Posted on 09/07/2005 10:43:23 AM PDT by Chicos_Bail_Bonds
Anybody know what the vote was on Mike Brown's confirmation via the Senate? I've been trying to find this out. I think this guy will be the fall guy but that's not really why I'm asking. A lot of my liberal "colleagues" are screaming about cronyism and my guess is that this guy was confirmed by the entire Senate or damn close.
Can't seem to find the information, however.
This isn't a game of horseshoes...and close doesn't count. Brown may have had hundreds of successes...but failure must be paid for. That is the way the system works (or should work) for without that kind of feedback, nothing changes for the better.
"Did you know that he was a former assistant city manager with emergency services oversite?"
That may mean as little as that he attended monthly board meeting to sign vouchers or....that he was more actively involved. I don't know, but certainly hope the latter.
Looks like Lieberman made some comments about Brown during the confirmation process. Per MSNBC.
>> Brown may have had hundreds of successes...but failure must be paid for.
What failures are you referring to? Please be specific. Generalizations are for generals.
I'm too lazy to search for the thread in which I posted what I thought were FEMA failures and so I will try, to the extent my memory will allow, to reconstruct them.
I thought FEMA dropped the ball because of Brown's lack of experience in direct disaster management and avoidance.
They knew (or should have known) the lack of Louisianana's state of emergency preparedness because:
They know (or should have known) the corruption of Louisiana government which is legendary. I love New Orleans, love its history, architecture, hospitality, and damn the torpedoes attitude (and I allow the possibility that only governmental corruption could facilitate this) but was obviously dysfunctional in emergency situations.
They know (or should have known)the state of emergency stocks because their computers can (or should) communicate with the local databases listing those supplies (which probably came from FEMA in the first instance).
They know (or should have known) that accurate and timely communication (either didrectly or indirectly) with the public as to what the problem is or isn't and how they are going about addressing it.
All of the above resulted in what I believe were unnecessary delays of perhaps several days...when mere hours can be crucial.
>>"I thought FEMA dropped the ball because of Brown's lack of experience in direct disaster management and avoidance."<<<
You don't consider the management of 164 previous federal disasters as experience? Man, you are tough!
>>"They knew (or should have known) the lack of Louisianana's state of emergency preparedness"<<
This is one point where I have to agree with you. The FEMA SOP Manual should have on the first page, "No city or state with democratic leadership shall be considered capable of handling anything remotely related to disaster management. The issuance of elaborate, well-designed plans by a democrat official shall in no way alter this judgement."
>>"They know (or should have known)the state of emergency stocks because their computers can (or should) communicate with the local databases listing those supplies (which probably came from FEMA in the first instance). "<<
I don't have a clue what you are talking about...
>>"They know (or should have known) that accurate and timely communication (either didrectly or indirectly) with the public as to what the problem is or isn't and how they are going about addressing it. "<<<
I felt pretty well informed, myself, and I have no direct communication with the federal government whatsoever. As a former military medical staff member, I would have expected FEMA to establish a triage system to evacuate those in the most danger, first. That is exactly what FEMA did. A consequence of all helicopters being tied-up in the evacuation was the routine air drops of food were delayed. That was no big deal in the scope of things. It was only a big deal to those who were seeking ways to bash the President, and, of course, it was a big deal to those too naive to understand that the Main Stream Media is treacherously deceitful.
I have wondered how others might handle disaster relief for 90,000 square miles of damaged or devastated real estate. But in the meantime I will place my faith in Brown.
I have no dog in this race...and no hidden agenda. I'm a strong Bush supporter in so far as most foreign policy issues go, and wish him and his administration well. That having been said, the evidence strongly suggest that there was some fundamental disconnect between first responsders at the local and state level, and the fed. I think it is precisely FEMA's job to identify those disconnects and fix them before the fact, not after. I don't believe Brown was aware enough, quick enough, paranoid enough, and prescient enough to do the job; this can only come with trial by fire, by experience, in which I believe Brown was clearly deficient. If we're lucky, using him as the proverbial sacrificial lamb can contain the political damage. If not, it will just go on and on to be used by the anti-Americans amongst us for futurre electoral gains.
I nominate the Governor of LA and the Mayor of NO.
>>> " . . . the evidence strongly suggest that there was some fundamental disconnect between first responsders at the local and state level, and the fed." <<<
Of course there was. In fact, there appears to be some sort of turf war between the real incompetent in the matter (Gov Blanco) and the feds.
>>>"I think it is precisely FEMA's job to identify those disconnects and fix them before the fact, not after. <<<
Now I understand. One of the job requirements for FEMA is, "Must be clairvoyant", and Bush ignored it.
>>"I don't believe Brown was aware enough, quick enough, paranoid enough, and prescient enough to do the job"<<
I agree he does not appear to be paranoid. Level-headed is a more appropriate description.
>>"This can only come with trial by fire, by experience, in which I believe Brown was clearly deficient."<<
So is everyone else on this planet. Brown's "weak" experience includes management of the Western wildfires of 2004, two minor hurricanes (Frances and Jeanne which hit the Fort Pierce area), and two major hurricanes (Ivan which hit Pensacola, and Charley which hit Punta Gorda). No offense, but that appears to be a hell of a lot of experience in disaster relief.
>> "If we're lucky, using him as the proverbial sacrificial lamb can contain the political damage. If not, it will just go on and on to be used by the anti-Americans amongst us for futurre electoral gains." <<
Are you pushing for an interview with the MSM? I can hear it now...
"At this time we welcome a member of Free Republic who believes that Brown should be fired from his position at FEMA". You could become the next Hagel.
Yeah, them too...but that's up to the voters of Louisiana.
Oh come on...this isn't sandlot baseball...this is the big leagues. Anyone who's been in the political game for awhile knew (or should have known) the incompetence and or corruption of local governments right up to the state level in Louisiana. They should have acted upon that information before, as opposed to after, the fact. I am not blaming President Bush as many have, other than to say that he has to bear some responsibility since Mike Brown was his appointee and this is an inevitable consequence of unenlightened cronyisim.
Ah, another member of the "shoot the messenger bearing bad tidings" school of thought...or perhaps an administration spin doctor would fit the bill. In either event, attacking me does not address the problem at hand.
Our president has been getting a lot of bad advice lately IMHO (and in Mike Savage's also) which deeply disturbs me. From his mishandling of the Cindy Sheehan situation, to his paralysis on the illegal immigrant issue, to his appointment of less than stellar cronies (Mike Brown), I think he's in the process of being set up and I don't like it, nor should you.
"While I agree with most of your post, I take exception to the above. I think the point is, it is FEMA's job to know these things before the fact, not after."
No it absolutely is not. FEMA's job is to step in and help when disasters are too large for the local and state government to handle. Their job is to provide coordination among the states and the federal government to get aid where it is needed.
The do need to know what resources are where to do their jobs. However, it's not their job to go and inspect every disaster shelter in the country and see that the local governments did what they said they would do in their plans.
That is not and should not be the federal government's responsibility.
"Are you suggesting that FEMA doesn't have computers that can query the inventory databases of these localities, especially when these supplies were probably furnished by the fed in the first instance?"
I'm suggesting that the FEDs made a reasonable assumption that New Orleans would provide the supplies that their disaster plan required, or ask for help immediately when they didn't have them.
They are there to coordinate, not to dictate. The law is very clear that the state and local governments are in charge.
"If I have any criticisim of Mike Brown, it is that he was not paranoid enough, not forward thinking enough, in his administration of FEMA...and why should he be?"
Because he has had experience with many other state and local governments. There weren't these problems in Florida after the hurricanes last year. Katrina hit a lot more area of the country than Lousiana, but problems of this magnitude didn't happen elsewhere.
The unpreparedness of New Orleans was the exception, not the rule, and people died because the local government didn't live up to even a minimum standard of their responsibilities.
"His background, his experience just didn't prepare him for the complexities of this type of job...but I can't even blame him. I think the real blame falls on the people who appointed him, and the people who confirmed him."
His background is running FEMA successfully and well through a number of huge disasters in the last few years. He has tremendous experience with dealing with disasters of this type, and it's recent experience. I find it hard to believe there are many people more qualified in the country right now.
The BS about him not having experience should be obviously false. He didn't just get appointed the day before the storm hit, and he's been working in FEMA in some capacity for a long time now.
[infocats] - "While I agree with most of your post, I take exception to the above. I think the point is, it is FEMA's job to know these things before the fact, not after."
[untrained skeptic] - No it absolutely is not. FEMA's job is to step in and help when disasters are too large for the local and state government to handle. Their job is to provide coordination among the states and the federal government to get aid where it is needed.
They do need to know what resources are where to do their jobs. However, it's not their job to go and inspect every disaster shelter in the country and see that the local governments did what they said they would do in their plans.
That is not and should not be the federal government's responsibility.
[infocats] - That is essentially the difference between a proactive and a reactive approach to reality. If I suggested to you that Homeland Security should wait for a CBN (hmmm...NBC) attack before preparing their plans, would you buy that. Of course not. It is precisely FEMA's job to know the weaknesses in the sytem (including local corruption and incompetence) before the fact, not after, in order to properly assess risk as but one factor in their action plan. If not the fed, then who?
[infocats] - "Are you suggesting that FEMA doesn't have computers that can query the inventory databases of these localities, especially when these supplies were probably furnished by the fed in the first instance?"
[untrained skeptic] -I'm suggesting that the FEDs made a reasonable assumption that New Orleans would provide the supplies that their disaster plan required, or ask for help immediately when they didn't have them.
[infocats] - Very rarely should reasonable assumption be relied upon. It is a fool's tool. It is FEMA's job to know, not guess, not assume, what the hell was going on down there before disaster struck. This problem didn't just drop out of the blue. The vulnerabilities of the area from hurricanes have been known and studied for decades, not based upon assumption, but upon sound engineering fundamentals. It was FEMA's job to know, it was Mike Brown's job to know, and their saying that they did not is akin to Ken Lay (an economist and CEO of Enron) saying he did not know about the accounting fraud going on at his company. I am getting a bit sick and tired of these empty suits collecting the big bucks for doing a job, and then coming up with endless excuses as to why they couldn't, wouldn't, or shouldn't.
[untrained skeptic] - They are there to coordinate, not to dictate. The law is very clear that the state and local governments are in charge.
[infocats] - FEMA has the authority under almost endless executive orders to charge into the breach and do virtually anything they deem appropriate to restore law, order, and functionality to any area struck by sudden disaster.
[infocats] - "If I have any criticisim of Mike Brown, it is that he was not paranoid enough, not forward thinking enough, in his administration of FEMA...and why should he be?"
[untrained skeptic] - Because he has had experience with many other state and local governments. There weren't these problems in Florida after the hurricanes last year. Katrina hit a lot more area of the country than Lousiana, but problems of this magnitude didn't happen elsewhere.
[infocats] - If you've had any experience in serving on either a corporate or governmental board of directors, you would know that many, but certainly not all, of these gun handle notches (resumés) can be very misleading. There is no implication in any of Brown's job titles that he had field experience. He may only have shown up at monthy board meetings to sign expense vouchers. The job really calls for a roll up your shirtsleeves type with experience at the street level. I would really have to dig up the minutes, or better yet the transcripts, of all of those meeting (which I guarantee I will not do) to ascertain exactly who did what to whom.
[untrained skeptic] - The unpreparedness of New Orleans was the exception, not the rule, and people died because the local government didn't live up to even a minimum standard of their responsibilities.
[infocats] - Isn't that the purpose of FEMA (or the C.I.A. or Homeland Security) to expect the unexpected and prepare for it by performing countless "what if" scenarios? That is, in part, why these organizations exist.
[infocats] - "His background, his experience just didn't prepare him for the complexities of this type of job...but I can't even blame him. I think the real blame falls on the people who appointed him, and the people who confirmed him."
[untrained skeptic] - His background is running FEMA successfully and well through a number of huge disasters in the last few years. He has tremendous experience with dealing with disasters of this type, and it's recent experience. I find it hard to believe there are many people more qualified in the country right now.
The BS about him not having experience should be obviously false. He didn't just get appointed the day before the storm hit, and he's been working in FEMA in some capacity for a long time now.
[infocats] - Again, I don't know the exact level of his expertise...but from FEMA's delayed response, I suspect that he had little to no training at the street level, and was merely another empty suit political crony hackmeister. If it turns out I am wrong, I will be the first to offer my humble apologies to you, Mike Brown, and anyone else gracious enough to accept them.
>>>Oh come on...this isn't sandlot baseball...this is the big leagues. Anyone who's been in the political game for awhile knew (or should have known) the incompetence and or corruption of local governments right up to the state level in Louisiana.<<<
I have a feeling you would be complaining just as loudly if FEMA had overstepped its authority and wrested control from the boobs in Louisiana. I can hear it now, "MIKE BROWN IS A TYRANT!"
>>> I am not blaming President Bush as many have, other than to say that he has to bear some responsibility since Mike Brown was his appointee and this is an inevitable consequence of unenlightened cronyisim.<<<
Cronyism? Please explain. Spare no details.
>>>Our president has been getting a lot of bad advice lately IMHO (and in Mike Savage's also) which deeply disturbs me. From his mishandling of the Cindy Sheehan situation, to his paralysis on the illegal immigrant issue, to his appointment of less than stellar cronies (Mike Brown), I think he's in the process of being set up and I don't like it, nor should you. <<<
The claim that Mike Brown is a crony is a myth created by left-wing propagandists to smear the Bush administration. But maybe I am wrong. Perhaps you can enlighten with something other than innuendo, which to date is all you have provided.
[infocats] - And you would probably be correct...if they overstepped their authority. I believe, however, that taking a quicker more pro-active position would have been well within their authority. I also believe that they are now doing a credible job.
[infocats] - I am not blaming President Bush as many have, other than to say that he has to bear some responsibility since Mike Brown was his appointee and this is an inevitable consequence of unenlightened cronyisim.
[PhilipFreneau] - Cronyism? Please explain. Spare no details.
[infocats] - This was covered in another FR Thread in a report by the NY Daily News.
I'm not ignoring your post #119. It will just have to wait until later because I've got to get some other work done ;-(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.