -- to making a truly stupefying one: stating that the breaching of the levees was an unforeseen event. This is simply false (see any of the usual left wing sites for copious sourcing), and it's such a basic error in this case as to suggest a real detachment from the situation at hand. New Orleans has been on borrowed times, behind insufficient levees, for decades; it's incredible that the President either does not know or will not acknowledge this.
What does this have to do with the relief and recovery effort per se? Very little. What does it have to do with the President's political fate? A great deal. Fairly or not, his perceived engagement with the de facto loss of a major American city is now the single most important issue affecting his second term agenda. It won't take long for many to make the connection that it's just this sort of de facto loss -- albeit to terrorism rather than natural disaster -- that his Administration has purportedly been preparing to handle since 9/11. That he seems disengaged, and that at the moment those purported preparations seem ephemeral indeed, together may well represent a ripping-away of the facade of the President-as-protector that won him reelection.
It's too early to know, of course. But for the sake of his agenda -- and really, for the sake of our refugee fellow-citizens -- the President needs to get on the ball.
« Burn the Witch — Comments (18) | A National Object Lesson in Tennessee — Comments (11) »
The absentee. 129 Comments (0 topical, 129 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Well considered, beautifully written. If dKos can ever match the writing here pound-for pound, I'll delight you all and go back.
. . . why you feel it's "regrettable" that "modern democracy demands that an elected representative involve himself in the great events of the day".
It seems to me that taking an active role in guiding the Republic through a disaster like this is the distilled essence of what it means to be the country's leader. Whether or not he's going to involve himself in the minutia of the government's response it strikes me that it's the President's role to appear informed, in control, measured, determined, and hopeful in a crisis like this.
All great leader-type Presidents (FDR, Kennedy, Reagan) could do this. Can you imagine any of them reacting as Bush has?
I find it a little sad that you see it only as involving the future of Bush's agenda, although I agree that it will do that as well. As you suggest, his performance so far does not bode well for his future plans.
However, remember that in the aftermath of 9/11 Bush received really terrible reviews for about two days. Safire in particular was vicious. The Administration managed, however, to turn it around -- they may yet do so here.
[My first post here so, to help you get your range before you start firing, I should let you know that I'm a contrarian dKos poster].
He should be able to well understand a Hurricanes effects as a former Texas Governor. I am afriad he is not on his game lately on many things. He needs to wake up. The last thing we could stomach is a Speaker Pelosi or Majority Leader Reid.
Please get with the program Mr President!
that they have a non-political monarch who can fill the role of Very Concerned and Grieved Ruler at times like this while the actual leadership gets the job done.
But I agree: symbolism in the face of overwhelming catastrophe is important too. Marie Antoinette may not have said "Let them eat cake" during a famine and Nero may not really have played his lyre during the burning of Rome but since people heard and believed those things about them their fates were sealed.
Josh, you're absolutely right. I tried to make these same points in certain places on the liberal blogosphere last night, and received troll ratings and profane personal attacks.
It's nice to know that sensible, fair-minded criticism of the President's policies and actions can be found here even at the highest level.
Courtesy of the Political Teen
I'm not a Bush fan, but I know he's not callous and uncaring. His actions of the last few days, however, sure make him seem like he is.
I've been reluctantly supporting the president for about two years now.
His performance the last two days sealed the deal for me. From the photo op in San Diego with the Guitar, to the photo of the President in Air Force 0ne showing his "concern" as he flew over New Orleans, to the horrible speech yesterday to the horrible speech today and the disastrous appearance on ABC today, I've had it. I will no longer defend this administration.
It's one thing to be politically tone deaf. Its another thing to be seen as completely divorced from reality. His speech yesterday was so bad that nearly all the writers at National Review Online's "The Corner" were aghast - and we know what a bunch of bleeding heart, far-left, America-hating, terrorists-sympathisers hang out over there.
I'm shocked that so many people are defending the administration's actions on this.
I'm surprised to see both this diary, and also one of the comments at the bottom here. How do I explain it...hmm...Blog Wars, I think sums it up enough.
Our view of the right, the right's view of the left. You know...
I'm not going to launch into a tirade, though, not on your turf. But I agree with the diarist and commentors here that the President seems a bit out of touch with this situation.
I know it's a bad metaphor, but is the Republican levee around this president starting to break, and what will be the consequences? Consider the following if the President is not seen to be effectively leading in this disaster or worse is a bumbler.
The famous "Capital" that President Bush promised to spend on his agenda will evaporate. His ability to move a legislative agenda in the face of poor ratings and poor public perceptions will become difficult at best, at worst he becomes a lame duck early.
Why should a Republican Senator support social security reform?
Why should a Republican Senator support an arch conservative nominee for the Supreme Court when Rehnquist goes? Roberts will get through no matter what happens, as any effects due to poor leadership will take a while to set in.
Why should a Republican Senator support continued engagement in Iraq?
Any Republican politician running for office in '08 will run as far as they can get from Bush to avoid being tarred with the same brush.
In short, if President Bush drops the ball badly during this crisis, the next President come 08 won't be Republican, and the Senate may change hands.
The stakes are enormous right now.
It is incredibly sad that the election of a Republican Congress in 1994 and the election of Republican Presidents since then has gotten us so little in the way of more efficient and more effective government.
Though I disagree with him on social policy, I will strongly consider Rudy Giuliani in 2008 for President because he understands that government needs to operate more like a business and be proactive rather than reactive. The problems of today, from hyperinflated gasoline prices to the destruction of New Orleans, needed to be addressed 10 years ago, at least. Passing an energy bill and sending FEMA now are too little and too late.
From terrorism, to border security, to energy policy, to disaster preparedness (and I agree with the author here that problems in New Orleans were known and simply ignored) the federal government has lacked the foresight and resolve to plan for a better tomorrow. Their planning cycle is measured in days rather than years.
Certainly Democrat governance is no answer; it is telling that the party of liberals is moving to the right on such issues as spending, terror, and immigration because they know that is where the citizens are. I think the answer is for a new breed and generation of Republicans who will run on a platform that points out the shortcomings of the current administration and Congress and vows to do things differently and better. It is an absolute joke for any Republican member of Congress to offer themselves as a Presidential candidate in 2008; they probably don't deserve reelection.
Our current Republican federal government is so wrapped up in reelection and scoring political points that they have failed to provide us prudent public policy or effective leadership. What a shame. What a crime.
It is happening on his watch. I love him like a brother and deeply respect him, but he signed for this job, and when tough things happen on your watch you are accountable. I am sure he is looking to heaven and thinking he did not sign up for this, but he did. He had better pull it off, get in front of the parade and lead it in a direction that makes sense. He shown better than any President since FDR in a time of terrible attack. Now we have an Act of God bigger than any in our history. He must, if he is to have the legacy he should, shine oike he has never shone before.
It was painful to watch W speak with Bill at his side this afternoon...knowing what Bill could have conveyed, empathywise (sincere or not, being beside the point, so save your arrows).
Despite the "filth" comment that's getting play around the blogosphere, the reaction on Redstate has been laudable.
It's time to put heads down and work. Period. There's plenty of time to score points later...right now folks need help.
Watching GWB in the Oval Office today with his dad and the junior senator from New York's husband was just such sorry theater. Furrowed brows, pursed lips, now bit your lower lip...
Where are Karen and Karl? Were they meeting in NOLA this past weekend? Nobody seems in charge of the message since the storm hit. Really, it's rather baffling. It doesn't seem that hard and yet it feels like the air is going out of the balloon.
The whole premise of this post is missing the mark, IMO. Bush will be judged on how the relief efforts and security situation materialize in the ensuing days and weeks, not from some forgettable press statements or interviews. Americans of all stripes (pundits notwithstanding) will be engaged, through their wallets and through their prayers, to support the president and to ensure that the city of New Orleans gets back on her feet again. I believe Americans judge their leaders on the merits of those leaders' actions and the fruits of their labors; not by limiting their view of leadership to a Bill "bite-the-lower-lip and-feel-your-pain" Clinton-styled consoler in chief. Besides, Americans know Bush, and, despite his recent poll numbers on his job performance, they still have a favorable view of him personally. Everybody knows Bush stumbles over words on every interview he ever does. This is meaningless in the greater scheme of things.
I'm very disappointed in this post and the ensuing comments. Why does there always have to be such a rush to judgment?
The President is a good man who has gotten us through much worse and now is the time to show some trust and faith in him.
I agree that it will be hard to pass this one off as a natural disaster or act of god. It is clear that the scope of the disaster was greatly magnified by a lack of planning, organization and resources, and that some of the blame will inevitably be laid at the President's door -- perhaps rightly.
The suggestion that the President should be more involved only because it is politically expedient is incredibly callous and the claim that the Republic is always improved by less government seems off the mark in this context. On the contrary, this disaster shows that there are times when government is absolutely necessary.
The suggestion that the President should be more involved only because it is politically expedient is incredibly callous....
If you're concerned with actual results on the ground, then that's the only real reason remaining for the President to appear more involved. These things are not run from the White House.
As I sit here in my apartment in Baton Rouge, trying to figure out what I'm going to do next to help the wave of refugees that has hit the state capitol, I can't help but shake my head in disbelief that stuff like this gets posted on RedState or anywhere else on the net. Trully, who are you people? What strange and wonderful place do you come from where a leader's rhetorical skills can heal every wound, or where the lack of them can be deadly? Where do you come from that the life and death struggles of hundreds of thousands of ordinary folks serve as a backdrop to the President's performance as a crisis manager.
Let me tell you what the view is like from HERE. Down here in the fetid, sweltering heat of the world's largest refugee camp (Baton Rouge) we measure progress our failure in bags of rice, boxes of clothes, diapers, canned food, mattresses, and blankets. Down here we don't care whether or not a leader, be it Gov. Blanco, Sen. Landrieu, Sen. Vitter, Mayor Nagin, or President Bush, can turn a phrase neatly. We want to see that he/she is working, working hard to bring relief to our stricken region. To that end, we like to hear numbers about liters of water, pounds of rice, generators, and blankets that are on the way here. Such numbers lend a certain concreteness to our hopes that a better day is coming. And pardon my frankness, none of us down here have the luxory of time to sit back and critique the forensic performance of our leaders, be they Blanco or Bush.
The really sad thing is that up to this point, I've been coming back to this site daily and posting my comments, in the sincere belief that somehow my observations might communicate something of the quality of daily existence in Southeast Louisiana. Was I wrong? Is there any point in my being here? You know, an hour ago I was riding pretty high, having seen my guests off to a (hopefully) better future in Houston. But the shallowness of this diary and related comments has taken the wind right out of me. I don't think I'll be back here for a while. AFK.
Rightly or wrongly, the President is facing a political disaster unless he seizes the reigns of the bully pulpit. The President, at least as a matter of perception, is our civic father. He needs to reasure, show confidence and lead. Given the utter and total incompetence of the local and state leadership in La., the President must step up to the plate.
It's sad to see Republicans here heaping blame on Bush. What else he could do? The breaching of levee WAS unforseen. NO ONE could have accurately predicted what would have happened after a Cat 5 hurricane went through a major city.
New Orleans may be on borrowed time, but you all ought blame on preceding presidents like LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, George I, and your favorite womanizer, Clinton. Obviously, that's not the case, now is it? So, please stop this silly blame game, it's a tragedy, not a political event to be played out.
It's like saying Bush "lost" Iraq, which is absurd. He didn't "lose" New Orleans. It was "lost" to a major natural disaster, nothing more or less.
Of course, I expect my post to fall on deaf ears, which is ironic, since I am Deaf. If you all want to play blame game, be my guest, after all, this is America, the land of freedom...and stupidity of the Left.
Dan
You are absolutely right. This whole thread is nothing but tripe. On the left we the absolute scum of the earth trying to make political gain out of a natural disaster. That is why it's called a natural disaster. If it wasn't, it would have been a summer rain like a billion others. It happened in a place that never should have a been a city. Who would put a city below sea level next to the sea? As to response, what would have happened if this storm hit in 1905? 1955? Do you all live in a world where every problem is fixed in 24 hours? Now on the right, we get criticism of the President for not being a "Leader" because he isn't Ronald Reagan playing the Gipper?. Unbelievable. If everything that happens in this country is going to turn into a left vs right argument, then we all might as well chose blue or grey and may the best shots win.
The breaching of levee WAS unforseen. NO ONE could have accurately predicted what would have happened after a Cat 5 hurricane went through a major city.
Both these sentences are false.
That being said, no one is blaming the President here for anything beyond being a poor communicator. He certainly didn't cause this catastrophe.
What strange and wonderful place do you come from where a leader's rhetorical skills can heal every wound, or where the lack of them can be deadly?
Certainly no one here believes such a thing.
Where do you come from that the life and death struggles of hundreds of thousands of ordinary folks serve as a backdrop to the President's performance as a crisis manager.
Sadly, this is the case whether we like it or not. (And, as I note in the original post, I don't.) This is a political site, and we must at some point note the political context of major events.
That the French Quarter, which is above the sea level, was where New Orleans originally built. Thus, city expanded over years, and thought expanding to below sea level was convenient.
There are always risks to living anywhere, it's not safe naturally anywhere.
It happened in a place that never should have a been a city. Who would put a city below sea level next to the sea?
It wasn't below sea level when it was built. New Orleans is built on delta land that is naturally restored with soil deposited by periodic flooding. The city was built at sea level and then slowly began to subside. The levees were built to eliminate the flooding, and that simply accelerated the rate of subsidence.
Of course, when this was realized, a massive public works program could have been launched to move the city to stable high ground. But I doubt very much that anyone at all would have gone along with that idea. I mean, think of the cost -- plus people tend to prefer to stay where they are.
If the city is rebuilt in situ a good deal of thought should go into zoning issues (to avoid building in low-lieing areas) and levee technology (obviously, what they were using were not particularly effective and also subject to degredation over time).
The levee system wasn't designed to withstand a Cat 5 storm. The best it could was to withstand a Cat 3 storm.
Here is the link, http://news.yahoo.com/s/krwashbureau/20050902/ts_krwashbureau/_wea_katrina_
levee
The only way to blame Bush lies in the funding of construction projects, but then no one could have predicted that one day a Cat 5 storm would have hit New Orleans. This is like one-in-millions odds thing.
Tell me, how many Cat 5 storms have gone though Gulf coast in the last 100 years? Only one, I believe, and that was Camille, if I recall correctly. Sorry, kid, you got facts wrong, not me.
Geez...stupidity of Left is incredible...
Can't you wait 30 days? I suppose there is already a poll taken that asks "Do you think the President has directed the relief efforts to your expectations" You might as well ask the equally dumb question "Do you think the President is being politically astute in managing his image in the midst of this disaster"
The levee system wasn't designed to withstand a Cat 5 storm. The best it could was to withstand a Cat 3 storm.
Yeah, I know. That point's been made here, by me and others, multiple times. I'm really not sure whom you're arguing with, but it ain't me.
I see no reason to "wait 30 days" and cede the discussion to the left in the meantime.
That the breaching of levees could have been forseen. Is it not what you said? You claimed that it was false to suggest that it was an unforseen event. I refuted that suggestion.
There was nothing anybody could have done to repair the levees quickly or to know quickly where it was breached. The levee could have been breached anywhere, as the article clearly explained that there are a number of ways levees could fail.
Dan
actually it was predicted, and pretty precisely, too. There are probably dozens of other links as well, that's just the first. So please don't continue to repeat an obviously false statement, just because Bush said it this morning.
My biggest gripe is that four years after September 11, there appears to have been no serious planning for disasters of this type. FEMA is being phased out; OK, where's the new guys? Natural disasters and terrorist attacks don't wait for the bureaucrats to finish making the org chart. They happen suddenly, and often without warning. The fact that even today, after four days, Michael Chertoff claimed ignorance of what was going on at the NO convention center is either a bald-faced lie or the greatest incompetence in modern history. Honestly, now, ask yourself this question -- are you pleased with the response of the federal government to the hurricane?
As to Bush, he didn't cause the hurricane, no one is claiming that, but the response has been abysmal. For two days it appeared he wasn't interested, and then he gave two dreadful speeches, one a laundry list and the other a very weak performance.
I believe Trevino is right about Bush not appearing to care. I disagree with those here who think that it doesn't really matter. Leadership sets the tone, whether liberal or conservative. If the leader doesn't appear involved or concerned, underlings naturally think that it's just not that important. Judging from the relief effort thus far, any message of concern from on high has just not been received.
The left blames Bush for eveything from hurricanes to busted wind in elevators. What kind of "discussion" do you think you can have with slobbering, ranting fools. You put this type of diary up and it draws them here like flies to poop.
I'm not going to do your homework for you. There were plenty of predictions that the levees might fail in particular circumstances -- which, sadly, Katrina met. FEMA and National Geographic spring to mind; given New Orlean's geographic situation, it was hardly a novel concept. Foreseen? Yeah, it was foreseen.
None of this suggests that the President is therefore to blame for this catastrophe. I have worked to refute that notion and will continue to do so. If you feel you need to promulgate the falsehood that a levee failure in New Orleans was a hitherto-unforeseen circumstance throughout modern history, I wish you godspeed.
If that's your basic gripe, we have many threads to choose from.
I'm sensing that, coupled with the sight of mere criticism of the President, this is exactly the case.
....a Republican and conservative website. This is not synonymous with a "lefty-free zone." We have posting rules, and this was within it: there are no grounds for complaint.
The fact that lefties are encouraged to respond to a post is not indicative of the fact that it's a bad one.
Sometimes, in fact, it's a badge of honor.
the flies or the poop characterizations, but I assume you've seen this.
My original complaint is that it is way to early to start judging political performance. This created a very shallow discussion that only Bush hating lefties would enjoy and reading the majority of comments, that is exactly what you got.
We just like shiny objects.
And what precisely did he expect to accomplish by coming out to California this week? His ratings are already almost on a par with Nixon at the height of Watergate and that was for July before gas hit $3 bucks a gallon and now Katrina. There certainly was nothing to be gained. Arnold will handle the Special Election and no one has even announced that they are running against Feinstein next year. The insensitivity, lack of concern and total lack of planning are going to hurt the Republicans big time.
The vaunted PR machine of the first term has most certainly lost its touch. The seeming public callousness of Bush and team is doing incalculable harm to the nation. As of today, there is no real leadership. Bush is like a deer caught in the headlights.
And it's just starting. The msm is going to rip him to shreds if the Army Corps of Engineers tales are true. Supposedly, all work on the levees along Lake Ponchatrain were suspended this year because of budget cuts. And if that death toll goes into the thousands as predicted, the Republicans will have no choice but to cut loose from him.
The political ramifications are just starting.
"NO ONE could have accurately predicted what would have happened after a Cat 5 hurricane went through a major city."
Nova and Frontline, did a story about this exact event, long ago. Must be you missed it they had it correct?.
Aired January 2005
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3204/02.html
Oh that is PBS, always predicting "the liberal view", although over the years I have found what the say is generally accurate regardless of anyone's politics.
I saw the whole frontline show but don't remember the date of that. New Orleans Federal funds where cut and they knew the risk, it was far more likely to happen then not. The question was when.
fair enough. I hate Bush. Guilty as charged.
Care to respond to the substance of what I wrote? Are you happy with what you're seeing on TV? Pleased with the emergency response? Pleased that Michael Chertoff went on NPR and didn't know that there were 2000 people without food or water at the convention center, even when the NPR anchor told him he had a reporter there at that very moment?
Put aside the politics. Are you satisfied with the level of emergency response you're seeing? If you are, I respectfully submit that you are seeing the situation with political blinders on.
Because I don't got no stinkin' badges but, maybe I'll get some.
If you are going to quote someone, and then shoot them down, it's helpful to quote them accurately. Picard90 said:
but then no one could have predicted that one day a Cat 5 storm would have hit New Orleans. This is like one-in-millions odds thing.
He most certainly did NOT say:
"NO ONE could have accurately predicted what would have happened after a Cat 5 hurricane went through a major city."
As you claim he did.
Either you can't tell the difference between the two, or you're intentionally being deceptive. Neither is desirable.
I didn't vote for him (but hey, I didn't vote for Clinton either -- I have a knack for picking the loser), but that doesn't make him any less my president.
In a situation like this, I want to feel like the leadership has the reins in hand. I want to feel like they know what they're doing. This is a situation that so clearly calls for strong, direct action, that it's painful to see anything less.
I have hopes that this thing can still be pulled together. In fact, it has to be.
at the the sacrifices of those responding and appreciative of their efforts and I am thankful that it is not my job. I do know that it is really easy for you, and those like you, to sit on the sidelines and criticize, but that has always been the case and is to be expected from those who cover their own weaknesses by pointing at others.
I hope you do come back. You are a ray of sunshine amidst this great darkness.
I'm not happy about the Monday morning quarterbacking that is going on here, but I'm going to give a little slack to some of these guys. You see, they are men and men are typically fixers and right now they are so removed from the situation that they can't help or fix it. So, it's frustrating. When frustration sets in, ya gotta blow somewhere.
As for you, you are my hero, at least for today. :)
Not only am I done being a Republican under this current leadership. I am done here, you people are so blind its frightening, Fascist have taken the party and you are holding their coat.
Makes me sick.
Leon H. please read post #29... they very first sentence.
and I don't blame Bush for either the hurricane or the collapse of the levy. I blame the administration for getting us into the Iraq War, and it appears that the war and the accompanying deficit led to the cutting of funds for the levy projects. However, this did not specifically lead to this breach. It only would have extended NOLA's borrowed time. Likewise, taking real action against global warming, even if that action did anything, would not have avoided 90 degree water temperatures in the Gulf. So, George W is not doing anything particularly worse than many others, at least with regard to funding New Orleans levy projects. But true leadership recognizes these problems and has the will to see them overcome. W did not specifically do anything that allowed 9/11 to happen, but there was obviously no vision and no will to do anything about terrorism prior to. It would have taken a great leader to inspire us lazy-a88 Americans to the point where we cared enough about these things in advance to do something about them. Where there is no will among the people, there is no will among the politicians. Thus it is left only to great leaders to create the will in the people. People like that don't come along very often, especially in the political realm. So we are left with long periods of Franklin Pierce and James Polk and Jimmy Carter and George Bush.
I think where Bush has utterly failed, however, is in the response. In a Paula Zahn interview today, Mike Brown claimed that the Federal Gov't only learned about the mess at the convention center today. Military helicopters stopped the rescue efforts at one point today because of a couple gunshots. One incident after another shows that things just are not in control, and that more people will die than they have to. It's patently ridiculous. There should today have been so much water and food at the Dome and at the convention center that people would have had to move to make room for it.
It's an absolute disgrace. But no, Bush didn't specifically cause the levy to break.
I don't blame Bush for . . . the collapse of the levy.
That was Gary Condit.
I can't help wondering if the real surprise is that there are survivors to be evacuated from New Orleans. If the "doomsday scenario" had played out as it almost did (direct Cat5 hit) and the levees had been overtopped by a storm surge, it seems like most of the people now waiting for rescue would have been drowned in their attics.
Well Doug, assuming SF is not Santa Fe, perhaps you better go down to City Hall and check over the plans for the 8.5 headed your way sooner or later. Hope that a true leader like John Kerry has "reported for duty" and is running the country. I'm sure that at worst, Starbucks will only be closed for a day or two.
Clearly, Presidential speeches are by far the most important part of the Bush Administration's response to the disaster. He must make them often and well.
Second only to those speeches are photo opportunities. He must exploit this disaster for all it's worth, get down in the water and cry "I feel your pain" with some of the victims. This is so obviously the most important use of the President's time, that it's astounding he's not doing it.
And why WASN'T he there with the Army Corps of Engineers, personally helping patch the levee? Come on! THIS is our Commander-in-Chief? Why can't he focus his attention entirely on this one thing?
If only we'd all watch CNN and read Daily Kos more, we'd all understand just how much of a miserable failure President Bush really is.
Former Pres. Bush and Clinton were interviewed together on CNN today and here is their final response to Suzanne Malveaux's partisan political attack at the current president (hattip to Captain's Quarters):
"G.H.W. BUSH: Let me -- I just to want finish. I believe the administration is doing the right thing, and I believe they have acted in a timely fashion. And I understand people being critical. That happens all the time. And I understand some people wanted to make, you know, a little difficulty by criticizing the president and the team. But I don't want to sit here and not defend the administration which, in my view, has taken all the right steps. And they're facing problems that nobody could foresee: breaking of the levees and the whole dome thing over in New Orleans coming apart. People couldn't foresee that.
CLINTON: Yes, I think that's important to point out. Because when you say that they should have done this, that or the other thing first, you can look at that problem in isolation, and you can say that.
But look at all the other things they had to deal with. I'm telling you, nobody thought this was going to happen like this. But what happened here is they escaped -- New Orleans escaped Katrina. But it brought all the water up the Mississippi River and all in the Pontchartrain, and then when it started running and that levee broke, they had problems they never could have foreseen.
And so I just think that we need to recognize right now there's a confident effort under way. People are doing the best they can. And I just don't think it's the time to worry about that. We need to keep people alive and get them back to life -- normal life."
So the Pres. made "a stupefying error" in stating the breaching of the levees was an unforseen event? I guess two former presidents are also guilty. I'm also wondering after reading this post whether this is Daily Kos or Red State. I know all about the age-old problem with the levee system. But your focus (and the MSM's) is all wrong. Look to the locals.
All major airports have contingency plans in the event of a crash landing or takeoff. Since it has been known for years that New Orleans was particularly vulnerable to a major hurricane, why was there no contingency plan in place to deal with the events that are now taking place? Why was there no plan in place to provide scores of busses to evacuate the residents who couldn't drive- before the storm hit? Why was there no plan in place to deal with the displacement of people from their homes-like where to direct them for the necessities of life? Why was there no plan in place to deal with the looting that would inevitably take place? The MSM certainly excoriated the Bush administration over the looting in Iraq. This is a city that has been and continues to be controlled by Democrats. Their failures, not the federal government's, or the President's, are what need to be scrutinized by the MSM. But I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen. It's so much easier to just blame Bush.
I know you're not blaming him, but this post gives aid and comfort to those who are.
They'd just blame 'global warming' for the earthquake.
....Presidential speeches are by far the most important part of the Bush Administration's response to the disaster.
They're not, and no one is saying they are. However, they are rather critical for the President's political agenda -- and his own political capital. Which was the point of the post.
" but that has always been the case and is to be expected from those who cover their own weaknesses by pointing at others"
Slighly ironic given the topic of dicussion on this thread and Trevino's quote of W saying "No one could have anticpated that . . .."
Seems consonant with what you are accusing this person of.
Maybe the key here is that he doesn't care about his political capital, and thinks that letting the hurricane victims get all the attention is more important.
He's not making this about himself, and i don't think anyone else should, either.
By criticizing out President, you are indeed aiding and abetting our enemies at home and abroad. Can you imagine the effect your Thread is having to our Troops overseas? I can imagine Al Queda using this tragedy to propagandize its goals. This does not even include what those Liberals will do when they see it.
Let us all remember that the Internet is worldwide. Statements can be construed and twisted to hurt America. We need to rally around Our President and defend him from this baseless nonsense!!!
Frankly, I am disappointed that Trevino would post such drivel.
....about his political capital. He's got a war to fight and judges to install. He should too. And, I suspect, he does.
Or whatever you're calling yourself these days. Pleasure to ban you again for the third time.
But you are looking in the wrong direction.
There should indeed have been huge amounts of food and water in the Dome. Why was that not the case? The blame lies with the people nobody wants to blame - Blanco and Nagin.
Unfortunately, I think it is one that noone wants to answer right now. But will need to in the future.
...I just assumed there was food and water in there. Oops. Never bet on competence.
I would have assumed that as well, but it seems that was not the case. I know they had short notice and all, but gee, you'd think they would have at least had bottled water and some type of non-perishable food. This one truly boggles the mind.
He is the leader of the country. Even injured professional athletes are in the sidelines/dugouts/etc cheering for their team, even though they cannot contribute on the field.
He should be more involved because it's the moral thing to do. It sets a poor example for him not to be.
according to CNN.
he could have
- ended his vacation early to be ready. Even Slick Willy did that much.
- skipped photo ops in SD to keep his toadies Chertoff and Browns' feet to the fire.
- look like he really cares and isn't just avoiding troubling his beautiful mind
- Rally all those conservatives that marched on Terry Schaivo to take in a poor victim.
- Go cut some brush in Biloxi.
- Order a full military response earlier...
- Ivade Mexico (no wait, wrong disaster)
the man is a joke.
or put a city on a fault line like Charleston SC, or in Mountains that burn in summer or place that flood like along the Missouri, Red River of the North or any part of Texas near a river.
No one blames Bush for a hurricane. The fact that billions have been spent on homeland security in the last 4 years and we still can't organize a relief effort is criminal. That is his responsibility.
cognitave dissonance is even worse
and done the only thing that might help in these circumstances is #5. And the security nightmare surrounding that idea is probably not worth it.
#4 is also a valid point and it is happening. Churches and other mission oriented non-profits are already on the ground all over the three state coastal area and in Houston. And one need only look at our own Leverkuhn for an example of absolute unselfish assistance.
#6-State governors control the Guard for state relief, not the President.
#1, 2, 3, & 7-cheap partisan shots that are totally unproductive in regards to helping those in need.
"The fact that billions have been spent on homeland security in the last 4 years and we still can't organize a relief effort is criminal. That is his responsibility."
I guess you have forgotten the hell that was FL last summer?
"...or put a city on a fault line like Charleston SC, or in Mountains that burn in summer or place that flood like along the Missouri, Red River of the North or any part of Texas near a river."
I daresay none of these situations are as precarious as NO. FTR-I have lived in Charleston, Grand Forks, St. Louis, and currently reside in the foothills of a western mountain range. I've also spent considerable time in NO and have friends that live there. I don't make that comment lightly.
Another point about the RR of the North. After it's banks swelled and flooded Grand Forks, the city had the good sense to make a great deal of the new flood plain a city park and did not allow homeowners to rebuild inthe area. I know this as a fact as I was there the end of July and pushed my child on swings in what used to be a childhood friend's home.
But really, this guy couldn't have ordered the US military into a response? I find it very hard to believe that the federal government cannot make use of its resources to get boats, planes, helicopters into New Orleans en masse. If they cannot land, surely they can drop supplies of food, water, medicine and baby formula? I'm sorry, don't give some legalistic reply. If the national guard cannot find a single plane or a single boat to come to these people's aid, the President ought to simply just take control as the country's leader and use whatever power he has to save people's lives. As he always says, "err on the side of life." So why isn't he ordering the military to save these people's lives?????????
I am so outraged and humiliated as an American about my govern'ts incompentance. The President needs to figure something, anything out.
The breaching of teh levee was unforseen? Why was everyone saying it was going to happen? Why did the mayor of NOLA order a total evac, why did he say there wouldn't be enough body bags? EVERYONE FORESAW the broken levees, EVERYONE I know was talking about it. All the people I know who come from NOLA or ever lived there tell me it was ALWAYS a constant source of conversation in the city, what might happen if the city took a direct hit from a 4 or a 5 hurricane. It makes me so, shakingly, mad to hear people flippantly shrug their shoulders and say "oh who could have know"? If you weren't paying a shred of attention I guess it might have come as a surprise. Was Bush taking it seriously at all? Had he read the forecasts for what was known was going to happen in the case of a direct hit on NOLA? Aaaargh these people are dying because of lack of foresight and incompetance!!!!!
how about using his status as the most powerful man on earth to alleviate some pain? Why can't he order the Army, the Navy, the Marines in there for a mass evacuation? People are dying!!! They are dying right there on your TV screen, and you have the callousness to complain that Bush is not to blame? Where the #@ is he!!!???? I don't care if I get banned anymore. I can't take it. This guy is totally out of touch, totally caught in the headlights, and TOTALLY AWOL.
Do you really want folks to hole up in the SuperDome for a week when plumbing is shot, electricity is shot, etc.? Might as well condemn them all to death.
Lots of blame for lots of public officials, but IMHO, giving incentive to stay holed up in the SD as it became a festering mess is NOT a good idea.
Banking food and wather somewhere high and dry, yes. Superdome? Nah. I don't think so.
But who the hell am I, right? Just armchair quarterbacking.
They didn't put the city below sea level. And in 1905 and 1955 there were alot less people living down there. And as far as taking political advantage, well, maybe some are, but for ordinary citizens watching other Americans begging for water for their dying babies on TV and there is not a SINGLE HELIPCOPTER OR BOAT OR PLANE to drop supplies for these poor people, you feel just super fine and dandy about that? Well, you trot yourself out on TV and say "oh they're dying it happens, nothing anyone can do about it, Bush is the best I love him" You'll get mobbed in thiscountry right now. Try to go down to the Superdome and tell those people that everything is just fine and no is to blame. Left v Right. No way. How about sane versus insane. I want my governmnet to do whatever it takes to save these people's lives. When it doesn't I blame the guy in charge. If that is purely a left wing thing to do, fine. Call me what you want. I am so furious at the gov't right now I am shaking!!!!! Go ahead and ban me. I do not care!!!!!
I think this kind of thing turns our system of government into a personality cult. This obsession with what one guy at the top is doing is reminiscent of some North Korean propaganda about Dear Leader Kim, who takes care of each Korean individually.
We've never had that in the United States. This kind of thinking is almost childlike in its naivete concerning how the world works. Do people not have a sense of the scale of these things? How many people are involved? How many different skill sets? It's crazy to think that one person can run all this stuff at the detail level.
Those engaged in this kind of magical thinking will have to pardon those of us who don't if we seem to suspect a political origin for some of these comments. Eventually we may come to understand that there really are people out there who are that naive and ignorant. But our first guess isn't going to be that, because we would like to think that nearly everyone has brains between their ears.
Another poster has pointed out that it was actually a different comment, upthread, that you were responding to, and not the comment you actually quoted. So, my mistake, and I'm sorry, but a useful object lesson in why links are helpful if you are not quoting from the post you are replying directly to.
OTOH, given your reaction, don't expect me to come after you begging you to return.
I hope someone can get to that banning shortly.
Never mind Bush, take a look at this guy. Here he is being lifted off the roof of his house by a rescue helicopter.
What's that thing under water in front of the house? That's a car, isn't it. Why do we need to pick that guy up in a helicopter? Lack of planning and foresight by Bush? I don't think so.
Go look at the news photos. Look how many people stuck on their roofs have half-submerged cars in their driveways. Whose fault is it that these people are stuck on a roof in a flooded city? Whose fault is it that there aren't enough rescue helicopters to go around? How about the idiots who were told to Get Out Of Town Now, had the means to do so right there, and chose instead to sit there... so now we have to waste a helicopter on somebody who shouldn't even be there.
The next thing I'll hear is that they didn't have enough money to buy gas. This in a city where it's "ALWAYS a constant source of conversation" that the place could flood any minute. Twenty bucks in a coffee can in the freezer as 'Get Out of Dodge' money is too much advance planning? I don't think so.
Not even the President of the United States can keep idiots from killing themselves through their own stupidity.
Elected officials "do" nothing during a disaster. They get briefed by high-level non-political appointees and a couple appointees from the professional services, but for the most part, the operational decision making is almost exclusively the domain of the bureaucrats. The only real impact the executive can have at this point is inter-agency coordination, but if FEMA drops the ball on it's own, that isn't directly the President's fault.
If you're in a state prone to problems, this runs on auto-pilot. Governors and presidents come and go, but the permanent government employees are the ones that get stuff done because it may be the governor's first hurricane but a careerist's tenth hurricane. They have the expertise, the on-site interaction with citizens, and the lack of direct supervisory authority - it's the perfect example of what Lipsky calls "the street-level bureaucrat"
If you're looking for people to blame, blame the head of the Louisiana State Police, the staff of the Adjutant General of Louisiana, the NO Deputy Chief of Police for Field Operations, the FEMA Deputy Director of Operations (if there is such a position)...these are the people that making operational decisions right now.
Trevino is right, the President must "appear informed and active". It is all about appearances right now - his appearances have to be sharp because he has to inspire public confidence in the government bureaucracy that will ultimately be responsible for how this all plays out. That's why Governor Blanco's public appearances are so troubling - she looks confused and weak and that affects the people trying to organize the recovery.
If the bureaucrats fail, this will be blamed on President Bush because we don't elect government employees - that's democratic accountability, but at this point, there's very little that the president is doing or can do beside "appear". It's naive to think that he's "doing" anything that detracts from his ability to "appear". Not at this point - decisions are being made on the ground in a highly fluid situation, not in Washington.
When the dust settles, the elected officials will develop the strategy to guide long-term operations, but right now, "leadership" is appearance, not action because the reality of the situation dictates it.
The disaster response so far from the federal government has been awful, but the blame should be spread around. The City of New Orleans and the State of Louisiana seem to have really dropped the ball beginning with the evacuation. They did a poor job of getting people out of the city, and they waited too long to call in the National Guard to help maintain law and order.
Who in the heck issued a mandatory evacuation affecting hundreds of thousands of people without giving any thought to what people without their own transportation were going to do? The city should have used school buses or city buses to transport those without cars to safer ground. The idea of evacuating to the Superdome and other places in N.O., in retrospect, was a horrible idea.
Second, who waited so long to call in the National Guard? That should have been a no-brainer. Looting is bad enough, but when you have thugs and idiots getting in the way of first responders and medical personnel, then something needs to be done. Even the engineers working on plugging the levee had to suspend work at times due to the threat of violence. What are people thinking? What rational-minded human being would think of interefering with the people who are trying to save his own city?
Third, a lot of blame lies with the able bodied people who could have left the city but chose not to do so. I know that many people were stuck or otherwise unable to leave, but not everyone who stayed behind was stuck. Those people are creating an additional drain on already limited resources.
Finally, the possibility of a Cat-5 hitting New Orleans was not a one-in-a-million disaster. It was something that was bound to happen sooner or later. People and governments have a responsibility to be prepared for likely disasters. For example, San Francisco will eventually be hit by a major earth quake. Are we, as a nation, prepared to deal with that? Has the city and state made plans for evacuating people and getting emergency personnel into the city after the disaster?
New Orleans has got me thinking lately about how many of us live in areas that are at risk of a major disaster and how well we are prepared to deal with that. There will be Cat-5 hurricanes in the future. Next time, it might be Miami or Tampa or Houston or any of the other high-population areas along the coast. Are there plans in place in those areas?
are what I have in God.
Action and results are what I expect from political leaders.
Who in the heck issued a mandatory evacuation affecting hundreds of thousands of people without giving any thought to what people without their own transportation were going to do? The city should have used school buses or city buses to transport those without cars to safer ground.
They did. According to Gov. Blanco, buses were sent throughout the city on Sunday to evac those who did have access to transportation.
You can see her comments from yesterday's presser here, around the 42nd and 43rd minutes.
There's probably plenty to fault the local gov'ts for, but I'm not sure what more they reasonably could've done before hand to get people out.
Good golly, I'm glad you aren't organizing hurricane relief.
"there is not a SINGLE HELIPCOPTER OR BOAT OR PLANE to drop supplies for these poor people,"
Obviously you haven't been watching very carefully. There are helicopters attempting to drop supplies and food and they are being shot at.
"you feel just super fine and dandy about that?"
Get a grip. No one feels fine and dandy about any of this.
but then no one could have predicted that one day a Cat 5 storm would have hit New Orleans
Before 9/11 the Federal Emergency Management Agency listed the three most likely catastrophic disasters facing America: a terrorist attack on New York, a major earthquake in San Francisco and a hurricane strike on New Orleans. "The New Orleans hurricane scenario," The Houston Chronicle wrote in December 2001, "may be the deadliest of all." It described a potential catastrophe very much like the one now happening.
It was predicted, and training excercises were performed, and plans were supposed to be put into place. 2 down, one to go. Judging from the response with this hurricane, do you think we're really ready for a major earthquake in San Francisco? Just sayin'...
Ditto.
It sucks that we have to have our hands held.
Many things that suck are nonetheless true.