|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2010 6:46:10 GMT
Five years on, the British papers are now analysing the political aftermath of the disaster. When the hurricane struck, people her were bemused at the slow response of evacuation, and it certainly brought home to me the problems of trying to govern such a huge country. But was the country's condemnation of Bush really so great as portrayed here? Extract from a longish article in The Independent:
...............
No single event, not even the war in Iraq that was plainly unwinnable in the late summer of 2005, was as ruinous to the fortunes of George W Bush, who, just 10 months earlier, had narrowly defeated the Democrat John Kerry to win a second term in the White House.
Thereafter for Bush, it was downhill all the way. But it was Katrina that sealed the 43rd president's reputation for ineptitude, cronyism and near-complete disconnect from the reality of life for ordinary Americans, especially poor Americans – a reputation that remains.
Shortly after the disaster, Bush claimed that no one could have foreseen that New Orleans' levees would break; in fact, scientists had for years been warning the federal government of precisely such an eventuality, if a major hurricane scored a direct hit on New Orleans.
For days, he and his top aides seemed unable to grasp the magnitude of what had happened, despite the ever-more frantic appeals from state and city authorities, and the harrowing images on television. Everyone in America knew a disaster for the ages was unfolding – except, it seemed, the man in the White House (or rather, at that particular moment, at his holiday ranch in Texas). Not until the afternoon of 31 August, some 60 hours after Katrina struck, did the President take a first-hand look at the stricken city – but only from the window of Air Force One as it made a detour on its route back to Washington from his ranch in Texas.
When he did visit the Gulf Coast in person, two days later, the occasion was memorable only for two gaffes. One was Bush's expression of sympathy for Mississippi's Senator Trent Lott, who had lost his house in the storm. Its replacement would be "fantastic," the President burbled, "and I'm looking forward to sitting on the porch." All this as tens of thousands of poor blacks – their own far humbler porches either washed away or under 20 feet of water – were trying to stay alive amid the apocalypse that had engulfed them, just a few dozen miles away in New Orleans.
Even that tone-deaf remark paled, however, beside the praise he lavished on Michael Brown, the head of Fema, the federal disaster management agency, whose handling of the emergency had been a national disgrace. Brown, a former supervisor of horse show judges but with powerful friends in the administration, was utterly unqualified for the job – and performed accordingly.
Bush, though, seemed oblivious to the reality apparent to everyone else. "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job," he declared, in a line that more than any other would define his presidency. A week later, Brown was fired, and in their minds, Americans did the same to their President. Before Katrina, people were still giving Bush a hearing. Thereafter, they simply tuned him out.
But the other ramifications of Katrina could not be tuned out. In the fetid waters that had taken over arguably its most beloved and distinctive city, the US saw a profoundly disturbing reflection of itself. The hurricane raised one uncomfortable question after another. How was it that an America able to send hundreds of thousands of troops halfway round the world to topple a dictator of whom it disapproved could not protect New Orleans? How could such a Third World disaster happen in the leader of the First World? Why did blacks suffer the most? Would the response have been as botched had a hurricane or earthquake struck Boston or San Francisco?
...........
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Aug 31, 2010 22:34:13 GMT
No that article is B__Sh_t, pure and simple. Katrina was simply one more opportunity for our left-wing biased liberal press to go after Bush.
The character assassination job the liberal media has done on GW Bush, Trent Lott, Sarah Palin, Newt Ginrich, etc. is abominable.
Whenever a Republican politician becomes a threat to them they send their private detectives to dig up dirt and they attack in the press. The sad thing is that it has worked.
Meanwhile, the Democrats screw up at every turn and are seldom criticized if ever. They get a free pass from the press.
That's the big problem with America and the world. Our major media outlets (BBC, Guardian, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, PBS, have sold out to the left. The only sources of honest news reporting remaining would be the Fox network and the Wall Street Journal. It is a disgrace.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 3:39:41 GMT
It is the "job" of the press to find the flaws in government, whichever is in power. If you think Obama is getting an easy ride, that may be because of your own political leanings; that's human nature!
The failure to maintain flood defences to protect New Orleans will cost the country billions of dollars in compensation. Whether that failure can be pinned entirely on the Bush administration is probably a matter for much debate; I dare say New Orleans has been overlooked for many decades.
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on Sept 1, 2010 3:57:43 GMT
The problem wasn't Bush. It didn't have anything to do with politics.
The problem was the entire disaster system. Pure and simple no one was ready for a hurricane of that magnitude. You have people spread out......that don't want to leave their homes.....they were told for days that it was coming......but they had rode out countless hurricanes for years....and weren't going to do anything different for this one. Combine this with an area that has a lot of poverty. Then when at the last minute many realized how bad it would be there was not a transportation system large enough to get everyone out. Then put in a city that is already below sea level......with a levee system that leaves a lot to be desired........and you have a disaster in the making. Police officers, fire departments and officials were evacuating their families also. Because people didn't want to leave were they supposed to die with them? That may sound callous, but would you? Granted most of them came back, but to utter chaos and no support system.......because there was no system......there was nothing. There were failures all around.
I would look at every large city and ask if they were hit with a catastrophic event......how would they do.........I don't think any of them would do much better even now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 4:05:43 GMT
The government had apparently been warned that New Orleans was a disaster in the making and those warnings went unheeded. That's why the court awarded compensation to the residents of part of the city, where flood defences had not been maintained - though I expect there will be manhy appeals!
From what I've read, the road evacuation of the city went very well.
But was adequate provision made for the 10% of the population who had no access to a car? The old, the sick?
Would things have been done differently in San Francisco?
If the population of America began to lose faith in Bush because of this, I say more power to them....and the press.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Sept 1, 2010 6:12:35 GMT
and in a small area of the uk...some of those flooded out in our small scale floods were still not back in their homes two yrs later katrina was on a vast scale...and a host of circumstances and incompetences
|
|
|
Post by firedancer on Sept 1, 2010 11:37:41 GMT
I can't think of any single country that has ever been ready for an eco-disaster on the scale of Katrina. Even the wealthiest get overwhelmed in the immediate aftermath. Disasters i.e. hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanos, mudslides etc. are actually so common that I can't see why there cannot be a global "disaster force" in place, to which all countries contribute according to their GDP, where all the supplies needed for an emergency response are warehoused and where the organisers can call immediately on specially trained segments of all country's military, medical, disaster charities etc. I'm sure it is not beyond humanity to organise it but I suppose I am being a bit naive......
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Sept 1, 2010 11:39:15 GMT
"I can't see why there cannot be a global "disaster force" in place"
I can.
|
|
|
Post by firedancer on Sept 1, 2010 11:48:49 GMT
;D Yes, Fret.. I was being deliberately provocative. I didn't come down with the last shower and I realise one cannot imagine humanity to act logically in matters like this.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Sept 1, 2010 12:15:10 GMT
;D Yes, Fret.. I was being deliberately provocative. I didn't come down with the last shower and I realise one cannot imagine humanity to act logically in matters like this. I know you didn't, firedancer! There's no harm in wishing or being idealistic, but this world is riven on just about everything you can think of.
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on Sept 1, 2010 14:30:43 GMT
The government had apparently been warned that New Orleans was a disaster in the making and those warnings went unheeded. That's why the court awarded compensation to the residents of part of the city, where flood defences had not been maintained - though I expect there will be manhy appeals! From what I've read, the road evacuation of the city went very well. But was adequate provision made for the 10% of the population who had no access to a car? The old, the sick? Would things have been done differently in San Francisco? If the population of America began to lose faith in Bush because of this, I say more power to them....and the press. Why is that just Bush's fault? What did Clinton do to fix it before him? What has Obama done since? What has any President done? I think it is that state that needs to address it.....then if they can't they need to take it further? I don't see it as the President's (any President) job to go out and inspect levees......or bridges....... Every city and state that is in danger of being hit by a hurricane should have a plan for the BIG ONE. If you don't....you have a problem. I live in a state that can be hit.....I think our butt's are in a crack......but I also think half the people wouldn't leave if the hurricane was looking them square in the eye......what can you do? Also.....more than half those people will build their houses right back where they were.....again.....what can you do? Again......New Orleans was already below sea level.......what do you think is going to happen? They have known the possibilities.....and the levee system wasn't built to take that type of hit......do you think anyone wanted to raise taxes to pay for a better levee system? A lot of people take chances......when it works out....it's great........nobody is happy when it doesn't.
|
|