Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Texasforever
Agreed. You are absolutely right. In a situation where there is such a strong possibility of a HUGE DISASTER, the president cannot be concerned about whether he'll be harshly criticized for stepping in. Too many lives depended on it.

Furthermore, he would have been vindicated when the levee broke and politically in a much stronger position than the one he currently occupies.

In this instance, there is plenty of blame to go around and the President deserves some of it.

59 posted on 09/03/2005 10:08:38 PM PDT by TAdams8591 (Member since December 1998)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]


To: TAdams8591
Well he did have several constitutional constraints BUT this is the classic example of letting the constitution become a suicide pact and you are right, it is sometimes better to break the rules and ask for forgiveness later.
61 posted on 09/03/2005 10:11:28 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

To: TAdams8591

IMO President Bush has been too "nice" and not quite pushy enough.

These NOLA criminals need to be smacked down and he isn't doing it. I agree that GWB should have been a little more authoritarian. Of course he would have been viciously criticized. But the MSM and mentally ill liberals will viciously criticize him no matter what he says or does.

(freepmail on the way in a minute.)

Hey! How come you aren't in bed? It's later where you are then here even!


138 posted on 09/04/2005 12:01:35 AM PDT by little jeremiah (A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, are incompatible with freedom. P. Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

To: TAdams8591

As you have undoubtedly been advised by now, the President steeped in WELL BEFORE the storm hit. Sheesh.


141 posted on 09/04/2005 12:29:35 AM PDT by JennysCool (Non-Y2K-Compliant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

To: TAdams8591
In a situation where there is such a strong possibility of a HUGE DISASTER, the president cannot be concerned about whether he'll be harshly criticized for stepping in.

"Stepping in" comes in degrees. The President did step in and urge the governor to issue a State of Emergency Declaration. He did step in and urge a mandatory evacuation.

There is a pre-existing system of "escalation" of intervention from the outside. Understand that if the President asserts more, "steps in" more than asked by the local authorities, he is in effect over-riding their authority, taking over the local government. That's okay if the locals ask for it (essentially giving up control in exchange for relief), and I'm sure there are circumstances where that is done when the locals don't ask for it (e.g., insurrection).

But the reasonable default assumption in a case of disaster is that the locals will ask for the help that they need. Blanco has not YET, today, made the necessary formal request that would put federal officials in charge of the relief. Therefore, Louisina officials are directing the relief effort.

167 posted on 09/04/2005 6:10:43 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

To: TAdams8591
In this instance, there is plenty of blame to go around and the President deserves some of it.

No. He doesn't.

Bush declares emergency in Louisiana (Hurricane Katrina) AP ^ | Aug. 27, 2005 |

Bush Urges People to Flee Hurricane (August 28th)

Bush declares emergency in Louisiana (Hurricane Katrina)

National Hurricane Director had to call Nagin at home Saturday night to plead: "Get people out..."

Fed. Govt sent emergency supplies to Louisiana as early as Tuesday [From AP]

194 posted on 09/04/2005 9:58:25 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If you think you know what's coming next....You don't know Jack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson