home

A Surprising Admission

by TChris

The president who never accepts blame uttered some surprising words today:

President Bush said Tuesday that "I take responsibility" for failures in dealing with Hurricane Katrina ...

Of course, the president hedged his acceptance of responsiblity:

"To the extent the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility," Bush said.

Given the efforts of Bush supporters to deflect blame to state and local officials, or to the victims of Katrina, it isn't clear that Bush believes the government he oversees was remiss in any significant degree. Still, he acknowledged the obvious: "Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government," including, presumably, the government he was elected to run.

Bush still talks about learning (presumably in the far distant future, after he's left office) "what went wrong and what went right."

The president was asked whether people should be worried about the government's ability to handle another terrorist attack given failures in responding to Katrina.

"Are we capable of dealing with a severe attack? That's a very important question and it's in the national interest that we find out what went on so we can better respond," Bush replied.

It is indeed a very important question, and one that deserves a prompt and accurate answer. So why isn't the president pressing for an independent, unbiased investigation of governmental failures before and after Katrina, and of the nation's preparedness for another disaster, whether sourced in nature or man?

< Hunger Protest Continues at Guantanamo | Tyson Foods Sued for Maintaining 'Whites Only' Bathroom >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Now I guess all the repigs and their flunkies are standing by their Fax machines. waiting for their rovian spin machine speaking points. Until then the fumbling and mumbling will just have to do.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Since this kind of admission is so out of character I guess the immediate discourse will be about wether this a gaff or a tactic? Should we start a Pool?

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#3)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    So why isn't the president pressing for an independent, unbiased investigation of governmental failures before and after Katrina, and of the nation's preparedness for another disaster, whether sourced in nature or man?
    Perhaps he's hoping this sliver of humble pie will relieve him of that unbiased investigation. Which is a dim hope indeed. Mother nature ain't no terrorist bogeyman, and the citizenry recognize the regularity of the former over the latter.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#4)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Why has it taken the worst natural disaster in the history of America, 2 weeks of the worst publicity this president has ever had, constant digging at this issue since 2001, and the lowest poll numbers he's ever seen, for Bush to finally admit that he makes mistakes? His persistent denial of reality is dangerous to himself and others. Persons with antisocial personality disorder tend to be callous, cynical, and contemptuous of the feelings, rights, and sufferings of others. They may lack a realistic concern about their problems or future.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    It's a start, but I will not be satisfied until the American people get an apology for the excessive, blatant cronyism. An admission of failure without adressing the root cause, in this case cronyism, is an empty admission.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    After the Marine Barracks bombing in Lebanon, Reagan accepted full responsibility, and then his team spent the next three weeks attempting to shift the blame. People remember the words, but they don't look for actions that prove or disprove the words. Of course, Bush never said "I am responsible."

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Toon O' The Day: Consoling Brownie

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Just how is Bush taking responsibility? He is simply trying to deflect criticism and avoid taking responsibility. In a way, it rings like terrorists taking responsibility for an attack. What does that mean? More of the same.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#9)
    by chemoelectric on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    You've been duped! Bush isn't saying anything he hadn't said already when saying he wasn't satisfied with the 'results'. And the last thing he has done here is admit a personal failure. Bush has merely recited his 'job description', that he is nominally 'responsible' for the activities of the executive branch. It is something that would be 'true' even if he didn't think the executive branch had done anything wrong!

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#10)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    perhaps this post at josh marshall explains some part of the puzzle as to why Bush made such an utterly uncharacteristic apology:
    Back on September 7th, Rep. John Conyers wrote to the Congressional Research Service (one of the few parts of the government that can legitimately be called non-partisan) and asked them to review the record to see whether Gov. Blanco of Louisiana took the necessary steps in a timely fashion to secure federal assistance in the face of hurricane Katrina. The report came back yesterday. Yes, she did. Read it yourself.
    josh marshall

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#11)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Unfortunately there is no "accountability" in the Bush family dictionary. This is just him pretending to give a darn. You know like he pretended to be a pilot in the military.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    It's a small, humble beginning, but Bush still has miles and miles to go. A few suggestions: First, he has to repeat his acceptance of responsibility for the flooding of New Orleans, but this time with all the weasel words removed. Next, he must unequivocally affirm that he was criminally negligent in withholding funds from the Army Corps of Engineers and thus guilty of dereliction of duty, and that his personal failings directly resulted in billions of dollars of property damage and the loss of hundreds, perhaps thousands of lives. Next, he has to confirm that he ignored compelling intelligence data and, thus, bears personal responsibility for 9/11. Finally, he has to personally apologize to Cindy Sheehan and confirm that he started an illegal war that killed her son, together with thousands of other innocent people, on a pretext, and that he has squandered billions of dollars American taxpayers' dollars and that his incoherent policies and foolish incompetence are destroying the Marine Corps and the Army. Then he has to resign.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    As opposed to your hero, President Clinton - who, after the Waco disaster played out, blamed talk radio and let Janet Reno take all the heat. Yeah, I can see what kind of "responsibility taking" TL prefers.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Clinton's no hero to me. But as always James, when the current pres. screws the pooch, bring up Clinton.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Yep, he never takes responsibility. Oops, he took responsibility - must be a ploy. If only Blanco would admit responsibility for the extent that the state government screwed up, then we might actually be getting somewhere Oh right, she's Democrat so she never makes mistakes.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#17)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    Exactly, kdog. This administration just got caught BIG TIME & without a doubt. Their failure has been evident and was broadcast ALL DAY LONG, into the night and beyond on the cable news channels....barely slowing for Rehnquist's death & funeral. There was nowhere - NOWHERE to go. I don't give Bush one lick of credit. Absolutely none.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#18)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    I was wondering if my Republican friends now agree with President Bush that he was responsible for the failure in dealing with Katrina? If you do, then weren't you also wrong about who bears responsibility for the Katrina fiasco? Or do you think that Bush is either a liar or is being untruthful?

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#19)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    grad-you are not doing your homework...again! The link I posted earlier (1:35 pm) is a bipartisan evaluation of Govenor Blanco's performance. She did fine. You get a F.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    So kdog, exactly how did Bush screw up? Why is it that things went so much better in FL last year, and in Mississippi and Alabama this year? Perhaps it's because in all those cases, local authorities did not panic - unlike Blanco. She failed to make a formal request for federal troops for days (CNN has reporting on this - have a look here, for instance - you'll get an idea as to just how badly prepared Blanco was. And then there's "flood the busses" Nagin, who didn't bother to round up city/school busses (and drivers) after the evacuation order, so that those with no transport could get out. Are you saying that the Feds should have sent in troops without an explicit request from the state governor? Even though they have no police powers (only the National Guard units have that)? Are you saying that the feds should have commandeered all of those busses, and somehow airlifted drivers in? In general, federal aid starts to arrive in volume 2+ days after a disaster. Prior to that, it's up to the state and local authorities. Is it your (kdog's) assertion that the federal government should act as if it's a martial law situation, right from the start? Do you really want to hand the feds that kind of power? Are you willing to let any President determine what is and isn't an emergency, and flood an area with troops immediately, w/o the agreement of the locals? If you do, I'm not sure which legal system you want to live under - but it's not the one I want.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#21)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    Check your links before you post idiocy, James. Your link (ostensibly to a CNN report) above is to (h)ttp://thepoliticalteen.com/video/blancoday8.wmv, and opens to a page that says:
    Please don’t hotlink to my videos - it is hard enough to deal with the current bandwidth I have now. If you like the video(s) you’ve seen, please consider donating to my dedicated server tipjar here.
    Go home, James... Get a paper and pencil, and don't come back till you've written "I will not lie or intentionally mislead" 1000 times... Find something useful to do with yourself...

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#22)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    James Robertson, Time to join the reality-based community. According to Bush "Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government." (emphasis mine) According to you, its all the fault of local government. So what you are saying is that Bush is a liar. If Bush is blameless than why is he taking responsibility for the Katrina fiasco? Why was Brown reassigned and then had to resign?

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    I notice that you haven't watched the video, so you've learned nothing.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#24)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    Per Talkingpoints memo
    "The President has done the obvious, only after it was clear he couldn’t get away with the inexcusable." John Kerry


    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#25)
    by Fr33d0m on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    Yes this is a ploy. He is taking responsibility but in the same breath trying to limit that responsibility. His words about capability are designed to mute the real problem; that he and his administration failed to ensure a timely federal response and chose to lie about it. Only his resignation will satisfy me.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#26)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    James Robertson : I notice that you haven't watched the video, so you've learned nothing. Earth to James... you short of oxygen, James? Go back and check your links...

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#27)
    by Last Night in Little Rock on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    If body language means anything, Bush's admission on television today was one of waffling and "I'm only saying this because Turdblossom told me to so we can stop the hemmoraging poll numbers." That's my read.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    I don't get how Bill Clinton has anything to do with this. He--according to JR--didn't take responsibility for Waco, so it's unfair to criticize Bush for his massive failures and his habit of not owning up to them. Is that the kind of logic we're working with? James Robertson isn't the only one who does this. It seems like any time you corner a repub. with the facts you hear something about a blue dress.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    Also James, I think Kdog might say that Bush shouldn't have slashed funding for FEMA, the corps of engineers, and maybe shouldn't have delayed a project specifically to improve the levies. Just for starters.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#30)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    Last Night:
    If body language means anything, Bush's admission on television today was one of waffling and "I'm only saying this because Turdblossom told me to so we can stop the hemmoraging poll numbers."
    According to Rasmussen Reports: Just 26% Say US Changed for Better Since 9/11
    September 10, 2005--As the fourth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks approaches, just 26% of Americans say their nation has changed for the better since those attacks. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 54% now believe those attacks changed America for the worse.


    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#31)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    ames Robertson:
    Why is it that things went so much better in FL last year, and in Mississippi and Alabama this year? Perhaps it's because in all those cases, local authorities did not panic - unlike Blanco. She failed to make a formal request for federal troops for days (CNN has reporting on this - have a look here, for instance - you'll get an idea as to just how badly prepared Blanco was.
    Sure, James: Nonpartisan congressional research report finds Louisiana governor took necessary steps
    "This report closes the book on the Bush Administration's attempts to evade accountability," [...] "The Bush Administration was caught napping at a critical time."


    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:46 PM EST
    I made this prediction back on Sept 5 on this site:
    "Clearly all levels of government underperformed in this debacle...I suspect the Left will begin canonizing Blanco in hopes of laying more blame on Bush"
    Try putting aside the "see no Democrat failure" spectacles for a millisecond and consider the following. (1) All levels of government failed. (2) Bush has admitted responsibility for federal failures. (3) Blanco has not admitted responsibility for state failures. Now, who is the more honest here: Bush or Blanco? Cut the crap about Bush being bad for not admitting responsibility and then being crooked for admitting responsibility. It's quite obvious to most of the 29000 people viewing this site daily.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    No one is saying that all democrat public officials did great, they're attacking the Bush-can-do-no-wrong lockstep of the cons. They are also, I think, wondering what happened to "the buck stops here." The con answer seems to be "anywhere but Bush."

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#34)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    In all fairness grad, if this article is reliable, I'm pretty pissed at Blanco, as well as Bush: FEMA, La. outsource Katrina body count to firm implicated in body-dumping scandals The Federal Emergency Management Agency has hired Kenyon International to set up a mobile morgue for handling bodies in Baton Rouge, Louisiana following Hurricane Katrina, RAW STORY has learned. Kenyon is a subsidiary of Service Corporation International (SCI), a scandal-ridden Texas-based company operated by a friend of the Bush family. Recently, SCI subsidiaries have been implicated in illegally discarding and desecrating corpses. Louisiana governor Katherine Blanco subsequently inked a contract with the firm after talks between FEMA and the firm broke down.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#35)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    Try to look at both sides of an issue, grad. You might fall over if you get too lopsided.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#36)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    grad: I suspect the Left will begin canonizing Blanco in hopes of laying more blame on Bush "the Left"... Defining or labelling a group, and then tarring everyone in the group you've created with your definition or label with the same brush, is dangerous. That is how things like racism, bigotry, self-righteousness get started...

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#37)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    Question everything... especially your assumptions...
    --- me

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#38)
    by bad Jim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    It would actually be impressive if Bush admitted responsibility for his own failure to act. Not only did the people he put into office fail to perform in a timely fashion, he was himself conspicuously absent from the executive job he was elected to perform until the public's outrage reached the boiling point.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#39)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    grad What you wrote on September 5 was that while "all levels of government underperformed" most of the blame needs to be placed on Governor Blanco because her government is more "proximate". This is only a variation of the "blame the local government" game that Republicans have been playing. By the way, do you think the governors in Mississippi and Alabama also underperformed or is it only limited to the Democratic governor of Louisiana?

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#40)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    Grad, So, your premise is "Blanco bad = Bush good" ? That's some logic there! How about they both suck?

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#41)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    bad Jim:
    [Bush] was himself conspicuously absent from the executive job he was elected to perform until the public's outrage reached the boiling point.
    From Think Progress: KATRINA TIMELINE Monday, August 29 7AM CDT – KATRINA MAKES LANDFALL AS A CATEGORY 4 HURRICANE MORNING — BUSH CALLS SECRETARY CHERTOFF TO DISCUSS IMMIGRATION: MORNING – BUSH SHARES BIRTHDAY CAKE PHOTO-OP WITH SEN. JOHN MCCAIN 11AM CDT — MICHAEL BROWN FINALLY REQUESTS THAT DHS DISPATCH 1,000 EMPLOYEES TO REGION, GIVES THEM TWO DAYS TO ARRIVE. LATE MORNING – LEVEE BREACHED 11AM CDT — BUSH VISITS ARIZONA RESORT TO PROMOTE MEDICARE DRUG BENEFIT: 4:30PM CDT — BUSH TRAVELS TO CALIFORNIA SENIOR CENTER TO DISCUSS MEDICARE DRUG BENEFIT: 8PM CDT — RUMSFELD ATTENDS SAN DIEGO PADRES BASEBALL GAME 8PM CDT – GOV. BLANCO AGAIN REQUESTS ASSISTANCE FROM BUSH: “Mr. President, we need your help. We need everything you’ve got.” [Newsweek] LATE PM – BUSH GOES TO BED WITHOUT ACTING ON BLANCO’S REQUESTS [Newsweek] Tuesday, August 30 11AM CDT – BUSH SPEAKS ON IRAQ AT NAVAL BASE CORONADO [White House] MIDDAY – CHERTOFF FINALLY BECOMES AWARE THAT LEVEE HAS FAILED: 2PM CDT – PRESIDENT BUSH PLAYS GUITAR WITH COUNTRY SINGER MARK WILLIS [AP] BUSH RETURNS TO CRAWFORD FOR FINAL NIGHT OF VACATION [AP] Wednesday, August 31 NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS ARRIVE IN LOUSIANA, MISSISSIPPI, ALABAMA, AND FLORIDA: Troops arrive two days after they are requested. [Boston Globe] TENS OF THOUSANDS TRAPPED IN SUPERDOME; CONDITIONS DETERIORATE PRESIDENT BUSH FINALLY ORGANIZES TASK FORCE TO COORDINATE FEDERAL RESPONSE: Bush says on Tuesday he will “fly to Washington to begin work…with a task force that will coordinate the work of 14 federal agencies involved in the relief effort.” [New York Times, 8/31/05]

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#42)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    et al - In the meantime, some are starting to view this wih a bit of reason.
    Jason van Steenwyk is a Florida Army National Guardsman who has been mobilized six times for hurricane relief. He notes that: "The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne." For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 1992. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.


    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    Jim, (and I don't really have time for this, so someone else should take over) There's a reason you hear this disaster compared to San Francisco 1906 more than you hear it compared to hurricane Andrew. A city was destroyed and the federal government needed to act very quickly. Instead you had Brownie telling Paula Zahn that he just found out about the SuperDome when the situation had been on TV. Had they watched, I don't know, THE NEWS, they would have known about it. I'm glad this National Guardsmen is happy with the federal govt. The American public isn't. So to "view" the situation "with a bit of reason," you have to absolve the president of responsibility, right? How very convenient.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#44)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    Jim: I don't think anyone here has argued that the Guard troops that did make it to NOLA didn't do heroic work. They did... What people are unhappy with is the response of the federal government, as a whole, and the "leader" callous way of not being willing to take responsibility for the "team" HE put together and IS responsible for.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#45)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    JR....I'm not a mayor/governor defender. They failed their constituents. I am not one of their constituents, I am Bush's consituent. Bush failed by appointing a political crony with no disaster relief experience to head FEMA, and his half-arse admission did not address this critical mistake. Cronyism kills, and I want the president to acknowledge that fact.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#46)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    Because you, too can head FEMA
    Republicans have two terms used to dismiss those unimpressed with the performance of FEMA. The first is, "Monday morning quarterbacking". This, however, is not an appropriate application. You and I are most likely not qualified to play professional football. We are, however, qualified by administration standards to head up the Federal Emergency Management Agency. ... The second term they use to dismiss criticism of the federal response to Katrina is, "The Blame Game". If you think that leaders shouldn't be judged by their response to immediate threats to the lives of their constituent... don’t vote. Ever. If you call that, “The Blame Game,” don’t play it. Just sit back, shut up, and tune in to Dr. Phil. For those of you in need of written affirmation of the obvious: The primary purpose of government is protection. When he was told the country was under attack, after having tried to convince us that nuclear weapons could land on our doorsteps in just 15 minutes, George W. Bush sat blankly at a photo op for 7 minutes, waiting for somebody to tell him what to do. He posed for some dramatic photos, invaded a country that had nothing to do with the attack, and this country re-elected him. And then, when he was told that a major U.S. city was 80% under water, he went about his vacation as if nothing happened. Let it never be said that voters don't get the government they deserve.


    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#49)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    PPJ, Well, if FEMA and the Bush adminstration did such a fine job, how come Brown resigned after being reassigned and how come Bush took responsibility after admitting that there were weaknesses in the federal response (as well as the local response)? Your arguement is belied by Bush's actions. By the way, regarding the National Guard. First of all, most Floridians consider the federal response to Andrew to have been a disaster. This was the major reason that Bush the elder lost the state and the election to Clinton. You also need to get your facts straight. It didn't take the Louisiana National Guard three days to respond. They were in New Orleans before the hurricane, during the hurricane, and after the hurricane. Here is another fact. Before Katrina hit, August 28, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson offered help from the New Mexico National Guard but the paperwork needed to get the troops didn't come back from Washington until September 2.

    Re: A Surprising Admission (none / 0) (#50)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:51 PM EST
    Why is it that things went so much better in FL last year, and in Mississippi and Alabama this year?
    Florida was a swing state in an election year. Alabama was on the fringe of the storm. Things were just as bad in coastal Mississippi as they were in Lousiana. People were dying days after the storm while waiting to be rescued there, too.
    Are you saying that the feds should have commandeered all of those busses, and somehow airlifted drivers in?
    The bus thing is a crock. Where would the buses have gone to? New Orleans had no realistic evacuation plan because such a thing would have needed funds the city didn't have. Putting people in the Superdome was not a good idea since the roof would have probably failed in a catagory 4 or 5 storm and the building would have been flooded as well. But where else could they go? A mass transit system may have made a difference in evacuating people. And what has Bush done to push mass transit? Absolutely nothing. Sorry, but whatever stones you want to throw at the local and state pols end up bouncing right back on the feds. BUSH FAILED TO PROTECT AMERICANS. Spectacularly. The second time in 4 years and look at the polls, the people know it.