home

Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bush Hatred

By Jeralyn, Section Huricanes Katrina and Rita
Posted on Sun Sep 04, 2005 at 06:17:14 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I'm getting really tired of those on the right who claim liberals are attacking Bush for his handling of the Katrina catastrophe just because he's Bush and we'd attack anything he does. Billmon has a good analysis of the powerline crowd attack on liberals.

I'm not fond of Colorado Governor Bill Owens' politics either, but I had nothing but praise for him as I watched the local evening news tonight and saw the busloads and planeloads of displaced persons streaming into Denver. Yesterday Gov. Owens offered shelter for 1,000 of the victims. They began arriving today. Not only has the Governor made housing, clothing, food and necessities available, but Colorado also will provide assistance for job and school placement and professional training. They also are welcome to remain in Colorado.

“We’ll give them job placement, give them professional training, so that they are prepared when they go back, go elsewhere, or stay here,” Owens said. “We’re doing what we can as good people.”

As I wrote over at 5280,

It’s a night to be very proud of Colorado.

Had Bush and his Administration acted responsibly and swiftly, or even like he was paying attention, we wouldn't be bashing him. His ineptitude, his poor choice of, and then praise for agency leaders and the bureacratic nightmare he created with FEMA and Homeland Security, have earned him a good thrashing. This was the first major test of Homeland Security and it failed miserably.

For a pretty-good summary of what Bush did wrong, see Matthew Cooper's new article in Time, Dipping His Toe Into the Disaster.

It isn't easy picking George Bush's worst moment last week. Was it his first go at addressing the crisis Wednesday, when he came across as cool to the point of uncaring? Was it when he said that he didn't "think anybody expected" the New Orleans levees to give way, though that very possibility had been forecast for years? Was it when he arrived in Mobile, Ala., a full four days after the storm made landfall, and praised his hapless Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) director, Michael D. Brown, whose disaster credentials seemed to consist of once being the commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Association? "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job," said the President.

< Terminology: Is Refugees a Bad Term? | Tiniest Survivor So Far >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bush Hatred | 56 comments (56 topical)
    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#1)
    by Paralegal on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    They also are welcome to remain in Colorado.
    No offense TL but, couldn't people stay in CO even if they weren't "welcome"?

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#2)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    People are going to have to get over the assumption that every comment, criticism, question, scientific report, article, or point of view is inherently partisan in nature. When every piece of objective data can be written off as partisan, reason is thrown out the window.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#3)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    As much as I don't like Bush, and I really do see him as a cheap, obnoxious, clever and dishonest little man, I've never thought he was stupid. He does have some very sharp advisors and handlers; to my way of thinking he just is not a "leader". And after watching him act the way he has been acting this week, as Matthew Cooper decribes:
    Slow, awkward and at times tone-deaf... Bush seemed so regularly out of it last week... ...often, W. looked annoyed. Or he smiled when he should have been serious. Or he swaggered when simple action would have been the right move... And he was so slow....
    I slowly, over the week began to at first suspect, then think it likely... This man is medicated...

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#4)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    And I have to agree with billmon that: "Bush's presidential image [...] is probably gone for good"

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    If you want a sign of how nonpartisan this issue really is... for the first time ever, I agree with Michelle Malkin about something. Hint: the title is: "Memo to Bush: Fire Michael Brown." I'm still in shock.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#6)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    Bush is full of excuses and blame shifting, he is uncomfortable, unreliable and awkward in public. He seems unable to take responsibility for, or admit or even allow for the possibility that he can make mistakes. This sounds, I know, like a description of an alcoholic... Perhaps "hungover" might be a better choice of words than "medicated"? Is this possible? Would not his handlers have had him out in front of cameras, coached to the eyeballs to "act" presidential, if he was capable of carrying it off?

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    ...conversely, if you want a sign of how partisan this issue is for some, check out this progressive article regarding the notion that Louisana natives "deserve to suffer and die." But I'll give credit where credit is due: TalkLeft held off on Bush-bashing until August 30, roughly 24 hours from when the storm hit New Orleans. I'm not sure that qualifies as an after-the-fact objective assessment of federal relief efforts, but it's better than the sub-minute lag I expected. (of course, many of the posters on this site had already begun the politicization even prior to the hurricane's landfall...)

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#8)
    by bad Jim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    It's a little hard to understand why FEMA was so competent and proactive in responding to the hurricanes that ravaged Florida last year. The same guy was in charge. Was the difference that Jeb Bush made it clear to his brother that if he screwed up he could kiss the election goodbye? This year there was no one home and the lights were out.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    So, a "student" has trawled the net to find an example of some leftie jerk who wrote a really callous, idiotic post. I don't agree with that writer. I can't believe I have to explain this to someone who is working on their Masters or PhD, but... there's a difference between some idiot mouthing off on their blog... and the president and his appointees, who have control over huge amounts of funding and resources, and whose actions or inactions mean thousands live or die. Oh, and again, I'm willing to say I disagree with somebody who is on my side of the ideological fence. You, on the other hand, seem unwilling to acknowledge that some huge "mistakes were made." And to start criticizing Bush on Tuesday? It seems perfectly appropriate to me. Brown and Chertoff were warned in advance that this was going to be a nightmare. Why didn't they start mobilizing the troops and supplies then? Sorry, "grad student." You flunk.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:14 PM EST
    With New Orleans and the Gulf States in ruins, now is not the time for purely symbolic acts, especially not cynical ones. That's why President Bush and the Pentagon should cancel the so-called Freedom Walk scheduled for Sunday, September 11. For the full story, see: "Cancel the 9/11 Freedom Walk."

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    "grad student" must believe that the Bush administration performance in this crisis was admirable, and seems to argue this view on the basis of the fact that the Left is criticizing him, and "politicizing" the process, and maybe even hurting his feelings. Wow. The mind boggles at this kind of thinking. The only other thing worth noting (besides the fact that what happened on the Gulf Coast this last week is clear to everyone) is that some graduate programs are pretty desparate for students these days and will accept damn near anyone with a pulse.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Posted by grad student: "check out this progressive article" Progressive? That article, by a single person, is a REACTION to the Red State/Blue State dicotomy YOU PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PUSHING AROUND THE CLOCK over the last five years. In other words, this is your own work, coming back at you. Some people are apparently traumatized enough to think that there IS such a thing as a 'Red State,' or that Louisiana is that, or that we have had a fair federal election in five years AT ALL. To use their reference to a single poster on a blog is to ignore the massively more offensive postings EVERY DAY on the LGF ...site.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#13)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    To be absolutely fair, TalkLeft has given the smackdown to both Governor Blanco and Senator Landrieu, both Democrats, on more than one occasion since the storm.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    The media has covered in full detail the hourly activities of President Bush and Secretary Rice in the days following the flood. Has that same scrutiny been given to Blanco? What was she doing? When was she doing it? If the media has been given her any scrutiny, I have not seen it.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#15)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    SoCal-Why don't we leave thet up to her mandate. Bush is a bigger fish than Blanco and everyone in America is worried about his performance in case disaster strikes where they live. It seems obvious why the media would reflect their readers concerns.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#16)
    by DonS on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Grad student, it doesn't take politization to recognize the horrendously callous and inadequate actions of the president for many days. Numerous repulicans admit as much. OTOH, claiming politzation is a convenient way to dismiss criticism, and a thoughtless response to factual observation.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    everyone in America is worried about his performance in case disaster strikes where they live.
    The Bush Administration faced the first major test of homeland security since 9/11, and failed miserably. That's scarey, in a way that transcends partisan politics.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    As much as I don't like Bush, and I really do see him as a cheap, obnoxious, clever and dishonest little man, I've never thought he was stupid. Edger--What do you mean by "stupid," exactly? Personally, I go with the theory that pretty much everyone with normal brain wiring is about as smart as everyone else--the difference being, some people put in their time. And those are the ones we think of as "smart." (And you can bet it's the version I pitch to my kid.) Bush never, ever put in his time. (And after a couple decades on a bender, that "normal brain wiring" criterion is up for grabs too.) He's got some animal cunning (notably including his reflex-like proclivity to lie) that pops up when his own welfare--and only his own-- is on the line, analogous to the way my dog suddenly gets smarter when there's food involved. So I'm always baffled when someone says Bush is smart. He's certainly not smart like someone who studied anything, or thought about anything besides how to put over a lie. He's what, smart like my mutt's smart? (You notice no one ever says "Clinton's smart" the way they say it about Bush--like a disputed position requiring supporting evidence.)

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#19)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Bill Clinton, I think, is an extemely intelligent man, able to consider an issue, it's ramifications, and range of responses and/or solutions from multiple points of view. george bush is not stupid. he did, for example, take advantage of his familys connections, position, and help to get him the job he has. This is not in any way a rebuttal of your comments, Molly. In fact, I agree with you 100%! I did not say bush is smart, and don't want to leave you with the impression that I think he is smart. I said I really do see him as a cheap, obnoxious, clever and dishonest little man, I've never thought he was stupid.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#20)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    grad student
    conversely, if you want a sign of how partisan this issue is for some, check out this progressive article regarding the notion that Louisana natives "deserve to suffer and die."
    If I was grading your post, I would give it a "F". He did write that but if you read on, you will find that the author then argues for the very opposite of what you are alleging.
    So, at least, I started to write. But then (to paraphrase the old song) I thought I'd better think it out again. Many of the victims, the ones who have suffered the most, are poor. The hardest hit were the blue state folk living among the red state maniacs. New Orleans, we should note, went heavily for Kerry. And that's why we must help. Although it was very tempting to say otherwise.
    What part of "And that's why we must help" don't you understand? Upon examination, your allegation is not supported by the evidence.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#21)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9179790/">Meet the Press: Transcript for September 4 Tim Russert talking with: Michael Chertoff, Marc Morial, Mike Tidwell, Mark Fischetti, David Wessel, Haley Barbour & Aaron Broussard MR. BROUSSARD: Sir, they were told like me, every single day, "The cavalry's coming," on a federal level, "The cavalry's coming, the cavalry's coming, the cavalry's coming." I have just begun to hear the hoofs of the cavalry. The cavalry's still not here yet, but I've begun to hear the hoofs, and we're almost a week out. Let me give you just three quick examples. We had Wal-Mart deliver three trucks of water, trailer trucks of water. FEMA turned them back. They said we didn't need them. This was a week ago. FEMA--we had 1,000 gallons of diesel fuel on a Coast Guard vessel docked in my parish. The Coast Guard said, "Come get the fuel right away." When we got there with our trucks, they got a word. "FEMA says don't give you the fuel." Yesterday--yesterday--FEMA comes in and cuts all of our emergency communication lines. They cut them without notice. Our sheriff, Harry Lee, goes back in, he reconnects the line. He posts armed guards on our line and says, "No one is getting near these lines." Sheriff Harry Lee said that if America--American government would have responded like Wal-Mart has responded, we wouldn't be in this crisis. But I want to thank Governor Blanco for all she's done and all her leadership. She sent in the National Guard. I just repaired a breach on my side of the 17th Street canal that the secretary didn't foresee, a 300-foot breach. I just completed it yesterday with convoys of National Guard and local parish workers and levee board people. It took us two and a half days working 24/7. I just closed it. MR. RUSSERT: All right.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#22)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Meet the Press: Transcript for September 4 Tim Russert talking with: Michael Chertoff, Marc Morial, Mike Tidwell, Mark Fischetti, David Wessel, Haley Barbour & Aaron Broussard Apologies for the broken link above... It's early, and it's my first day with the new fingers, I guess ;-)

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#23)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Hmmmm, the subject of the thread is that blaming Bush is not rooted in hatred. I don't know. That may be true for some, but I have seen too many comments that seem very much otherwise. On this thread, I give you Coop at 9/4 8:52PM. So bad TL deleted it. Then we have edger:
    As much as I don't like Bush, and I really do see him as a cheap, obnoxious, clever and dishonest little man.
    Who, according to edger’s source is awkward, tone deaf, swaggers and is medicated, no hung over. He is blame shifting, will not accept responsibility. And, of course, he has “handlers.” Gee, edger. Don’t hold back. Tell us how you really feel. And when someone disagrees with PIL:
    Little Green F*ks, racists all, have spread FILTH for years
    Molly – The only people I have seen commenting about the intelligence of Bush has been the Demos and the Left. So actually, anyone refuting their “he’s not the brightest bulb on the tree” comment has to show evidence, or it becomes a “he is – is not” argument. And then we have coop from the Sean Penn thread:
    Or, unlike the illegitimate trash punk in the White House, maybe he just gives a damn.
    I could go on, but we all know there are many like edger’s, less like coop’s, but they are there. Is it hate? In some cases I think yes. In some cases I think it falls back to a loss of decorum that society has suffered in general, and certainly a lack of it within the internet. The edges have become blurred and we may find we don’t like the end results.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#24)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    So actually, anyone refuting their “he’s not the brightest bulb on the tree” comment has to show evidence, or it becomes a “he is – is not” argument.
    I'll give you a direct quote from the boy: "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees..." Now defend that like the good Republican politburo member you are.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Thanks to all for your responses, and in particular those who responded with slurs on my (unknown) academic background and character. It manifests weakness with respect to arguing the issue - always a good thing to see amongst one's opponents. To Ditto, the sole reasonable respondent, you are correct. Clearly all levels of government underperformed in this debacle and it's good TalkLeft is addressing it. However, TalkLeft (like the MSM) is spending far more time criticizing Bush (the farthest removed level of government) than Blanco and Nagin (most proximate levels of government). And this criticism began well before the debacle had taken shape. So I think the claim that TalkLeft is reacting more from Bush-hatred (who would have guessed?) than sound judgement is justified. I suspect the Left will begin canonizing Blanco in hopes of laying more blame on Bush (some posters above are already starting down this path). I'll also answer John Horse since his argument was at least coherent, albeit irrational. John Horse: you justify that article from the left blogosphere on the basis that the writer eventually advocates helping the victims (big of him). But you missed the most callous aspect: he only thinks we should help them because many of them voted Democrat.
    New Orleans, we should note, went heavily for Kerry. And that's why we must help. Although it was very tempting to say otherwise.
    If all the victims were known red voters he would gladly let them starve. How tolerant. How progressive. How non-partisan. Obviously TalkLeft hasn't gone to this extreme, but clearly some on the left have. It is being politicized to varying degrees by those on the Left, and that is not impressive.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#26)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Jim is concerned about:
    "...a loss of decorum that society has suffered in general, and certainly a lack of it within the internet..."
    de·co·rum (dĭ-kôr'əm, -kōr'-) pronunciation n. 1. Appropriateness of behavior or conduct; propriety: “In the Ireland of the 1940's … the stolidity of a long, empty, grave face was thought to be the height of decorum and profundity” (John McGahern). 2. decorums The conventions or requirements of polite behavior: the formalities and decorums of a military funeral. 3. The appropriateness of an element of an artistic or literary work, such as style or tone, to its particular circumstance or to the composition as a whole. Not polite or appropriate behavior to voice your opinions, Jim?

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#27)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    “including drugs such as Cipro, which is designed for use against anthrax”
    First, Cipro is prescribed as a first volley in fighting cholera and typhoid; a prudent drug to have at hand. This post from an ‘open’ thread was taken from another liberal blog. It does kind of look like you folks are stretching a bit. Also, the constant histrionics over the labeling of the now infamous looting/finding photographs looks petty as well. The whole mess is pretty awful without adding the petty crap.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#28)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    MD-
    “When every piece of objective data can be written off as partisan, reason is thrown out the window.”
    If there ever was such a thing. Take for example the connection between climate change, global warming, and hurricane intensity and frequency. I doubt a single person here has bothered to read any of the manuscripts published regarding this; only the media accounts, which are terribly sensational and inaccurate. I am aware of only a single group that has published results concerning ocean temperature and hurricane intensity. They have yet to show causation between water temperatures and Hurricane intensity or frequency. This is probably the state of the art as it was published in Nature. I have no idea if anyone has shown a connection between global temperature trends and ocean temperature trends. However, none of this is more tenuous than the projection of wholesale climate change from the increase in mean global temperatures. Add a recent study published in the Public Library of Science that argues, rather convincingly, that around half of all published results are false, due to simple error, bias, ‘incest’ in a given subject, and so forth. Anyway, none of this matters. Hurricanes are caused by global warming as part of a greater trend of climate change, caused by greenhouse emissions. It is a settled argument, which incidentally corroborates the lefts worldview. I remain skeptical, but open-minded. Michael, unfortunate science will never be apolitical. As proof, I offer the following attacks.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#29)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Grad-Who are you to call someone "at least coherent?" Your posts have nothing to offer except packaged religious right white bread spew. Go back to your Bible study sites, daddy's bringin' em on, so you best prepare for Armageddon and the ensuing sweet end of your fairy tale life. I find the question of Bush bashing a bit like the one "Are you still beating your wife" It is a trick question for sure. Maybe the best way to think of it is as if we were an occupied country being pillaged by a ruthless gang of savages. Would anyone question the appropriateness of 'bashing' them at any time. No, unless you were part of the ruthless gang. Bush bashers are the true patriots. I know that it is hard to believe, but they can and do accomplish many other things while 'bashing'. Relentlessness is needed to counter the endless stream of bald faced lies foisted on our citizens. Relentlessness is also needed so that we can garner adequate support to wrest our government out of the hands of the evil neocon maniacs who are bent on ruining (ruling) the world.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#30)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    "The only people I have seen commenting about the intelligence of Bush has been the Demos and the Left"
    It's an open thread... I think decorum will allow for your opinions and comments of bush's level intelligence.... Jim...? Hello...?? Jim...???

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    The Rove-bots pretend that criticism of FEMA is mere Bush-bashing. This is the FEMA of the X-files. Here you can download a Meet the Press video clip of Aaron Broussard, president of Jefferson Parish in Louisiana, who tells of FEMA blocking Walmart water shipments FEMA turing back a Coast Guard shipment of diesel fuel FEMA cutting emergency phone lines It's as if low-level Politburo bureaucrats are running things. The wing-nuts are vigorously defending this insanity.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#32)
    by DonS on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:15 PM EST
    Grad You: talk about "slurs" "manifests weakness with respect to arguing the issue - always a good thing to see amongst one's opponents." . . . . . then . . . You: generalize and slur against TL: "TalkLeft held off on Bush-bashing until . . .roughly 24 hours from when the storm hit New Orleans." You: slur and make an implicit, unsupported assumptions about responsibilities of levels of government based on a tautology: "all levels of government underperformed in this debacle and it's good TalkLeft is addressing it. However, TalkLeft (like the MSM) is spending far more time criticizing Bush (the farthest removed level of government) than Blanco and Nagin (most proximate levels of government)." You: slur and more unsupported ad hominem judgment: "I think the claim that TalkLeft is reacting more from Bush-hatred (who would have guessed?) than sound judgement is justified." I surely hope you are young, inexperienced, and not studying logic. Take that as a slur if you wish.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    coop - Thanks for proving my point. edger - This not an open thread. You were speaking of....intelligence? ;-) Note that I said "loss of decorum." And that has nothing to do with expressing your opinion, but it does have everything to do with how you do it. edger? edger? Squeaky - Thanks for proving my point. You and coop do a super job. Et al - Frankly I don't care if you criticize Bush until the Nether Regions become frosty. In point of fact, and as I have written before, I am not a fan of many of his policies. But in a practical world you have to decide if you are going to work towards a goal, or just complain. My goal is a strong national defense. If we have that we have time to continue on improving the country. The Left and the modern Democrats... and the differences are very small... can't do that. But when the comments continually use the wording that many use, it starts to resemble a middle school locker room discussing the next opponent in some athletic contest.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#34)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    "loss of decorum." And that has nothing to do with expressing your opinion, but it does have everything to do with how you do it
    Right here Jim, just waiting for your opinions in defence of bush's intelligence(?) in however way "you do it"... Just so we have "both" sides covered here, to be fair... you understand? Of course you do...

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    Thanks to all for your responses, and in particular those who responded with slurs on my (unknown) academic background
    Just out of curiosity, Grad student--what is your academic background?

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#36)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    edger - Why should I defend Bush's intelligence? After all, his resume speaks for itself. Would you like to compare your resume to his? Of course not, you say. After all, he is rich and the old boy network.... Well his family was very well off, but there must be a million people who started with much more and have done less. Teddy? RFK Jr? On the otherhand Ted Turner took a good position and became a billionafre. Bush became President. edger, I am starting to think you don't have any solutions, just complaints.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#37)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    Jim: "his resume speaks for itself" Thanks, Jim... I believe that's one of the few things, if not the first thing, that you and I have agreed on. I knew you could do it...

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#38)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    Jim: I am starting to think you don't have any solutions Well now, I think waking up enough people to boot bush and these neanderthals out of office in the next election is a good start on a solution. After all "his resume speaks for itself". And I'd be happy to compare resumes... mine is at least readable, and isn't soaked in blood...

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    My goal is a strong national defense. If we have that we have time to continue on improving the country.
    I'm speechless. OK, no I'm not. Do you not think a strong national defense includes swift response to major disasters? Do you not think it means being able to mobilize troops and resources in the "homeland" quickly in the event of a crisis? If there was a terrorist attack in New Orleans, would you REALLY expect the mayor and governor to be wholly responsible for dealing with the aftermath for a week? The response to the hurricane is TOTALLY about national security. How can you not see that?

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#40)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    How's your foot feel this morning, Jim? Did george "show up in time" to help stop the bleeding yesterday? I wouldn't want to see you compound the injury today... Aim at the other one, huh?

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#41)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    PPJ- you wanna be the big brainless gym teacher who enforces the golden rule while we riot in your middle school locker room. Nice try but your status is not that grand as you are only the Chimp King Emissary. You have no point as you are only a mouthpiece, so your attempt to use of me to prove your point is quite pointless.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    Support of a Rove orchestrated campaign to shift the blame for the glacial response of the federal government to the Louisiana state and local govenments has nothing whatsoever to do with the putative sole concern with a "strong national defense." So much for credibility.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#43)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    grad, First of all, what I was saying was that the author of the blog that you cited was not saying that the flood victims "deserve to suffer and die" but the opposite, that they should be helped. In your response, I think you acknowledge this point. Now regarding his reasons for favoring assistance, I would agree with you that he wants to do the right thing for the wrong reasons. When you say that he "he only thinks we should help them because many of them voted Democrat" that is not quite accurate because you ignore the first reason that he cites for favoring assistance, that they are poor. You allege that "If all the victims were known red voters he would gladly let them starve" but most of the victims in Alabama and Mississippi were "red voters" and he did not advocate that they starve, did he? Personally, I agree with you that it matters not if the Katrina victims were poor or rich or from a red state or a blue state. The only thing that matters were they were victims of a hurricane and a flood and need our help. I agree with you that to look at the political affiliation or income status of the victims was wrong. However, this is uniquely Gannon's view, not "some on the Left". What I find being "politicized" by those on the Left is the justifiable criticism of the Bush adminstration's response to the disaster. Government leaders should be held accountable. By the way, this also governors and mayors. However, the primary responsibility for response and recovery for disasters of this magnitude is with the federal government. The buck stops with the President. As I've said before, what we had with Katrina was the perfect storm, the combination of a natural disaster of almost biblical proportions and one of the most incompetent Presidents in American history.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#44)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:16 PM EST
    Myself: ...waking up enough people to boot bush and these neanderthals out of office... Once that's done... for a good encore, we might elect a woman for President... if we're smart enough to.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    webmacher - Apples and oranges. A terrorist attack would involve the feds up front and

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    hmmmm wrong button... webmacher - Apples and oranges. A terrorist attack would involve the feds up front and immediately. A natural disaster requires the local, in this case the mayor and the govenor to act. In this case the Governor was offered fededral assistance around midnight on August 26. WaPost But she refused it. All things tie back to that, and the lost time involved. I hope your speech improves. edger - So your solution to our problems is to get Bush out of office? Uh, that happens automatically in Jan 09. Oh, you mean impeachment? So what happens after that? How would you end the war. Health care? Social Security? Oh, I know, since all of that is Bush's fault they will just cure themselves. Squeak - I am having trouble understanding. I am the King? Golden Rule? Huh?

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    insults deleted

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    From PPJ's linked article: "Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday." My question is, is this the usual procedure in the case of a natural disaster? A Republican president attempting to usurp authority from a Democratic Governor? Is this the way the United States of America handles these situations? By politicizing them? If the governor of Louisiana had been a Republican would more victims have made it out alive?

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#49)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    Hey Jim... let's go get a beer... Or two!

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#50)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    I'll get the first round, we can alternate after that... ;-)

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:18 PM EST
    PPJ... One leetle problem with your timeline. Right day of the week, wrong MONTH. The event you're referring to which you claim happened on Friday, August 26, before the hurricane strike... actually happened the FOLLOWING Friday, September 2. Seriously. One Friday was before the hurricane strike, and one was four days later!!!! Go back and read the article YOU LINKED TO!
    About 42,000 people had been evacuated from the city by Saturday afternoon, with roughly the same number remaining, city officials said. Search-and-rescue efforts continued in flooded areas of the city, where an unknown number of people wait in their homes, on rooftops or in makeshift shelters. Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced by the flooding -- 250,000 have been absorbed by Texas alone, and local radio reported that Baton Rouge will have doubled in population by Monday. Federal officials said they have begun to collect corpses but could not guess the total toll. Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.
    The article was datelined Saturday, September 3 and published Sunday, September 4. They were obviously talking about Friday, September 2. So you're going to have to find another excuse. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and not assume you're deliberately trying to mislead people into believing something not true. And that "apples and oranges" thing is just silly. Since when does a governor have the authority to commandeer federal troops and resources? Sure, she could have requested them, but I do believe that's just what she did when she wrote that letter to President Bush on Sunday, August 28 requesting that he declare a state of emergency and mobilize the resources that Louisiana was going to need! I will agree that there should be a full accounting. If the mayor and governor left something undone, then we all need to know. I'll personally feel better if my mayor watches this and takes careful notes for the next time we have a major earthquake. But the federal government has certain duties and responsibilities for security and disaster relief, and they fell down on the job. It doesn't inspire any great confidence that they'd magically do better if there was a terrorist attack.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#52)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:18 PM EST
    No Arabian horses were killed in the storm. Billmon posts the reason Brown lost his former job
    Former association board member Karl V. Hart of Florida alleges that in 2000 Brown improperly accepted a check for nearly $50,000 from a prominent breeder and put it toward his own legal defense for his work as commissioner.
    link

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#53)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:18 PM EST
    Blanco asked for federal assistance and what she got was blackmail.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:18 PM EST
    It doesn't inspire any great confidence that they'd magically do better if there was a terrorist attack.
    But Chertoff all but called Katrina a learning experience, and promised that the next time we had one of these "truly ultracatastrophes," federal agencies would figure out how to get involved earlier and work with state and local agencies better. Doesn't that give you a warm and fuzzy feeling? I didn't think so.

    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#55)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:19 PM EST
    Yo, PPJ! From FEMA's website, their mission statement, which says in part:
    Strategic Goals Awareness -- Identify and understand threats, assess vulnerabilities, determine potential impacts and disseminate timely information to our homeland security partners and the American public. Prevention -- Detect, deter and mitigate threats to our homeland. Protection -- Safeguard our people and their freedoms, critical infrastructure, property and the economy of our Nation from acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies. Response -- Lead, manage and coordinate the national response to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies. Recovery -- Lead national, state, local and private sector efforts to restore services and rebuild communities after acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies.
    Re: Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bu (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:20 PM EST
    "I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and not assume you're deliberately trying to mislead people into believing something not true." The truth is weirder. Jim himself doesn't know that he is spouting untruths, but if he finds out, he continues to spout them. So it comes down to what you mean by 'deliberate.' I'd say deliberate is somewhere between two fingers and four fingers of whatever Scotch Jim drinks.

    Blaming the Administration is Not Rooted in Bush Hatred | 56 comments (56 topical)