[art_director]

Regardless of your view, George Bush did a fine job of leading the nation after 9-11. Now he's facing the test again. In the coming weeks and months we'll see what he and his team are really about. This time there's no war to boost the perception of success and action – it's all about saving lives and rebuilding.

I may not like everything President Bush does but I do wish him luck with this challenge.

[Ron Goodman]

Yeah, he led(lied) us right into a useless war with a country which had nothing to do with 9/11. I think we could do without any more of these "fine jobs".

[Troll]

Which of the breathlyser tests (that he failed) was his first biggest test?



PS. Looks like you got love and move confused. Freudian slip?

[art_director]

Freudian slip?

I believe that would be correct.

[Moderator]

What test..what does he actually have to do. Take heli tours, stumble through press conferences, and listen to people tell him what to do. Which is about what he did during his last "test".

[Maflynn]

I don't hate him, and the Secret service would have issues if I Moved him

Of course the democrats Move him - at least want too. Move him out of 1600 pennsylvania ave that is

[art_director]

Originally Posted by Moderator

What test..what does he actually have to do. Take heli tours, stumble through press conferences, and listen to people tell him what to do. Which is about what he did during his last "test".

That has me in stitches!

[art_director]

Originally Posted by Maflynn

I don't hate him, and the Secret service would have issues if I Moved him

Of course the democrats Move him - at least want too. Move him out of 1600 pennsylvania ave that is

Dick Chency moves his mouth by placing his hand up Dubya's back.

[Atomic Rooster]

Bush moves very badly on bicycles and anything else with two wheels.

I think he has a balance problem from all the crack he did.

[art_director]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster

Bush moves very badly on bicycles and anything else with two wheels.

I think he has a balance problem from all the crack he did.

And for the love of god, PLEASE, watch him if he goes for the bag of pretzels again...er...wait, nevermind. "Would you like a pretzel, Mr. President? It's o.k. these are the choke-proof kind. Made special for you in France."

[spauldingg]

Bush failed this test before he misspelled his name on the paper.

[placebo1969]

Can I post something in here, or is it a circle jerk for the left only?

Regarding the original post, this is not only a challenge to Bush, but the entire country and even world. The devastation is so incredible. I want to get on the first plane and go there, but know that's not realistic.

My wife and I have saved up and we were going to make an extra mortgage payment. I'm going to talk to her and see if we can donate the money to Red Cross (or some other agency) instead.

[spauldingg]

Oh yeah, it's a lefty circle jerk, but right handed people can squeeze in, too.

to your contribution. I'll see what I can do, too.

[RIRedinPA]

Originally Posted by art_director

Regardless of your view, George Bush did a fine job of leading the nation after 9-11. Now he's facing the test again. In the coming weeks and months we'll see what he and his team are really about. This time there's no war to boost the perception of success and action – it's all about saving lives and rebuilding.

I may not like everything President Bush does but I do wish him luck with this challenge.

I say he gets a big red F. For Christ sake, almost four years after 9/11 and there is obviously no plan on a national level to deal with the aftermath of any kind of disaster, man-made or natural.

And they had a head start on this one. FEMA and Homeland Security, which they are under, had three days at least to anticipate that this storm would be a monster and hit the Gulf Coast. Three days to mobilize national guard and active duty units, to have SAR teams on stand-by, ship medical, food and other supplies to the periphery, to assist with evacuation plans and a host of other concerns where they are obviously failing.

Imagine if this was a nuke or chem attack on LA or Philly? There would be no warning. There is obviously no plan for debris removal, infrastructure repair and maintenance, security, mortuary services, nothing to deal with hundreds of thousands of misplaced and homeless people, security, civil affairs, etc. etc. It sounds just like the aftermath of the Iraqi invasion.

It's four days now and FEMA and the federal government is still slowly reacting to this disaster. Had 9/11 not happened I would cut them some slack, this is indeed unprecedented. But they and non-government experts have been saying since before 9/11 a nuke or chemical or bio attack on the US is a matter of when, not if. If this is the response we can look forward to then no sh*t, lawlessness is going to abound.

It's the same damn story over and over again. When you get down to the folks on the ground, the Coastie doing the rescues, the cops in New Orleans, the doctors in Chairty Hospital, they are acting in the truest sense of the word hero. The masses are acting predictably when there is no civil order, they will regress to the most fundamental instincts. It is a national shame.

And this isn't a partisan rant. The Dems would fare no better. The plan of the elite seem to be to let us languish in the streets, blame the opposing parties elites and then send out a fund raising request disguised as a survey. F*ck all of em.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by RIRedinPA

It is a national shame.

What's really a national shame are all the folks who've been Hollywooded into thinking that everything will get fixed right before the last commercial break of the hour.

Here's a reality check for you:

THINGS...DON'T...HAPPEN...THAT...FAST.

Not in the "real world." In Hollywood, or on TV, they happen before the hour's up. But not really.

Folks in N.O. and Biloxi who were expecting relief the next day will know better next time and prepare. They were Hollywooded and Washingtoned into believing that nothing bad really ever happens and the govt. would fix it if it did.

Those of us who've lived through disasters know better. The ONLY good that could come of any of this is that it might wake up some of the informationally and experientially challenged among us.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by RIRedinPA

I say he gets a big red F. For Christ sake, almost four years after 9/11 and there is obviously no plan on a national level to deal with the aftermath of any kind of disaster, man-made or natural.

And they had a head start on this one. FEMA and Homeland Security, which they are under, had three days at least to anticipate that this storm would be a monster and hit the Gulf Coast. Three days to mobilize national guard and active duty units, to have SAR teams on stand-by, ship medical, food and other supplies to the periphery, to assist with evacuation plans and a host of other concerns where they are obviously failing.

I heard a few reporters on the ground there say that the governor of Lousiana was in charge of mobilizing the national guard, and she had only 2000 guardsmen activated for that entire city. New Orleans police weren't enforcing curfew on the night of the hurricane, and many who stayed behind in New Orleans did so because they knew the upper and middle class folks were evacuating their homes and businesses. Thes thugs were planning to loot and steal the entire time. THe reporters (one was Shep Smith) said cntrol of New Orleans was lost the moment Katrina hit.

FEMA steps in once the disaster occurs. They prepare ahead of time, but they still don't kick into full gear until a disaster actually occurs, as far as I know. And the President cannot just seize a city or region of the country from locally elected officials whenever a hurricane is forecast.

[spauldingg]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

With all the dire predictions we heard, there was no reason to have only 2000 National Guardsmen deployed. The Mayor of New Orleans should have known better as well. He's supposed to know his city lick the back of his hand. He had ample time to plead for more assistance. It's as if neither of them asked themselves "OK... imagine the entire city is completely flooded like some experts say is possible. Are we OK if that scenario happens?"

I call Bull$hi!t to the Bush apologist.

from here:

...after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars.

Newhouse News Service, in an article posted late Tuesday night at The Times-Picayune Web site, reported: "No one can say they didn't see it coming. ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation."

In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness.

On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."

Also that June, with the 2004 hurricane season starting, the Corps' project manager Al Naomi went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and essentially begged for $2 million for urgent work that Washington was now unable to pay for. From the June 18, 2004 Times-Picayune:

"The system is in great shape, but the levees are sinking. Everything is sinking, and if we don't get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can't stay ahead of the settlement," he said. "The problem that we have isn't that the levee is low, but that the federal funds have dried up so that we can't raise them."

The panel authorized that money, and on July 1, 2004, it had to pony up another $250,000 when it learned that stretches of the levee in Metairie had sunk by four feet. The agency had to pay for the work with higher property taxes. The levee board noted in October 2004 that the feds were also now not paying for a hoped-for $15 million project to better shore up the banks of Lake Pontchartrain.

The 2004 hurricane season was the worst in decades. In spite of that, the federal government came back this spring with the steepest reduction in hurricane and flood-control funding for New Orleans in history. Because of the proposed cuts, the Corps office there imposed a hiring freeze. Officials said that money targeted for the SELA project -- $10.4 million, down from $36.5 million -- was not enough to start any new jobs.

There was, at the same time, a growing recognition that more research was needed to see what New Orleans must do to protect itself from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane. But once again, the money was not there. As the Times-Picayune reported last Sept. 22:

"That second study would take about four years to complete and would cost about $4 million, said Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi. About $300,000 in federal money was proposed for the 2005 fiscal-year budget, and the state had agreed to match that amount. But the cost of the Iraq war forced the Bush administration to order the New Orleans district office not to begin any new studies, and the 2005 budget no longer includes the needed money, he said."

The Senate was seeking to restore some of the SELA funding cuts for 2006. But now it's too late.

One project that a contractor had been racing to finish this summer: a bridge and levee job right at the 17th Street Canal, site of the main breach on Monday.

The Newhouse News Service article published Tuesday night observed, "The Louisiana congressional delegation urged Congress earlier this year to dedicate a stream of federal money to Louisiana's coast, only to be opposed by the White House. ... In its budget, the Bush administration proposed a significant reduction in funding for southeast Louisiana's chief hurricane protection project. Bush proposed $10.4 million, a sixth of what local officials say they need."

Local officials are now saying, the article reported, that had Washington heeded their warnings about the dire need for hurricane protection, including building up levees and repairing barrier islands, "the damage might not have been nearly as bad as it turned out to be."

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by spauldingg

I call Bull$hi!t to the Bush apologist.

back at you...

Strock added that despite a May report by the Corps' Louisiana district that a lack of federal funding had slowed construction of hurricane protection, nothing the Corps could have done recently would have prevented Katrina from flooding New Orleans.

"The levee projects that failed were at full project design and were not really going to be improved," Strock said.

and there's more...

A fact sheet issued by the Corps in May said that seven construction projects in New Orleans had been stalled for lack of funding. It noted that the budget proposed by President Bush for 2005 was $3 million and termed that amount insufficient to fund new construction contracts.

"We could spend $20 million if the funds were provided," the fact sheet said. Two major pump stations needed to be protected against hurricane storm surges, the fact sheet said, but the budgets for 2005 and 2006 "will prevent the corps from addressing these pressing needs."

Acknowledging delays in construction, Corps officials in Louisiana said that those projects weren't where the failures occurred. "They did not contribute to the flooding of the city," said Al Naomi, a senior project manager.

[RIRedinPA]

Originally Posted by finboy

What's really a national shame are all the folks who've been Hollywooded into thinking that everything will get fixed right before the last commercial break of the hour.

Here's a reality check for you:

THINGS...DON'T...HAPPEN...THAT...FAST.

Not in the "real world." In Hollywood, or on TV, they happen before the hour's up. But not really.

Folks in N.O. and Biloxi who were expecting relief the next day will know better next time and prepare. They were Hollywooded and Washingtoned into believing that nothing bad really ever happens and the govt. would fix it if it did.

Those of us who've lived through disasters know better. The ONLY good that could come of any of this is that it might wake up some of the informationally and experientially challenged among us.

You obviously did not read my post.

The federal government had 3 days at minimum to prepare for this disaster but very little was done. I am not saying that NO would be pumped out and restored to its ante bellum beauty the day following the worst hurricane to hit America ever but, and I say this in the context of already having 9/11 happen and the government warn us that a WMD hit on the US is inevitable, where was the preparedness? It's not like this storm rolled up out of no where, NOAA was tracking it since it formed off the West African coast. and they knew it would be cat 4 or 5.

They also knew, from a recent table top hurricane "war" game (Goggle Hurricane Pam) that around 112,000 households in NO had no vehicular means of getting out of the city. To cut them some slack they were beginning to put into place emergency plans as a result of the war game but all the same, four years after 9/11 and this is the best response the feds can give.

You want to give them a pass that's your option, I think they have failed and let us down.

[RIRedinPA]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

I heard a few reporters on the ground there say that the governor of Lousiana was in charge of mobilizing the national guard, and she had only 2000 guardsmen activated for that entire city. New Orleans police weren't enforcing curfew on the night of the hurricane, and many who stayed behind in New Orleans did so because they knew the upper and middle class folks were evacuating their homes and businesses. Thes thugs were planning to loot and steal the entire time. THe reporters (one was Shep Smith) said cntrol of New Orleans was lost the moment Katrina hit.

FEMA steps in once the disaster occurs. They prepare ahead of time, but they still don't kick into full gear until a disaster actually occurs, as far as I know. And the President cannot just seize a city or region of the country from locally elected officials whenever a hurricane is forecast.

I'm aware of FEMA's policy of stepping once a disaster occurs and I am not advocating the federal government seizing control because of a dire forecast for a region. But c'mon, they knew this was going to be a monster. Your telling me FEMA couldn't have gathered the SAR teams ahead of them to deploy them more almost immediately, that they couldn't have C-130s and C-5's waiting with supplies to head down immediately after the storm cleared, etc. etc. They are being reactive instead of proactive/preventive and like I said above, after 9/11 I expect a better response.

As for the thought that everyone who remained behind did so so they could loot, that's painting with a broad paint brush. See my other reply about Hurricane Pam.

[spauldingg]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

back at you...
and there's more...

Cute how you left off the last paragraph:

"The design was not adequate to protect against a storm of this nature," he said. "We were not authorized to provide protection to Category 4 or 5 design

[budster101]

Nice bait thread. Troll.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by RIRedinPA

I'm aware of FEMA's policy of stepping once a disaster occurs and I am not advocating the federal government seizing control because of a dire forecast for a region. But c'mon, they knew this was going to be a monster. Your telling me FEMA couldn't have gathered the SAR teams ahead of them to deploy them more almost immediately, that they couldn't have C-130s and C-5's waiting with supplies to head down immediately after the storm cleared, etc. etc. They are being reactive instead of proactive/preventive and like I said above, after 9/11 I expect a better response.

As for the thought that everyone who remained behind did so so they could loot, that's painting with a broad paint brush. See my other reply about Hurricane Pam.

FIrst off, I said "many". I would never have said "everyone", for I know it's an extremely small percent of the people in New Orleans. My point, which maybe I didn't phrase correctly, was that a criminal element was present and ready from the get go (versus the theory that normal, law-abiding citizens have been somehow transformed overnight into hardcore, gun-toting criminals).

I agree on the supplies issue, though I do want to read more about what exactly was/is going on with regards to that.

As for the Pam excercise, none of the 6 major issues included a levee break, let alone multiple breaks as have been experienced. The closest of the 6 major issues was "Removing floodwater from New Orleans, Metairie and other bowl-like areas where levees will capture and hold storm surge." It's a whole different ball game when those levees don't capture or hold anything.

It seems as if there things have been taken care of with regards to Katrina:

http://www.ohsep.louisiana.gov/newsr...rripamends.htm

I just don't think they prepared for (multiple) levee breaks, which seems to be the big monkey wrench.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by spauldingg

Cute how you left off the last paragraph:

"The design was not adequate to protect against a storm of this nature," he said. "We were not authorized to provide protection to Category 4 or 5 design

That serves my point even more. The designs that were being done for the "underfunded" projects that you noted weren't even intended or aimed at providing Cat 4 or Cat 5 protection.

The moral of the story: It wouldn't have made an ounce of difference had those projects been given the thumbs up. They wouldn't have been done on the portions that broke, they wouldn't have protected against a cat. 4 or 5 storm, and they wouldn't have been completed by this time.

Your entire case is debunked from top-to-bottom. Nice try.

[RIRedinPA]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

FIrst off, I said "many". I would never have said "everyone", for I know it's an extremely small percent of the people in New Orleans. My point, which maybe I didn't phrase correctly, was that a criminal element was present and ready from the get go (versus the theory that normal, law-abiding citizens have been somehow transformed overnight into hardcore, gun-toting criminals).

Well I think there is always a criminal element ready to capitalize on any tragedy, be they petty theives or corporate oil companies. But I get your point, though I do think, given the supply fiasco, that some law abiding folks are looting out of necessity, not greed.

I agree on the supplies issue, though I do want to read more about what exactly was/is going on with regards to that.

As for the Pam excercise, none of the 6 major issues included a levee break, let alone multiple breaks as have been experienced. The closest of the 6 major issues was "Removing floodwater from New Orleans, Metairie and other bowl-like areas where levees will capture and hold storm surge." It's a whole different ball game when those levees don't capture or hold anything.

It seems as if there things have been taken care of with regards to Katrina:

http://www.ohsep.louisiana.gov/newsr...rripamends.htm

I just don't think they prepared for (multiple) levee breaks, which seems to be the big monkey wrench.

I heard an interview on NPR today with someone who particpated in Pam and he was asked specifically if the scenerio included a levee break. He said no because the scenerio had water levels in NO which were the same as the lake, so a levee break would not have made a difference.

I guess my point is if we are this unprepared as a nation for a predicted disaster, especially following last year's hurricane season and 9/11 how f*cked are we going to be when that bio/chem.nuke attack does happen?

[besson3c]

Paul Krugman says, in a nutshell:

1) Rescue was slow to respond, many vehicles in Iraq

2) Lack of preventive action taken, work on levees cut back, partially because of spending pressures on Iraq

3) FEMA agency rendered ineffective


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/02/op...02krugman.html

Just sharing this with you for your general interest, although I'm sure the usual Republican bunch will jump down my throat.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by RIRedinPA

You obviously did not read my post.

and they knew it would be cat 4 or 5.

Sure, I read your post. You've said the same thing several times now. I heard you. I think you're overreacting.

As for them "knowing" it would be a cat 4 or 5, that's incorrect, too. Living in Houston, I watched this storm almost *hourly* from the time it was a threat to Florida. We knew no such thing that far in advance.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Paul Krugman says, in a nutshell:

I guess he got the Democrat talking points Fax-of-the-Day, too. For people to take such raw tragedy and turn it into a political football is sick.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by finboy

I guess he got the Democrat talking points Fax-of-the-Day, too. For people to take such raw tragedy and turn it into a political football is sick.

I think there definitely it is appropriate to not jump into the political editorial while events are still raw and unsettled. The question is: how long should this period of reflection/silence be?

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by RIRedinPA

I heard an interview on NPR today with someone who particpated in Pam and he was asked specifically if the scenerio included a levee break. He said no because the scenerio had water levels in NO which were the same as the lake, so a levee break would not have made a difference.

Except that pumping out the water could have begun immediately. THat's pretty huge.

Originally Posted by RIRedinPA

I guess my point is if we are this unprepared as a nation for a predicted disaster, especially following last year's hurricane season and 9/11 how f*cked are we going to be when that bio/chem.nuke attack does happen?

My main complaint has to do with those thousands of people near the Superdome and hanging out on highways. Can't we be dropping pallete after palette of water and food there? What are the reservations about this?

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Paul Krugman says, in a nutshell:

1) Rescue was slow to respond, many vehicles in Iraq

2) Lack of preventive action taken, work on levees cut back, partially because of spending pressures on Iraq

3) FEMA agency rendered ineffective

1: We have plenty of vehicles, military and civilian.

2: The proposed levee projects weren't even targeted at the areas where the breaks occurred.

3: FEMA in New Orleans appears to be not doing so well, but I think we'll need more information to pinpoint exactly where they dedicated their resources. I know the first 2 days, they were totally engaged in rescuing 5-10 thousand people stranded in their homes.

I want to know why food and water weren't dropped in mass near the Superdome at a constant pace. The rest I am willing to understand to a point... at least until the entire recount of efforts and activities is given and analyzed.

[budster101]

Where are the porta-potties? They have no running water, and no toilets... that's gotta be bad just that alone. The Mayor is an idiot down there... Get him off teh Hootch.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

My main complaint has to do with those thousands of people near the Superdome and hanging out on highways. Can't we be dropping pallete after palette of water and food there? What are the reservations about this?

Or even better, get the people out of there. I mean those prisoners sitting on the bridge just freak me out. Get those guys out of there an into a jail!

[goMac]

Originally Posted by finboy

Here's a reality check for you:

THINGS...DON'T...HAPPEN...THAT...FAST.

Really? A few years ago, the US invaded a certain foreign country on the other side of the world. That took us 48 hours.

It's been 48 hours and we can't even invade a city in our own country.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by budster101

Where are the porta-potties? They have no running water, and no toilets... that's gotta be bad just that alone. The Mayor is an idiot down there... Get him off teh Hootch.

I believe it's FEMA's job to set those up. The mayor doesn't have a storeroom full of porta potties.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by goMac

Really? A few years ago, the US invaded a certain foreign country on the other side of the world. That took us 48 hours.

It's been 48 hours and we can't even invade a city in our own country.

You didn't notice that we were building up troops and supplies in Kuwait for over 6 months BEFORE we went in to oust the Saddam regime?

EIther your completely ignorant, or you're being untruthful. Either way, your argument is 100% wrong.

[budster101]

It's UNDER WATER not in a desert... You got a plane that can land in water and get people out? Donate it.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

You didn't notice that we were building up troops and supplies in Kuwait for over 6 months BEFORE we went in to oust the Saddam regime?

EIther your completely ignorant, or you're being untruthful. Either way, your argument is 100% wrong.

Right. Shouldn't there already be a "troop buildup" in the US? I mean... it is the US...

[goMac]

Originally Posted by budster101

It's UNDER WATER not in a desert... You got a plane that can land in water and get people out? Donate it.

Hmmmm... lets see....

Helicopters...
Seaplanes...
Paratroopers to secure places...
Boats...

You're telling me the army doesn't have these things?

[budster101]

Why should there be a 'build up' in the US? We going to be invaded anytime soon?...

New Orleans had 3 days advanced notice to GET THE FLUCK OUT OF DODGE... that should piss you off more. Get out and WALK... duh. You live 40ft below sea level...

[goMac]

Originally Posted by budster101

Why should there be a 'build up' in the US? We going to be invaded anytime soon?...

Huh? Because shouldn't there always be troops here to protect us? What is Al Quada nuked us randomly? Are you saying there should be no one here to protect us? Who's keeping the US safe if the army isn't?

[budster101]

You're the expert... outline it for me.

[art_director]

Originally Posted by budster101

You're the expert... outline it for me.

From the LA Times::

NEW ORLEANS -- President Bush, under mounting criticism for the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina that left tens of thousands homeless in the Gulf Coast, said today that relief efforts have been "not acceptable."

--

Hey pot boy,

Spark up a doob, crack open a box of Twinkies™ and let the adults get back to the conversation.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by budster101

You're the expert... outline it for me.

Uhhhhhh... Don't keep our troops in foreign countries so that we can deal with these disasters?

This isn't going to go well for Bush at all. Small children being raped because of lack of law is a horrible unforgivable thing.

[budster101]

You going to post this in every thread verbatum? From the LA TImes... wow. This is 'expert' outlining of a situation for military action? Not very well done, and quite pathetic. PS: I was not talking to YOU.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by goMac

Small children being raped because of lack of law ...

... INSIDE the facility that was set aside to house people fleeing the disaster. I don't know if this is Bush's fault, but wtf were they thinking putting 20,000 people in a stadium with no plan for getting facilities there, no plan for governing the place and no plan to evacuate them faster than they have?

Maybe they thought that this would all be over by now but still, "unacceptable" is the understatement of the year.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Troll

... INSIDE the facility that was set aside to house people fleeing the disaster. I don't know if this is Bush's fault, but wtf were they thinking putting 20,000 people in a stadium with no plan for getting facilities there, no plan for governing the place and no plan to evacuate them faster than they have?

Maybe they thought that this would all be over by now but still, "unacceptable" is the understatement of the year.

It's also spread out onto the streets apparently.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by budster101

You going to post this in every thread verbatum? From the LA TImes... wow.

Being reported elsewhere too actually.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by goMac

Uhhhhhh... Don't keep our troops in foreign countries so that we can deal with these disasters?

This isn't going to go well for Bush at all. Small children being raped because of lack of law is a horrible unforgivable thing.

I find it astonishing how the usual suspects here are so quick to defend Bush. Yes, I think that many of the criticisms of him in regards to this disaster are unfair, and that many are being opportunistic about ceasing this opportunity to slam him and his administraiton, but this still happened on his watch, and he is a part of the chain of command.

I think that many, if not most of these problems are state and local issues moreso than federal, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect some accountability at the federal level, somewhere.

By saying this, I would honestly (and I hope that others) would say the same of any president this happened to. It doesn't matter whether the president is a Republican or Democrat, it just seems evident that one way or another, some very big mistakes have been made that go beyond "there is always room for improvement".

[art_director]

Originally Posted by budster101

You going to post this in every thread verbatum? From the LA TImes... wow. This is 'expert' outlining of a situation for military action? Not very well done, and quite pathetic. PS: I was not talking to YOU.

If I must, yes.