Replies

It's very sad really because not understanding means you can't make an informed decision on what is good or what is bad. I've seen posts from people who have been here for years that would make your head spin. Some of these post would indicate that they think we have a King not a President of a Federal Republic.

And maybe your complacent posts make other people's heads spin.

You really oversimplifies the issues, I think. There is a subtext here that isn't readily apparent. It has to do with perceptions about federal response to emergencies and the privatization of many FEMA functions. FEMA, a Carter creation, always did cause a stir with conservatives when it was a cabinet post. But creating DHS and then folding FEMA into it causes a lot of questions and confusion. The Bush policy of privatizing much of what FEMA had previously done will also be reviewed and questions will be asked about whether the private sector really is best suited to respond to massive disasters. The FEMA response now is going to be compared to the abysmal failure during Hurricane Andrew and to the far better FEMA response to the 2004 hurricanes in Florida.

Actually, I welcome the upcoming hearings. I want more representation from my spineless senators. They pass far too many things without even reading them. They've granted OMB and the White House far more influence than most conservatives really want IMO. And I welcome the national debate over the use of National Guard as regular troops in the occupation of Iraq and the NG role in disaster relief.

Much of this will be about the size and role of FEMA. Someone like Brown shouldn't head FEMA. You just don't put cronies into important jobs. The crisis has revealed real leadership from Honore and Barbour and some fine work by the Corps (when you actually give them money). And it will return us to the old debates over national responsibility for vital ports and flood control and the protection of the Gulf Coast which is appropriate as the area from Baton Rouge to the Gulf constitutes the largest port in the world and a port area that contains about 25% of our refining capacity. We need to address refinery regulations and energy policy more forcefully too. And that entire port area is not addressed adequately by state or local or federal agencies. Many of us in the Midwest all the way to Chicago are going to be affected by this so it's simply not adequate to say that it's their problem. If New York and Seattle-Tacoma are national ports, then NOLA is even more so. The human tragedy is bad enough. But the damage to our ports is just made worse by the human disaster. And spending the $15 billion to upgrade NOLA's levees to Cat 5 protection is obvious in hindsight a far better investment than, say, the $15 billion BushCo shipped off to Africa. Where's the compassion for our citizens here? Well, that kind of hindsight is a little unfair but our ports, chemical plants and port traffic is too important to just dismiss it all. So much of the loss of life and economic damage was preventable.

Political heat, even if not completely well-founded, isn't always a bad thing. We need to send a wake-up call to the congresscritters.

"And maybe your complacent posts make other people's heads spin. You really oversimplifies the issues, I think."

No, just trying to put things in perspective

"It has to do with perceptions about federal response to emergencies and the privatization of many FEMA functions."

I noticed that you didn't provide examples of this FEMA privatization and what went wrong with it. It's hard to respond generalizations. But I guess you knew that didn't you?

"Actually, I welcome the upcoming hearings. I want more representation from my spineless senators. They pass far too many things without even reading them. They've granted OMB and the White House far more influence than most conservatives really want IMO. And I welcome the national debate over the use of National Guard as regular troops in the occupation of Iraq and the NG role in disaster relief."

It was the peace dividend don't you know. Exactly who drew down the armed forces? Maybe you should make yourself aware of the NG role in every war we have ever had. Do you just make this stuff up or what?

"Much of this will be about the size and role of FEMA. Someone like Brown shouldn't head FEMA. You just don't put cronies into important jobs."

What are you talking about? I guess James K. Witt is you example of a good appointment? What was Witt's responsibility in the current crisis in LA? Give me a break please.

"The crisis has revealed real leadership from Honore and Barbour and some fine work by the Corps (when you actually give them money).And it will return us to the old debates over national responsibility for vital ports and flood control and the protection of the Gulf Coast which is appropriate as the area from Baton Rouge to the Gulf constitutes the largest port in the world and a port area that contains about 25% of our refining capacity. We need to address refinery regulations and energy policy more forcefully too. And that entire port area is not addressed adequately by state or local or federal agencies."

Other than your compliment of the good General and Governor the rest is a political decision that the President only has marginal control over. Where have you been all of these many years? Have you not heard about the environment arguments? Do you want a refinery in your backyard? The chemical plants and refineries are where they are because that is where the oil is and LA, TX, MS and Al are the only states that would allow them to be built.

"Many of us in the Midwest all the way to Chicago are going to be affected by this so it's simply not adequate to say that it's their problem. If New York and Seattle-Tacoma are national ports, then NOLA is even more so. The human tragedy is bad enough. But the damage to our ports is just made worse by the human disaster."

I would just like you to understand how the system works not how you would like the system to work. Please educate yourself. It was the responsibility of NO and LA to be prepared to handle things for 72 to 96 hours. They were responsible for evacuations and Security. They failed with both. When they were overwhelmed it was their responsibility to ask for additional assistance. They did it through the press, but never actually asked for it to the people that counted. How smart was that? What did they do with the billions of dollars they were given by DHS (mandated by Congress) to improve communications, training and development better disaster plans? Maybe build a Casino or two?

"And spending the $15 billion to upgrade NOLA's levees to Cat 5 protection is obvious in hindsight a far better investment than, say, the $15 billion BushCo shipped off to Africa. Where's the compassion for our citizens here? Well, that kind of hindsight is a little unfair but our ports, chemical plants and port traffic is too important to just dismiss it all. So much of the loss of life and economic damage was preventable."

This is a political decision by the Congress not by the President, the Cat 3 vice Cat 5 decision was made decades ago in the Johnson administration, I believe. Money for Africa had nothing to do with this; if you don't understand that you don't have a clue. Neither of these things had anything to do with responding to this event no matter how it happen.