NationStates Jolt Archive

Many of you on here have berated President Bush for not accepting responsibility for the mistakes his Administration has made. One poster even has a note in his signature about "There USE to be Presidents who said that 'The buck stops here.'" ( Or words to that effect. )

Now that President Bush has stated that he personally bears the responsibility for the mistakes made by his Administration during the Katrina disaster, you point at him and say things like, "See! Even HE has to admit that he's fucked up!"

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(

i see the whole owning up and accepting responsibility thing as being just a PR stunt in the face of falling popularity... but then i am a tad cynical about these things

it's just the situation in which he can do nothing right and has to choose the lesser evil. (although a bit late) (see PM's response for my thoughts on that)

I don't care for George Bush, but I never said anything to that effect. It would be really silly to blame him for an entire hurricane, that would be giving him way too much credit ;)

However, I do feel that an administration that doesn't have an emergency evacuation plan for all potential disaster zones in the country (and Katrina wasn't the first type 4 hurricane to hit the area, for all I know) plus an adequate plan of action concerning the displaced people and the rebuilding of the destroyed area is seriously fucked up. And at the moment, dear old George is the head of that administration... although I don't think he would see any reason to initate a program like that if none of his predesessors ever did.

I don't understand how he could see weapons of mass destruction when there weren't any, but couldn't spot weather of mass destruction when it was all over the news for about a week beforehand. Even Toni Marsh knew about it...





But now I'm quoting Raybon Kan, so I'd better stop..

The quote wasn't quite perfect, now that I've dug up the newspaper it was in, but you get the jist..

I don't understand how he could see weapons of mass destruction when there weren't any, but couldn't spot weather of mass destruction when it was all over the news for about a week beforehand. Even Toni Marsh new about it...





But now I'm quoting Raybon Kan, so I'd better stop..

*roflmao

Oh, that one I have to write down somewhere.

I don't care for George Bush, but I never said anything to that effect. It would be really silly to blame him for an entire hurricane, that would be giving him way too much credit ;)

However, I do feel that an administration that doesn't have an emergency evacuation plan for all potential disaster zones in the country (and Katrina wasn't the first type 4 hurricane to hit the area, for all I know) plus an adequate plan of action concerning the displaced people and the rebuilding of the destroyed area is seriously fucked up. And at the moment, dear old George is the head of that administration... although I don't think he would see any reason to initate a program like that if none of his predesessors ever did.


none of his predecessors ever had 9/11 happen. What the heck is Homeland Security for? It's not like GWB had no clue that mass evacuation might need to happen at some point (for a terrorist dirty bomb, etc). He put an incompetent at the head of FEMA--just more cronyism from the Bush admin.

If he REALLY wanted to be personally accountable for the mistakes he's made, he should take a cue from Nixon. RESIGN and apologize to the american people.

If he REALLY wanted to be personally accountable for the mistakes he's made, he should take a cue from Nixon. RESIGN and apologize to the american people.
exactly - if the republicans were crying for Clinton's blood and impeachment over a little spunk on some broad's dress, then surely allowing state response to such disasters to be so awfully incompetent is also impeachable??


edit: if he indeed accepts full responsibiltiy, then he accepts responsibiltiy for the hundereds or thousands that died... and should certainly no longer be president due to that fact alone imho

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things?
And what do you want us to do? Back down?

I'm sorry, no. I'm glad he finally took responcibility (and a little shocked considering he never has before), but this is a man who appointed a failed horse judge as the head of emergency responce for the US. This is a man who didn't bother to cancle his vacation until 2 days AFTER the hurricane struck (and before you say anything, yes, I know his Crawford house is wired up, but I'm sure you can apriciate the idea that in an emergency, you want your CO where he's supposed to be looking like he's leading).

There is more than enough blaime to go around for this one, more than enough, but I'm not going to back off anyone until the answers to why what happened are laid out.

Strike that, I won't back off till not only are the answers out, but solutions so this doesn't happen again are planned and implimented.

The president has said he screwed up, the only good thing that might mean is that this public admission means he really will rattle the cages of DoHS and help fix some of these problems.

I don't care for George Bush, but I never said anything to that effect. It would be really silly to blame him for an entire hurricane, that would be giving him way too much credit ;)

However, I do feel that an administration that doesn't have an emergency evacuation plan for all potential disaster zones in the country (and Katrina wasn't the first type 4 hurricane to hit the area, for all I know) plus an adequate plan of action concerning the displaced people and the rebuilding of the destroyed area is seriously fucked up. And at the moment, dear old George is the head of that administration... although I don't think he would see any reason to initate a program like that if none of his predesessors ever did.

Did you know that there was an editorial in the New York Times that blamed Bush personally for the Hurricane's existance? It's true.

Also, people seem to have a mistaken point about what FEMA was designed to do. It's not supposed to evacuate the people, or rebuild anything. The states are supposed to have their emergency plans in place and they are responsible for taking care of evacuations, shelters, and for taking care of business later. FEMA is just supposed to plug into the states and provide additional resources to fill gaps in what the states are able to do. If you want to blame anyone, blame the LA governor and the New Orleans mayor. Of course, they TOLD people to get out of the city or to get to shelter if they could not leave.

Katrina was not the first Category 4 hurricane to hit the area. Heck when Hurricane Camille struck land (in almost the identical location, just a little further east) it was a Category 5. However, Katrina was the worst natural disaster in American history. There is no preparing for things like that. You jsut do your best, learn from the mistakes that will be made, and don't make them again.

All this being said, I'm most ardently anti-Bush under normal circumstances. I believe he is one of the worst presidents this country has ever had and I would like nothing more than to see him sent to live in Iran. However, blaming him for the hurricane or for the fact that our nation is facing a humanitarian crisis of proportions is has never seen before is stretching it. In the hurricane ravaged areas of MS (which oddly you don't hear much about) people are making fun of the New Orleans folks everytime something goes wrong by blaming it on Bush. "What, I have a flat tire. . . it must be George Bush's fault!" "You mean your favorite shirt got bleach spilled on it?!? BLAME BUSH!" It's gotten silly and ridiculous.

End diatribe.

I don't care for George Bush, but I never said anything to that effect. It would be really silly to blame him for an entire hurricane, that would be giving him way too much credit ;)

However, I do feel that an administration that doesn't have an emergency evacuation plan for all potential disaster zones in the country (and Katrina wasn't the first type 4 hurricane to hit the area, for all I know) plus an adequate plan of action concerning the displaced people and the rebuilding of the destroyed area is seriously fucked up. And at the moment, dear old George is the head of that administration... although I don't think he would see any reason to initate a program like that if none of his predesessors ever did.


I don't know if any of you are close to the hurricane affected area, but I am 40 minutes outside of New Orleans and the crap I'm seeing being thrown at the president for this is absolutely crazy. OUR LOCAL OFFICIALS failed us down here. People don't understand that the federal government has laws restricting it from coming into any state with the army and taking over any relief effort like this until the governor of that state sends a written request and asks for it. Our completely incompetent governor (whom I definately did not vote for and am embarrassed of), did not do this until 3 days after the damn storm hit. On top of that, mayor nagin of New Orleans failed to execute the plan for city buses to get even more people out. THESE ARE THINGS ONLY THE LOCAL STATE COULD HAVE DONE.....the government has simply bailed out the people that failed us down here......people need to see that and stop blaming bush, and the federal government. We have plans down here that weren't executed properly, and then when our officials realized they were in over their heads.....they jumped on the federal government in order to cover their own ass!!!!!!!! Our governor even admitted she screwed up by not calling in the national guard until days after the hurricane, those are all things that the federal government can't control until a state allows them too......it's part of our constitution and people need to understand that better.

...the federal government has laws restricting it from coming into any state with the army and taking over any relief effort like this until the governor of that state sends a written request and asks for it. Our completely incompetent governor (whom I definately did not vote for and am embarrassed of), did not do this until 3 days after the damn storm hit...
crippled by your own fear of 'big government' :rolleyes:

Did you know that there was an editorial in the New York Times that blamed Bush personally for the Hurricane's existance? It's true.

Also, people seem to have a mistaken point about what FEMA was designed to do. It's not supposed to evacuate the people, or rebuild anything. The states are supposed to have their emergency plans in place and they are responsible for taking care of evacuations, shelters, and for taking care of business later. FEMA is just supposed to plug into the states and provide additional resources to fill gaps in what the states are able to do. If you want to blame anyone, blame the LA governor and the New Orleans mayor. Of course, they TOLD people to get out of the city or to get to shelter if they could not leave.

Katrina was not the first Category 4 hurricane to hit the area. Heck when Hurricane Camille struck land (in almost the identical location, just a little further east) it was a Category 5. However, Katrina was the worst natural disaster in American history. There is no preparing for things like that. You jsut do your best, learn from the mistakes that will be made, and don't make them again.

All this being said, I'm most ardently anti-Bush under normal circumstances. I believe he is one of the worst presidents this country has ever had and I would like nothing more than to see him sent to live in Iran. However, blaming him for the hurricane or for the fact that our nation is facing a humanitarian crisis of proportions is has never seen before is stretching it. In the hurricane ravaged areas of MS (which oddly you don't hear much about) people are making fun of the New Orleans folks everytime something goes wrong by blaming it on Bush. "What, I have a flat tire. . . it must be George Bush's fault!" "You mean your favorite shirt got bleach spilled on it?!? BLAME BUSH!" It's gotten silly and ridiculous.

End diatribe.


Thank you for paying attention to the facts. I live down here and the sad truth is that the people that were left in the city of New Orleans were the scum of the earth and represent a minority that is giving this state an even worse name......most people in my state wish that a lot of them had been washed off the map for doing the things they have been doing. THEY WERE TOLD TO LEAVE THE CITY......then THEY SHOT AT RESCUE WORKERS.......you don't deserve to be saved if you are that level of a person. What these remaining citizens (i choke on calling them that) have done in what is left of that city, is horrendous......and blaming the whole thing on the federal government is hogwash.....the state officials carry whatever blame there should be.

crippled by your own fear of 'big government' :rolleyes:


No...PAY ATTENTION!!!! we were crippled by incompetent local officials. Those laws are there to protect a state from being overrun by the federal government......WE HAVE PROTECTIONS IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!!

I being a foreigner dont bloody care about how Bush is treating Katrina. Its his right to cause harm to his own citizens, if people dont want a president that does allow such things, they shouldnt vote for him. If they think that Kerry is worse than Bush, then they should find a third party that is better.

Because of Bush's arrogance towards the international community, ignorance towards the situation in Iraq, and impetiousity, he has started a conflict that killed 25,000 people for reasons that were in the end, completely invalid.

He should resign his position at the very least, I probably wouldnt be able to live with the fact that I caused the deaths of thousands of innocent people.

none of his predecessors ever had 9/11 happen. What the heck is Homeland Security for? It's not like GWB had no clue that mass evacuation might need to happen at some point (for a terrorist dirty bomb, etc). He put an incompetent at the head of FEMA--just more cronyism from the Bush admin.

If he REALLY wanted to be personally accountable for the mistakes he's made, he should take a cue from Nixon. RESIGN and apologize to the american people.

You're DAMN RIGHT! Couldn't agree more. But not just American people, but EVERYONE in the world.

*To Eutrusca*
FAIR? HOW DARE YOU! Bush and his cadre are WAR CRIMINALS, plain and simple. What's the deal, saying that we're not FAIR? We've been MORE than fair. Given him AMPLE opportunity to apologise for his collection of f**k-ups.

Bush LET 9/11 Happen, then used it as an excuse to destroy a sovereign nation innocent of 9/11, but really in the name of OIL, whilst pursuing (a) a terrorist that America's government gave training to (Osama bin Laden) and (b) an evil dictator that America assisted with weaponry (Saddam Hussein).
He may have Saddam, but at what cost?
He used all of this as a pretext to write the constitution-shredding "USAPATRIOT act" #I and II.
And for all this, where's Osama?

He GUTTED America's infrastructure so that he could give tax-cuts to the top 2% richest in the country.

I thought that conservatives were so PRO-ECONOMY. At least Clinton knew how to manage the money, so that there was even MORE of A SURPLUS by the time he was impeached ($5 Billion US under Clinton, I believe), and now, thanks to "Shrub", it's in DEFICIT. He pissed it away with more tax-cuts for the rich.

It is believed that Bush Jr.'s actions increased global terrorism and sparked off both the Madrid and London bombings.

His cronyism - to the right-wing, big business and right-wing Christianity, knows no ends.
This has been shown in his appointments of the head of FEMA, the supreme court judges and even the UN Ambassador (John Boulton). Way to be an ambassador for the US! :p

And, to top it all off, whilst he's not RESPONSIBLE for a whole hurricane (what mortal man can be?), his gutted infrastructure and idiocy with FEMA has resulted in the pointless deaths of hundreds of his own countrymen, because he's a racist and prejudiced against the poor (I doubt it would've taken this long if this had happened anywhere near the gated communities where he and/or his buddies live), as they're certainly not going to be the sort of people to vote for HIM, now, are they? I mean, whilst he may well not have CAUSED the hurricane, I don't doubt he sees it as fortunate circumstance that a group of voters more likely to vote Democrat are wiped out in a hurricane.

Clinton was kicked out of office for a little fun in the oval office with someone else's oval office, if you get my drift, and he was impeached! Now, Clinton was no saint, this is true, but he's done NOTHING as bad as this.
Nixon - as was mentioned above - RESIGNED after watergate. Nixon wasn't an INCOMPETENT President, per se. Evil, untrustworthy, but not incompetent. And he may have done dishonourable deeds, but at least he had the decency to resign.

But BUSH, who's responsible for more deaths in his terms of office since just about anyone, and has done more damage to his own country than just about anything since the great depression, and made America a laughingstock in many areas, gets a second term.

Fair? Be fair to him? HOW DARE YOU! If anything, we've been TOO fair.

Those who are "unfair" for bashing President Bush at every opportunity are counterbalanced in my book by those who are "unfair" for bashing President Clinton at every opportunity.

It's politics. It's not meant to be fair.

As for your comment Aogawa, you're painting the entire United States with a very large brush. As you can tell if you've read enough posts, there are plenty of Americans who consider Bush a disgrace or worse.

Also, people seem to have a mistaken point about what FEMA was designed to do. It's not supposed to evacuate the people, or rebuild anything. The states are supposed to have their emergency plans in place and they are responsible for taking care of evacuations, shelters, and for taking care of business later. FEMA is just supposed to plug into the states and provide additional resources to fill gaps in what the states are able to do. If you want to blame anyone, blame the LA governor and the New Orleans mayor. Of course, they TOLD people to get out of the city or to get to shelter if they could not leave.

The thing is, the US is currently an area prone to natural disasters of all kinds (earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, you name it). And while it may be the responsibility of each state to create an emergency program, I would think that people with foresight might have realised that there will inevitably be incidents where the emergency program of just one state simply won't be sufficient at all. The logical consequence is to build some sort of general federal program that's mobile, flexible and effective enough to at least take care of things after the catastrophe.


Katrina was not the first Category 4 hurricane to hit the area. Heck when Hurricane Camille struck land (in almost the identical location, just a little further east) it was a Category 5. However, Katrina was the worst natural disaster in American history. There is no preparing for things like that. You jsut do your best, learn from the mistakes that will be made, and don't make them again.


Worse than the fire and earthquake of San Fransisco of 1906? I seem to remember reports on a massive earthquake in Chicago in the first half of the 20th century as well. And then there were those Mississippi inundations sometime in the 90s.
While the situation is bad, I don't think it is the worst natural disaster to ever happen in the USA. However, it seems to be the one that overstrained the administraiton the most.

No...PAY ATTENTION!!!! we were crippled by incompetent local officials. Those laws are there to protect a state from being overrun by the federal government......WE HAVE PROTECTIONS IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!!
STOP SHOUTING!!!!!111!1 its not big or clever

but you missed my point: the fear many americans seem to harbour against their government has lead to these laws (which i quoted) peventing national/federal aid coming to help the relief effort. it was the incompetent govenor who was stupid in not asking for this help until the third day but that wouldn't have been a problem if it weren't for this stupid ant-federal/anti-big government law meaning he had to do that in the first place.
if federal aid could have come sooner, on its own accord, maybe this could have helped.

however, aside from this, federal help was asked for by the incompetent local officials (see, i'm agreeing with you) but the federal aid was seemingly just as incompetent as the locals... seeing how the mess is only just being cleared tens of days (i lost count) after the disaster. had it been entirely the local officials' fault then after the 3rd (or 4th) day, when federal aid arrived, the whole mess would have been cleared or, at least, some real efforts would have been made rather than the troops and police just standing around for days on end.

hence, the federal help must be just as accountable as the incompetent local officials and if other people are losing their jobs over being so very incompetent, why is george bush not - especially if he is accepting responsibility?


but my original point was that that law is stupid if it prevents the state helping in saving people's lives in a disaster situation.

Many of you on here have berated President Bush for not accepting responsibility for the mistakes his Administration has made. One poster even has a note in his signature about "There USE to be Presidents who said that 'The buck stops here.'" ( Or words to that effect. )

Now that President Bush has stated that he personally bears the responsibility for the mistakes made by his Administration during the Katrina disaster, you point at him and say things like, "See! Even HE has to admit that he's fucked up!"

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(



I dunno.


Will all the people here who spent the past two weeks saying that he WASN'T at fault eat their words and admit that the sun doesn't shine out of his ass too?

Or will they just now say "well he took the blame because it's his job too and was a good political move, but he still isn't REALLY to blame because God made him perfect?"


Added: as recently as 15 minutes before his speech you could see people here spewing last week's Republican Talking Points: "It's not time for the blame game".


The President just said that he takes some responsibility and that we need to get to the bottom of the problem and solve them, which seems to me to mean that he agrees that, in fact, it IS time for the "blame game" (his term for it, I prefer "critical analysis of a collosal failure").

So by pointing out his comments, you saying that it's STILL not time for the blame game seems in direct contravention of the official position of the government as well as the people.


It is time to look at what happened, examine the failures of leadership at ALL levels, and let the chips fall where they may.

And yes, some of them fall on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Many of you on here have berated President Bush for not accepting responsibility for the mistakes his Administration has made. One poster even has a note in his signature about "There USE to be Presidents who said that 'The buck stops here.'" ( Or words to that effect. )

Now that President Bush has stated that he personally bears the responsibility for the mistakes made by his Administration during the Katrina disaster, you point at him and say things like, "See! Even HE has to admit that he's fucked up!"

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(

Let's see...out of aproximately 4 major screw-ups that have meant lost lives to many Americans, we give him a break for admitting to one?

Not bloody likely. He has a lot more to own up to before he gets any sympathy. And besides, he only says he took the blame because his fall-guy resigned and he was left choiceless. What about his poor response to 9/11? The unecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Where are the apologies for that?

Many of you on here have berated President Bush for not accepting responsibility for the mistakes his Administration has made. One poster even has a note in his signature about "There USE to be Presidents who said that 'The buck stops here.'" ( Or words to that effect. )

Now that President Bush has stated that he personally bears the responsibility for the mistakes made by his Administration during the Katrina disaster, you point at him and say things like, "See! Even HE has to admit that he's fucked up!"

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(
My attitude toward Bush's "apology" is that talk is cheap. What's he going to actually do other than utter the words "it's my responsibility?" I mean, Rumsfeld supposedly took responsibility for Abu Ghraib, but other than saying those words, nothing else has happened, so why, given this administration's track record on virtually every fuckup they're presided over, should I expect anything other than this statement from Bush?

And actually...now that I look closely at his words...he didn't apologize. He only said "I am responsible". Which is not an apology?

Really? You're responsible for tragic events and their handling that get's fucked up? Really? You? The President? You're responsible for the country?

Whew...thank goodness idiot America voted him back into power. Where would we be without him?

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(

fair will be when his entire administration is dragged to the hague for crimes against humanity and when we march into dc and take our freedoms back.

Just about the sort of thing I should have expcected from the "I hate bush" crowd. I had hoped for more, but should have known better. Sigh. :( :mad:

fair will be when his entire administration is dragged to the hague for crimes against humanity and when we march into dc and take our freedoms back.
Now you're just trying to bait me. Fortunately, I'm learned my lesson when it comes to this sort of instigation. Too bad. So sad. Live with it. :D

Now you're just trying to bait me. Fortunately, I'm learned my lesson when it comes to this sort of instigation. Too bad. So sad. Live with it. :D
And you're not trying to bait us with this? Just about the sort of thing I should have expcected from the "I hate bush" crowd. I had hoped for more, but should have known better. Sigh.
Give me a break. :rolleyes:

STOP SHOUTING!!!!!111!1 its not big or clever

but you missed my point: the fear many americans seem to harbour against their government has lead to these laws (which i quoted) peventing national/federal aid coming to help the relief effort. it was the incompetent govenor who was stupid in not asking for this help until the third day but that wouldn't have been a problem if it weren't for this stupid ant-federal/anti-big government law meaning he had to do that in the first place.
if federal aid could have come sooner, on its own accord, maybe this could have helped.

however, aside from this, federal help was asked for by the incompetent local officials (see, i'm agreeing with you) but the federal aid was seemingly just as incompetent as the locals... seeing how the mess is only just being cleared tens of days (i lost count) after the disaster. had it been entirely the local officials' fault then after the 3rd (or 4th) day, when federal aid arrived, the whole mess would have been cleared or, at least, some real efforts would have been made rather than the troops and police just standing around for days on end.

hence, the federal help must be just as accountable as the incompetent local officials and if other people are losing their jobs over being so very incompetent, why is george bush not - especially if he is accepting responsibility?


but my original point was that that law is stupid if it prevents the state helping in saving people's lives in a disaster situation.

Actually, I am very disappointed in the administration in their reaction to this situation, however, I must correct some of your errors. Federal Aid was FINALLY requested on late Thursday or early Friday. Two days later New Orleans was under control and within three days evacuated. Tens of days is so incorrect as to not be funny. The hurrican hit just over two weeks ago.

Also to the people who said there was so much warning, the hurricane was expected to hit FL and be a level 3 on Friday according to ALL national weather services. On Saturday the hurrican turned and gained strength over the gulf. It was only then that were was an indication of a truly serious problem. For those of you who are unfamiliar, the area of FL I was living in last year was hit by 3 Category 3+ hurricanes inside of a month. It was hardly a disaster. People living on the gulf tend to look at Category 3 hurricanes as a nuisance rather than a disaster, much like people in the midwest view tornados. Yes, people die and towns get destroyed but the majority of the population even in the path of the hurricane (or in my tornado example) are safe from harm in the shelters that are available.

No...PAY ATTENTION!!!! we were crippled by incompetent local officials. Those laws are there to protect a state from being overrun by the federal government......WE HAVE PROTECTIONS IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!!Damn right! Which is why the federal government didn't bother trying to get involved in Terry Shci.. uhmm..

Okay.. they're why the federal supreme court didn't overrule a state supreme court on an issue of interpreting state la... hmm..

I know! It's kept a federal government from criminalizing a civil offence like in the DMCA and forcing states to act on tha.. err..

Wait, how about how those protections keep the federal government from dictating to the state the means by which they'll educate their ki.. crap.

Pot! That's it! Those protections make it so that certain states can decide if their citizens can legally have mari.. okay.. there's gotta be one..

Of course! Those protections make it impossible for the federal government to send in armed agents to surround and burn down somebody's hou.. oh. Waco. Right.

Well then, if nothing else, we can at least say they protect the federal government from having to take all the blame when people are dying. That's gotta be worth something, right?

Right?

Just about the sort of thing I should have expcected from the "I hate bush" crowd. I had hoped for more, but should have known better. Sigh. :( :mad:

I guess my question would be more along the lines of...why do you support the Bush administration after all their bad deals, lies and attrocities? Why are you pro-Bush?

In those random moments when I'm being serious, I'll be fair to the guy. He's definitively stepped into reality and he's starting to realize that this whole "President" thingie isn't just some extended vacation his daddy paid for to get him out of his hair.

Note I said "fair", not "nice". It's only fair to use some qualifiers here.

quote by conservative_thinking:

Thank you for paying attention to the facts. I live down here and the sad truth is that the people that were left in the city of New Orleans were the scum of the earth and represent a minority that is giving this state an even worse name......most people in my state wish that a lot of them had been washed off the map for doing the things they have been doing. THEY WERE TOLD TO LEAVE THE CITY......then THEY SHOT AT RESCUE WORKERS.......you don't deserve to be saved if you are that level of a person. What these remaining citizens (i choke on calling them that) have done in what is left of that city, is horrendous......

could somebody else please answer to this post (I'm appalled at the fact that nobody did yet) as neither is my english sufficient to put my feelings inot words nor do i think i can contrain myself enough right now to answer in an appropiriate way

Now you're just trying to bait me.

nah. if i was doing that i'd have made reference to your 'centrism'

There is only one way to solve this.

Move everyone away from the coast, fault lines, volcanos, and any large breeze of wind ;)

In those random moments when I'm being serious, I'll be fair to the guy. He's definitively stepped into reality and he's starting to realize that this whole "President" thingie isn't just some extended vacation his daddy paid for to get him out of his hair.

Note I said "fair", not "nice". It's only fair to use some qualifiers here.
Or here's another possible scenario:

I'm the neo-con controlled Republican National Congress (RNC). I went to a lot of trouble to put and keep this frickin' idiot in the White House because the rubes are just in love with him and the magic rubs off on all his friends, i.e., the party. We are sitting pretty. But now Katrina comes along and kills actual Americans, and every single level of government fucks up outrageously while lawlessness and drowning puppy dogs fill the tv screens, and I see is hard angry stares coming my way from our voters, and all those moderate Republicans who never liked the neo-cons in the first place are making noises, and I suddenly remember the name Jim Jeffords. You know what I say? I say screw Bush. Screw my own guy. He's a lame duck. We've got all the upcoming state and Congressional elections to win and 2008 coming fast. Michael Brown wasn't enough of a sacrifice this time. It's time for Dubya to make the ultimate sacrifice for the party (note I didn't say country).

This isn't a conspiracy theory. This is politics. They keep the Dems busy throwing crap at Bush. The Republicans stand around and say tut, tut, but see, he did the mature thing in the end, the important thing now is to think about the future. And the right wing stays in power.

And you're not trying to bait us with this?
Give me a break. :rolleyes:
No. :p

nah. if i was doing that i'd have made reference to your 'centrism'
Um ... you just did. :p

Um ... you just did. :p

Paradox eh? ;)

It is so hard to resist sometimes though.

quote by conservative_thinking:



could somebody else please answer to this post (I'm appalled at the fact that nobody did yet) as neither is my english sufficient to put my feelings inot words nor do i think i can contrain myself enough right now to answer in an appropiriate way
Sure. See, some people are racist, elitist, self-righteous bastards who actually think they are so much better than other people (I know, I don't know who told them that, either) that they can get away with saying shit like that. Civilized people ignore them in public, but privately we keep track until we get a chance to sue their asses for violating others' rights. See all of US history for examples. :)

none of his predecessors ever had 9/11 happen. What the heck is Homeland Security for? It's not like GWB had no clue that mass evacuation might need to happen at some point (for a terrorist dirty bomb, etc). He put an incompetent at the head of FEMA--just more cronyism from the Bush admin.

you DO realize homeland security came after 9/11 right ? And no major terrorist attack on American soil since. Never had a 9/11 happen before (as in terrorist attack... or just Loss of massive life)? Funny, what was Pearl Harbor ? What was Oklamhoma bombing, what was the first world trade center?

Mass evactuation ? strange... I thought that was put out from the local level. As the Mayor of New Orleans waited 24 hours before the storm to give that evaucation notice even when his own plans said 72 hours were needed. And no efforts to evacuate the disabled even when Amtrac offered its assistance to evacuate the impoverished and disabled (instead being turned down).

Do try to be a little less ignorant on the facts, and a little more open in your statements

If he REALLY wanted to be personally accountable for the mistakes he's made, he should take a cue from Nixon. RESIGN and apologize to the american people.

Resign ? you mean like President Kennedy did after the Bay of Pigs ? Yes... resignation really isn't the only way to apologize, and its a bit of hopeful thinking on your side. Besides, then Cheny becomes president (not something i would be unhappy with).. but is that something YOU would really want ?

Many of you on here have berated President Bush for not accepting responsibility for the mistakes his Administration has made. One poster even has a note in his signature about "There USE to be Presidents who said that 'The buck stops here.'" ( Or words to that effect. )

Now that President Bush has stated that he personally bears the responsibility for the mistakes made by his Administration during the Katrina disaster, you point at him and say things like, "See! Even HE has to admit that he's fucked up!"

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(

It's not like he did it out of the kindness of his heart, nor did he do it because he really believes it. It couldn't be more obvious that he did it as a political move, he had no choice, his numbers have been dropping like flies in October and he knew it. This is only his latest antic to try and gain back some support from the American people. It's so obvious it screams. It's fine to say "I take full responsibility" but where is the action to back up those words? Sure they got rid of Mike Brown, but why haven't they gotten rid of the Secretary of Homeland Security? He's another one that was appointed to a position he had no experience in. Actions speak louder than words.

Many of you on here have berated President Bush for not accepting responsibility for the mistakes his Administration has made. One poster even has a note in his signature about "There USE to be Presidents who said that 'The buck stops here.'" ( Or words to that effect. )

Now that President Bush has stated that he personally bears the responsibility for the mistakes made by his Administration during the Katrina disaster, you point at him and say things like, "See! Even HE has to admit that he's fucked up!"

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(

If the liberals were being fair, that would be very out-of-character of them.

but privately we keep track until we get a chance to sue their asses for violating others' rights

great. wanna exchange lists some time so we can update to the respective other one's?

b

great. wanna exchange lists some time so we can update to the respective other one's?
Everyone can be somebody's Big Brother. ;)

[EDIT: We'd better drop this. We don't want them to be hate-filled *and* paranoid.]

yes, i finally found a goal to reach in my life

It's not like he did it out of the kindness of his heart, nor did he do it because he really believes it. It couldn't be more obvious that he did it as a political move, he had no choice, his numbers have been dropping like flies in October and he knew it. This is only his latest antic to try and gain back some support from the American people. It's so obvious it screams. It's fine to say "I take full responsibility" but where is the action to back up those words? Sure they got rid of Mike Brown, but why haven't they gotten rid of the Secretary of Homeland Security? He's another one that was appointed to a position he had no experience in. Actions speak louder than words.

And why do you and those of your ilk attack Bush who has apologised and give the clearly incompetent mayor of N.O. and Governor of Louisiana, who have not apologized (at least none that I"ve heard), a free pass?

It seems that liberal hatred of Bush is like masturbation - it makes you blind.

i see the whole owning up and accepting responsibility thing as being just a PR stunt in the face of falling popularity... but then i am a tad cynical about these things

Seconded.

My attitude toward Bush's "apology" is that talk is cheap. What's he going to actually do other than utter the words "it's my responsibility?" I mean, Rumsfeld supposedly took responsibility for Abu Ghraib, but other than saying those words, nothing else has happened, so why, given this administration's track record on virtually every fuckup they're presided over, should I expect anything other than this statement from Bush?
Circle gets the square.

And why do you and those of your ilk attack Bush who has apologised and give the clearly incompetent mayor of N.O. and Governor of Louisiana, who have not apologized (at least none that I"ve heard), a free pass?

Because Bush is at fault for making political appointments to "friends" who had no experience in the area he appointed them to. I also believe the Mayor of New Orleans holds a lot of blame too. As for the Governor of LA, I don't think she holds that much blame, she followed proper protocol, as can easily be seen in this press release (http://www.gov.state.la.us/Press_Release_detail.asp?id=976) that was BEFORE the storm. The Feds can talk semantics about what "give us all you've got" means, but it should of been fairly obvious.

Because Bush is at fault for making political appointments to "friends" who had no experience in the area he appointed them to.

Nepotism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepotism) at its finest, my dear. :(

he is trying to stop the bad press

it is damage limitation

trust me i'm from a country where there is a real opposition (kinda)

Actually, I am very disappointed in the administration in their reaction to this situation, however, I must correct some of your errors. Federal Aid was FINALLY requested on late Thursday or early Friday. Two days later New Orleans was under control and within three days evacuated. Tens of days is so incorrect as to not be funny. The hurrican hit just over two weeks ago.

You're wrong, and the Congressional Research office says so. (http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/crskatrinarept91205.pdf) They're a non-partisan group by the way. Blanco asked for help well before she needed to, and the feds failed to respond in a timely manner. And while Brown took a lot of deserved heat for this, it's starting to look more and more like Chertoff was supposed to be the one in charge, and he didn't know it. Heads up their asses, these people--heads up their asses.

Because Bush is at fault for making political appointments to "friends" who had no experience in the area he appointed them to. I also believe the Mayor of New Orleans holds a lot of blame too. As for the Governor of LA, I don't think she holds that much blame, she followed proper protocol, as can easily be seen in this press release (http://www.gov.state.la.us/Press_Release_detail.asp?id=976) that was BEFORE the storm. The Feds can talk semantics about what "give us all you've got" means, but it should of been fairly obvious.

And Bush responded appropriately to the request for help as seen here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html) but Brown dropped the ball. Don't get me wrong - I am not saying Bush and FEMA don't deserved some blame - my point is that there is too much blame be handed off to Bush while the local officials who are clearly meant to be the first responders are getting a free pass. Why didn't Blanco call out her own national guard? Why did Nagin leave 2,000 school buses sitting around to flood instead of using them to evacuate people. Why were red cross trucks full of water and supplies denied access to the superdome the day after the hurricane? Why, because the city and state governments were every bit as incompetent as the feds were in dealing with the situation.

I don't understand how he could see weapons of mass destruction when there weren't any, but couldn't spot weather of mass destruction when it was all over the news for about a week beforehand. Even Toni Marsh knew about it...

But now I'm quoting Raybon Kan, so I'd better stop..

The quote wasn't quite perfect, now that I've dug up the newspaper it was in, but you get the jist..

Ack, I think I lost some IQ points while reading such garbage. Whoever this Raybon Kan is, he's a drooling idiot for having written that, and you're under suspicion now too for having spread his idiocy ( :p ).

Seriously, I was tired of hearing about his hurricane business a week ago, and I'm only getting testier now that the usual suspects on the Left are trying desperately to blame George Bush for the weather. Instead of trying to pin the blame on GWB, why don't you find fault with those who legitimately screwed up: the state of Louisiana, the city of New Orleans, and all the boneheads who didn't leave when the mayor gave the evacuation order.

Why can't Louisiana be more stoic, like Mississippi, and just get on with the work of rebuilding without whining about how hard they have it?

Resign ? you mean like President Kennedy did after the Bay of Pigs ? Yes... resignation really isn't the only way to apologize, and its a bit of hopeful thinking on your side. Besides, then Cheny becomes president (not something i would be unhappy with).. but is that something YOU would really want ?
Kennedy is a bad example--that was an Eisenhower operation that Kennedy let go through, much like Clinton with Somalia. To their credit, both Presidents stood up and took the blame for what went wrong even though it was politically damaging.

I'm not calling for Bush's resignation or impeachment either--although I have my doubts that much, if anything, would change, since I firmly believe that Cheney's running the show already. What I'm really hoping happens is a change of control of at least one and hopefully both houses of Congress in 2006.

And Bush responded appropriately to the request for help as seen here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html) but Brown dropped the ball. Don't get me wrong - I am not saying Bush and FEMA don't deserved some blame - my point is that there is too much blame be handed off to Bush while the local officials who are clearly meant to be the first responders are getting a free pass. Why didn't Blanco call out her own national guard? Why did Nagin leave 2,000 school buses sitting around to flood instead of using them to evacuate people. Why were red cross trucks full of water and supplies denied access to the superdome the day after the hurricane? Why, because the city and state governments were every bit as incompetent as the feds were in dealing with the situation.
Blanco did call out her National Guard, and as for the buses--who exactly was Nagin going to get to drive them, and where would they drive them to?

Understand what they did accomplish--an 80% evacuation of a city of almost 500,000 people. Most evacuation plans of major cities hope for 60% at best, and New Orleans got 80% of them out. They ran buses through the poorer parts of the city to get people to shelters of last resort where there were supplies for 36 hours of relief--help didn't start arriving for at least 72 hours, and in some cases 96 hours. No city has the kind of resources necessary to withstand this kind of devastation.

I'm not saying that city and state officials don't deserve some criticism, but by comparison with the feds, it's not even close.

the sad truth is that the people that were left in the city of New Orleans were the scum of the earth and represent a minority that is giving this state an even worse name......most people in my state wish that a lot of them had been washed off the map for doing the things they have been doing. THEY WERE TOLD TO LEAVE THE CITY......then THEY SHOT AT RESCUE WORKERS.......you don't deserve to be saved if you are that level of a person.

There was, i believe, one misattributed claim of gunshots being fired at rescue helicopters. You are saying EVERY single person who was left in New Orleans deserved to be washed away because they were "scum of the earth"?

Deal with human beings often?

FAIR? HOW DARE YOU! Bush and his cadre are WAR CRIMINALS, plain and simple. What's the deal, saying that we're not FAIR? We've been MORE than fair. Given him AMPLE opportunity to apologise for his collection of f**k-ups.
Really? Haven't seen much patience on your side. Huh... Must've missed that.

Bush LET 9/11 Happen, then used it as an excuse to destroy a sovereign nation innocent of 9/11, but really in the name of OIL
Wow. Have any valid evidence for these claims?

He used all of this as a pretext to write the constitution-shredding "USAPATRIOT act" #I and II.
Strange how the entire House voted for "constitution-shredding" unanimously...

He GUTTED America's infrastructure so that he could give tax-cuts to the top 2% richest in the country.
Again, evidence, please?

I thought that conservatives were so PRO-ECONOMY. At least Clinton knew how to manage the money, so that there was even MORE of A SURPLUS by the time he was impeached ($5 Billion US under Clinton, I believe), and now, thanks to "Shrub", it's in DEFICIT. He pissed it away with more tax-cuts for the rich.

Clinton had nothing to do with the good economy he stepped into. It's very rare that presidents have direct influence, except in times of war.

It is believed that Bush Jr.'s actions increased global terrorism and sparked off both the Madrid and London bombings.
Believed maybe, but not proven. Besides, what doesn't piss off the extremists?

His cronyism - to the right-wing, big business and right-wing Christianity, knows no ends.This has been shown in his appointments of the head of FEMA, the supreme court judges and even the UN Ambassador (John Boulton). Way to be an ambassador for the US! :p
And yet he's appointed democrats positions into his cabinet...

And, to top it all off, whilst he's not RESPONSIBLE for a whole hurricane (what mortal man can be?), his gutted infrastructure and idiocy with FEMA has resulted in the pointless deaths of hundreds of his own countrymen, because he's a racist and prejudiced against the poor (I doubt it would've taken this long if this had happened anywhere near the gated communities where he and/or his buddies live), as they're certainly not going to be the sort of people to vote for HIM, now, are they? I mean, whilst he may well not have CAUSED the hurricane, I don't doubt he sees it as fortunate circumstance that a group of voters more likely to vote Democrat are wiped out in a hurricane.
Woah, now. Taking Kanye's rantings a bit too seriously? Oh, and, once again, show me some evidence to back this up.

Clinton was kicked out of office for a little fun in the oval office with someone else's oval office, if you get my drift, and he was impeached! Now, Clinton was no saint, this is true, but he's done NOTHING as bad as this.
Nixon - as was mentioned above - RESIGNED after watergate. Nixon wasn't an INCOMPETENT President, per se. Evil, untrustworthy, but not incompetent. And he may have done dishonourable deeds, but at least he had the decency to resign.
For starters, Clinton was never "kicked out of office". He served his two terms. Impeachment doesn't mean the president gets the boot. It means he gets trialed to see if he's worthy of getting the boot.

But BUSH, who's responsible for more deaths in his terms of office since just about anyone, and has done more damage to his own country than just about anything since the great depression, and made America a laughingstock in many areas, gets a second term.
Actually, extremist muslims and very bad weather have been responsible for more deaths in his terms of office. And you know what? When it comes to blaming Bush about this whole "NO not being prepared" schpeal, why don't we go back and begin blaming every single damn president that's preceeded him? This would include the last president, Clinton. None of them did anything to prepare NO--they haven't given any funding or said "You should move, stupids. Hurricanes will PWNz0rz you!", so why is it Bush is taking the fall for this? Just because it so happened to hit during his term? How childish. Yeah, blame Bush for not preparing NO, but you'd better be prepared to give just as equal amounts of blame to everyone that preceeded him.

Fair? Be fair to him? HOW DARE YOU! If anything, we've been TOO fair.
Time for you to own up to your claim and provide some clickey-links to the pretty harsh claims you've slandered Bush with. That'd be the fair thing to do.

And why do you and those of your ilk attack Bush who has apologised and give the clearly incompetent mayor of N.O. and Governor of Louisiana, who have not apologized (at least none that I"ve heard), a free pass?

It seems that liberal hatred of Bush is like masturbation - it makes you blind.
Masturbation doesn't make you blind -- or so I'm told. ;)

Here's one liberal who isn't letting the locals off the hook. Recall elections all round, say I!

But I still don't see how other people failing at their jobs means that Bush and his appointees didn't fail at theirs. They all had very specific jobs to do, and they didn't do them. I also insist that the higher the rank, the greater the responsibility should be. Sorry if that seems unfair to you, but I don't like it when bosses try to hide behind their underlings.

Finally, I don't really care what the "chain of command" was. After the second day, anybody with a television could see what was going on down there. For a bunch of bureacrats to know that and still sit around waiting on "procedure" when they had the resources to just go in, get to work, and let the lawyers sort it out later -- well, I say, recall elections and jail time all round, goddammit.

You're wrong, and the Congressional Research office says so. (http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/crskatrinarept91205.pdf) They're a non-partisan group by the way. Blanco asked for help well before she needed to, and the feds failed to respond in a timely manner. And while Brown took a lot of deserved heat for this, it's starting to look more and more like Chertoff was supposed to be the one in charge, and he didn't know it. Heads up their asses, these people--heads up their asses.

It's CRS (Congressional Research Service) and that tells a small bit of the story. Here is the actual letter. (http://gov.louisiana.gov/Disaster%20Relief%20Request.pdf) Note that it asks for money and help removing debris. It requests no help for assistance with evacuations. The letter is a legal document and the stipulations of Federal assistance are very clear. This is specifically why there is an issue here. They are required to change the contract in order to change the aid. It's not like a declaration of war or something that gives a President war powers. His power here was clearly outlined in the document.

Meanwhile on Saturday, the Mayor has only issued a voluntary evacuation even though the storm has already turn and it is clear it will hit NO and that it will be a cat 4 or 5 according to the national hurrican center and this didn't happen until 5PM local time. At this point, President Bush has already declared a state of emergency in the areas of landfall.

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1125213007249320.xml
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html

Nagin finally declares a mandatory evacuation at 10AM local time on Sunday, 52 hours too late to enact the evacuation plan even though 24 hours earlier the governor had reversed traffic on all roads leading out of NO to make it so both sides of the highways led out of NO. 10AM is 20 hours before landfall of the storm. However, had that time been used to its fullest in terms of evacuation assistance by the city's buses (as is called for in the emergency plan) it is estimated that 30,000 additional people would have been evacuated, not to mention the buses that were destroy in the flood would have saved to be used for evacuation after the storm.

2PM on Monday was the when the levee was breached (I almost always misspell levee). This is when the real disaster begins. I figure it was about 2:02PM when Nagin realized that he was not going to be reelected to any office ever.

Shortly thereafter, Brown orders FEMA employees to allow state and local officials to direct their response in order to best coordinate the federal response to the needs of the state without violating state and federal law.

http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=18470

On Friday, Bush finally asks the governor to allow FEMA to take over.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090301680.html

Many of you on here have berated President Bush for not accepting responsibility for the mistakes his Administration has made. One poster even has a note in his signature about "There USE to be Presidents who said that 'The buck stops here.'" ( Or words to that effect. )

Now that President Bush has stated that he personally bears the responsibility for the mistakes made by his Administration during the Katrina disaster, you point at him and say things like, "See! Even HE has to admit that he's fucked up!"

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(
I can honestly say that it's the only thing in the past five years that he has said and that I completely agreed with.

Masturbation doesn't make you blind -- or so I'm told. ;)

Here's one liberal who isn't letting the locals off the hook. Recall elections all round, say I!

But I still don't see how other people failing at their jobs means that Bush and his appointees didn't fail at theirs. They all had very specific jobs to do, and they didn't do them. I also insist that the higher the rank, the greater the responsibility should be. Sorry if that seems unfair to you, but I don't like it when bosses try to hide behind their underlings.

Finally, I don't really care what the "chain of command" was. After the second day, anybody with a television could see what was going on down there. For a bunch of bureacrats to know that and still sit around waiting on "procedure" when they had the resources to just go in, get to work, and let the lawyers sort it out later -- well, I say, recall elections and jail time all round, goddammit.

I agree with this mostly. I think this was a colossal failure on all levels. The part I think that Bush did well in the disaster that occured nine months into his first presidency and did poorly in the disaster that occurred nine months into his second presidency (strand coincidence, eh) is that during 9/11 he really made moves that suggested he cares even when the general response was out of his immediate control you got the impression that he really cared about those who were affected by it, and his response here was the opposite. Bush's role in this event was primarily to give people the feeling that someone high up gave a crap in the wake of certainly one of the biggest disaster's of my lifetime. The general feeling from top to bottom during the first days of the aftermath was that all anyone cared about was the 'looting'.

Here's the crazy part -

2001 - the first year of his first presidency - Bush goes through this terrible and divisive election and afterwards, by some kind of horrible miracle (horrible or miraculous depending on how you look at it), a disaster of epic proportions occurs that he and others handle well enough to really bring the country together in feeling that government is really going to step in and protect them in times of strife. Bush squandered this era of good feeling.

2005 - the first year of his second presidency - Another terrible and divisive election that leaves Bush's popularity hurting much like at the beginning of his first term and AGAIN, by some kind of horrible miracle, ANOTHER disaster of epic proportions hits and Bush gets an opportunity to again gel the country and really up his popularity. The disaster happens in a heavy democrat state and all he has to do is to APPEAR to work with state and local officials and suddenly he's got another era of good feeling about the government. Only this time he doesn't hit a homerun. The guy gets another impossible to forecast bailout of his lack of popularity and he can't capitalize on it. If I was a Republican I would be pissed. A proper handling of this disaster would have resulted in Democrats complaining that Bush is taking all the credit like he did after 9/11. If I was a Democrat, I would be equally pissed and the state and local officials making Democrats look like a bunch of braying jackasses (pun intended).

Last point - at one point, a single person is already brain dead and somebody wants to pull the plug on her. It is authorized and within 24 hours there is an emergency session of the US CONGRESS! Now, a disaster strikes that kills people in the four figures and leaves people in the six figures in harm's way with very little effective response several days in and WHERE'S CONGRESS? Certainly not in an emergency session. Those are only reserved for people who are already dead but are still on life support apparently. ARGH!!!

I say we vote them all out. Every democrat, every republican and we start fresh with a whole new batch that actually gives a crap about something we, the people, actually care about. And here's a suggestion, how about we don't vote a single one of them into office because their father was President or a Senator (Bush, Kerry, Gore)?

I say we vote them all out. Every democrat, every republican and we start fresh with a whole new batch that actually gives a crap about something we, the people, actually care about. And here's a suggestion, how about we don't vote a single one of them into office because their father was President or a Senator (Bush, Kerry, Gore)?
Excellent suggestion!! (quoting anonymous angry British voter from many years ago) "Vote the buggers out!"

There's such a rash on now to amend the Constitution, let's suggest amending it to allow votes of no confidence and federal recall elections. How much Congressional debate do you think there'd be on that? :p

But I'll leave aside the issue of whether Bush looks like he gives a crap or not. I once read an entire Times article about the drastically opposite response people have just to that grin/smirk of his. Half of all test subjects absolutely loved it and him, and half absolutely hated both. Hm...explains...something?

Many of you on here have berated President Bush for not accepting responsibility for the mistakes his Administration has made. One poster even has a note in his signature about "There USE to be Presidents who said that 'The buck stops here.'" ( Or words to that effect. )

Now that President Bush has stated that he personally bears the responsibility for the mistakes made by his Administration during the Katrina disaster, you point at him and say things like, "See! Even HE has to admit that he's fucked up!"

Can't you at least TRY to be fair about things? :(

He says he fucked up, we agree with him. How is that not being fair?

I say we vote them all out. Every democrat, every republican and we start fresh with a whole new batch that actually gives a crap about something we, the people, actually care about. And here's a suggestion, how about we don't vote a single one of them into office because their father was President or a Senator (Bush, Kerry, Gore)?
[ cheers wildly! stomps feet! whistles! ] Yayyyyyy!

Jocabia for President! :D

Ack, I think I lost some IQ points while reading such garbage. Whoever this Raybon Kan is, he's a drooling idiot for having written that, and you're under suspicion now too for having spread his idiocy ( :p ).

Seriously, I was tired of hearing about his hurricane business a week ago, and I'm only getting testier now that the usual suspects on the Left are trying desperately to blame George Bush for the weather. Instead of trying to pin the blame on GWB, why don't you find fault with those who legitimately screwed up: the state of Louisiana, the city of New Orleans, and all the boneheads who didn't leave when the mayor gave the evacuation order.

Why can't Louisiana be more stoic, like Mississippi, and just get on with the work of rebuilding without whining about how hard they have it?

Well they exact quote was about america in general not bush.

But whatever, get worked up all you want.

Blanco did call out her National Guard, and as for the buses--who exactly was Nagin going to get to drive them, and where would they drive them to?


A YOUNG BLACK TEEN DROVE ONE TO GET THE FUCK OUT OF THERE.

IN OTHER WORDS, ANY FUCKING ONE.

jesus fucking christ, this is why you guys lose elections. The majority of the blame goes to the idiotic mayor. Yes, Bush had a part to play in the fuckup, but he should get the minority of the blame.

Don't get me wrong - I am not saying Bush and FEMA don't deserved some blame...I know I for one have been RIPPING Nagin and Blanco (both of whom I felt deserved far more of the blame than Bush for the debacle that was the aftermath of Katrina). I've also let Mike Brown have it before he pulled out that ages-old excuse of "wanting to spend time with [his] family." For me, Bush deserves a share of blame for the overarching fuckup that was the handling of Katrina. He's also majorly fucked up in other areas that have been well documented. He admitted to one, but has stridently refused to admit to the others.

I make no secret of my genuine dislike for President Bush, but I'm not just blaming him in light of the obvious errors on the part of Ray Nagin, Kathleen Blanco, Michael Brown, and others whose blunders played out on the world's stage. He was just one person who needs to get in line to get his share of humble pie. The aforementioned Terrible Three deserve most of the pie, however.

The thing is, the US is currently an area prone to natural disasters of all kinds (earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, you name it). And while it may be the responsibility of each state to create an emergency program, I would think that people with foresight might have realised that there will inevitably be incidents where the emergency program of just one state simply won't be sufficient at all. The logical consequence is to build some sort of general federal program that's mobile, flexible and effective enough to at least take care of things after the catastrophe.


Sorry I'm so late in responding. I agree with you that the feds should help to fill in the gaps of state programs in times when they are not sufficient--but that requires the states to actually HAVE A program to begin with. You don't see the people of Mississippi whining and crying about federal unfairness although the hurricane actually caused MUCH MORE DAMAGE in our state. Our governor (who I also despise as much as Bush) had a plan. Our cities on the coast, had plans. And when the hurricane came they implemented them.


Worse than the fire and earthquake of San Fransisco of 1906? I seem to remember reports on a massive earthquake in Chicago in the first half of the 20th century as well. And then there were those Mississippi inundations sometime in the 90s.

Yeah, a lot worse. This hurricane didn't just affect one city or county. If affected three states. Over 80% of the state of Mississippi was without power. Millions of people were affected easily.


While the situation is bad, I don't think it is the worst natural disaster to ever happen in the USA. However, it seems to be the one that overstrained the administraiton the most.

I'm going to asume you wrote this before the news agencies actually started carrying that it was the worst. Of course, how did I know that then? If you don't actually believe it was the most severe, widespread disaster, then there is no point in every debating with you again because you avoid reality.

There was, i believe, one misattributed claim of gunshots being fired at rescue helicopters. You are saying EVERY single person who was left in New Orleans deserved to be washed away because they were "scum of the earth"?

Deal with human beings often?


While I don't agree entirely with the poster you are responding to, I have to say that what he said is not an entire untruth, although it seems to be something of an exaggeration. There were several incidents of people shooting at those who were coming to rescue them--including one notable one where the NOPD had to open fire on a gang that was shooting at a group of contractors going to work on the breached levies. That kind of makes it hard to work (though I didn't say that it shouldn't be done.)

i see the whole owning up and accepting responsibility thing as being just a PR stunt in the face of falling popularity... but then i am a tad cynical about these things
Actually, he was very smart about the apology. He aplogized for any screw-ups by FEMA. Since the majority of screw-ups in this case were made at local and state levels, he didn't tar himself with as nasty a brush as most people think.