Originally Posted By bboisvert <<Pity so much of it is just plain wrong.>> Would you care to amend the timeline?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <The point that he was trying to make was that the levee system was going to fail.> No, that wasn't the point he was making. <Even *IF* she had not been briefed about that, it would seem that she was already doing all that she could so this news would not have been unexpected to her.> Here's what the NY Times said: "In the videoconference held at noon on Monday, Aug. 29, Michael D. Brown, director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, reported that he had spoken with President Bush twice in the morning and that the president was asking about reports that the levees had been breached. But asked about the levees by Joe Hagin, the White House deputy chief of staff, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco of Louisiana said, "We have not breached the levee at this point in time." <And given the fact that she had sent the request two days earlier, there should have been more already inplace.> I guess because New Orleans is the only thing the federal government has to worry about, huh?
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Would you care to amend the timeline?<< Those deficiencies are pretty well covered in posts 77-80. That there were all sorts of failures on all levels is a given. So far, the ONLY person I have seen own up to any is Bush himself. Not Brown, not Nagin, and certainly not Blanco. What is annoying is the notion that George W. Bush not only knew what was going to happen, not only failed to act, and not only passed on the blame, but then lied about it. It just ain't so.
Originally Posted By bboisvert <<<The point that he was trying to make was that the levee system was going to fail.> No, that wasn't the point he was making.>> Wouldn't you hope that the people that you expect to help would want to assume the worst so that they would be prepared for the worst? Instead, now we have to put up with, "Well you didn't tell me the levee would break." <<I guess because New Orleans is the only thing the federal government has to worry about, huh?>> When there is a Cat4/5 hurricane bearing down on one of largest seaports that would have a devastating impact on the nation's infrastructure, I'd hope that would be pretty high on the list.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>The mystery to me is that Bush (who was busy elsewhere eating birthday cake, playing the guitar, and kicking back on the ranch) should have had better information that the Governor or Mayor, who ostensibly were a little closer to the action. I guess to make that leap requires either some sort of special knowledge, or a visceral dislike of the administration.<< No. Simply an intellectual curiosity and a TELEVISION. It seems that EVERYONE IN THE WORLD except for Bush and some hermits who live in Tibet were aware of the tragedy that was going on in New Orleans on Tuesday.
Originally Posted By bboisvert <<<<Pity so much of it is just plain wrong.>> <<Those deficiencies are pretty well covered in posts 77-80.>> So far the only real disputed point is that the Governor said that she didn't know that the levee was compromised. That's one point, not "much of it". And it's pretty weak. Are you trying to make me believe that if Blanco had known that the levee failed even one minute after Nagin did that everything else would have worked flawlessly? I don't buy it. As to the "blame bush" argument, I've tried to stay out of that mindset, but the fact is that he and his staff were not acting like people who understood the gravity of the situation. Bush took the blame for the failures of the administration and accept that admission, so I'm not really going to beat him up for that point. Nevertheless, he should have cancelled his vacation and acted more like a leader.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Wouldn't you hope that the people that you expect to help would want to assume the worst so that they would be prepared for the worst?> Not really. I think they should try to prepare for the most likely problems. <When there is a Cat4/5 hurricane bearing down on one of largest seaports that would have a devastating impact on the nation's infrastructure, I'd hope that would be pretty high on the list.> Of course, but New Orleans wasn't the only place being threatened.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<When there is a Cat4/5 hurricane bearing down on one of largest seaports that would have a devastating impact on the nation's infrastructure, I'd hope that would be pretty high on the list.>> No one knew with accuracy where the Hurricane was going to "touch down". FEMA was spread thin in at least 6 southeastern US States. Did you honestly expect FEMA to abandon ALL presence in Mississippi, Florida, Georgia and Alabama?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <So far the only real disputed point is that the Governor said that she didn't know that the levee was compromised.> No, it also disputed that the Bush administration was warned of "levee failure" and that no federal help was on the scene until days after the storm hit. <Instead, now we have to put up with, "Well you didn't tell me the levee would break."> No, now we have to put up with, "Bush knew the levees would fail and lied about it." That's simply not true. It's a pity it's gotten to the point where everyone looks to the Federal government for everything. It didn't use to be this way. <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/reed200603020809.asp" target="_blank">http://www.nationalreview.com/ comment/reed200603020809.asp</a>
Originally Posted By bboisvert <,Not really. I think they should try to prepare for the most likely problems.>> Then you and I will have to disagree. <<Of course, but New Orleans wasn't the only place being threatened.>> But there was no question that New Orleans was the largest target and had the greatest potential for disaster "fanout effect" in terms of national infrastructure disruption. They drilled this worst case scenario with the fictional Hurricane Pam so that they could anticipate how to work with the other agencies (fed, state, local) in case of "the Big One" IIRC, the other Gulf areas didn't fare much better than New Orleans in the "prompt response" department.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Then you and I will have to disagree.> Are you prepared for the worst that can happen? I'm not, and I doubt 99% of the people are. Being overprepared is generally wasteful.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<Bush Urges Residents to Flee Sunday, August 28, 2005 PHOTOS VIDEO PHOTO ESSAYS Click image to enlarge Photo Essays:•Katrina Threatens New Orleans•Sunshine State SoakedSTORIES BACKGROUND LINKS •Raw Data: Bush Text on Katrina, Iraq•Hurricane Katrina Threatens New Orleans•New Orleans Parties On•Katrina Rumbles Closer to Gulf Coast•Bush Declares State of Emergency•Fast Facts: Red Cross During Katrina•Hurricane Would Ravage Big Easy•Katrina Gains Strength•Hurricane Katrina Plows Through Florida•Bush Monitoring Katrina Landfall•Fast Facts: Katrina•Fast Facts: Katrina's Damage CRAWFORD, Texas — President Bush, as he readied the federal government for a massive relief effort, on Sunday urged people in the path of Hurricane Katrina (search) to forget anything but their safety and move to higher ground as instructed. "We cannot stress enough the danger this hurricane poses to Gulf Coast communities," Bush said as the storm roared across the gulf toward New Orleans (search) and other communities. "I urge all citizens to put their own safety and the safety of their families first by moving to safe ground." With forecasters warning of a category five storm, the president made sure the federal response would not be delayed by already declaring emergencies in Mississippi, Florida and Alabama just hours after a similar declaration for Louisiana. Such declarations make federal aid available to assist with disaster relief, but they are rarely made before a storm even hits. Working from his Texas ranch, Bush participated via videoconference in a large meeting of federal, state and local disaster management officials preparing for the storm's onslaught. Separately, he spoke by phone with the governors of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. "We will do everything in our power to help the people and the communities affected by this storm," the president said. (Story continues below) ADVERTISEMENTSAdvertise Here Winds reaching 175 mph and a potentially devastating storm surge were feared when Hurricane Katrina reached land early Monday. The 485,000 residents of New Orleans were ordered to evacuate the city. In Washington, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (search) was coordinating relief efforts sending water, food and other supplies to staging centers in the Southeast. FEMA was moving supplies from logistics centers in Atlanta and Denton, Texas, to areas closer to where authorities believe the storm will create a need, spokeswoman Nicol Andrews said. "It's a very dangerous situation at this point," FEMA spokeswoman Nicol Andrews said. "We're ready and awaiting landfall." The American Red Cross was mobilizing volunteers from across the country for what one official called its largest response to a single disaster in many years. "This is really an all-hands-on-deck scenario for the Red Cross right now," spokeswoman Carrie Martin said. The Red Cross urged people, even those who think they are outside the storm's path, to prepare for an emergency. "It could shift at any point. It's really a matter of not taking any chances, having the supplies in place," Martin said. Andrews said that FEMA knows "from 30 years' experience that these hurricanes are still largely unpredictable and can turn at a moment's notice." Officials anticipated a need for emergency shelters as people evacuate the areas expected to be hit hardest by the storm. "As far as people can get away from the storm there will be places for them to go," Andrews said. The Red Cross encouraged people to turn to friends and family first rather than shelters because of the magnitude of the evacuation. Shelters should be for those who have nowhere else to go, Martin said.>>
Originally Posted By bboisvert RE:89 - <<No, it also disputed that the Bush administration was warned of "levee failure" and that no federal help was on the scene until days after the storm hit. >> I conceded that the federal presence was minimal. <<"Bush knew the levees would fail and lied about it." That's simply not true.>> I've never said that, but there are many that have, if you're one to use the president's exact words against him. This whole discussion about whether he knew or was told and when is juvenile. It's splitting hairs. It shouldn't have to be that the president or his staff is so dense that they have to be explicitly told that New Orleans was in trouble. A true leader would be able to anticipate this. As I said, why not be prepared for the worst and then be ready for anything. Same for Iraq (initial troop levels), but that's another discussion. ======== RE: 91 - No, I'm not prepared for the big one. But if I had 2-3 days notice that Mt. St. Helens was going to blow up, I'd be able to prepare pretty quickly. I'm pretty lucky in that. Lots of people aren't. We expect the government to be more responsive than that. I know that republicans like the whole "starve the beast" mentality of government so that it is smaller and smaller. Can we at least agree that it is the role of the government to protect and preserve the infrastructure, if not the individual citizens? ======== RE: 92 - <<It's really a matter of not taking any chances, having the supplies in place,>> The Red Cross seemed to get it. Brownie and FEMA blew it.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I conceded that the federal presence was minimal.> So that would change your timeline, wouldn't it, since your timeline said none? <I've never said that, but there are many that have, if you're one to use the president's exact words against him. This whole discussion about whether he knew or was told and when is juvenile. It's splitting hairs.> Yes, but this is what we have to put up with. This thread was not started by a conservative. <It shouldn't have to be that the president or his staff is so dense that they have to be explicitly told that New Orleans was in trouble. A true leader would be able to anticipate this.> As long as they weren't the mayor of New Orleans or the Governor of Louisiana, huh? <Can we at least agree that it is the role of the government to protect and preserve the infrastructure, if not the individual citizens?> I agree it's one of the roles of government, but it's not always the federal government's role. Cities, Counties, and States need to be responsible for their infrastructure.
Originally Posted By bboisvert <,So that would change your timeline, wouldn't it, since your timeline said none?>> No, it doesn't. The original context was that Gov Blanco contacted Bush again. That part is true. ==== <<As long as they weren't the mayor of New Orleans or the Governor of Louisiana, huh?>> I'm sorry, I'm not following you here. Are you saying that the state and local didn't anticipate the destruction and the need for federal help? ==== <<I agree it's one of the roles of government, but it's not always the federal government's role. Cities, Counties, and States need to be responsible for their infrastructure.>> ...and when they saw that they were overwhelmed, they called up the chain of command like they are supposed to.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <The original context was that Gov Blanco contacted Bush again. That part is true.> But the rest wasn't. <Are you saying that the state and local didn't anticipate the destruction and the need for federal help?> It's apparent that state and local leaders were not adequately prepared. <and when they saw that they were overwhelmed, they called up the chain of command like they are supposed to.> They were supposed to protect and preserve their infrastructure, not rely on someone else to do it.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<<<I agree it's one of the roles of government, but it's not always the federal government's role. Cities, Counties, and States need to be responsible for their infrastructure.>> ...and when they saw that they were overwhelmed, they called up the chain of command like they are supposed to.>> They had 40 to 50 years to improve their infrastructure. During that time they spent money on anything but the leeves. Lousianna has the reputation for being the most corrupt state in the Union.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer The AP just issued a CORRECTION to the sotry... >>WASHINGTON (AP) _ In a March 1 story, The Associated Press reported that federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees in New Orleans, citing confidential video footage of an Aug. 28 briefing among U.S. officials. The Army Corps of Engineers considers a breach a hole developing in a levee rather than an overrun. The story should have made clear that Bush was warned about floodwaters overrunning the levees, rather than the levees breaking. The day before the storm hit, Bush was told there were grave concerns that the levees could be overrun. It wasn't until the next morning, as the storm was hitting, that Michael Brown, then head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said Bush had inquired about reports of breaches. Bush did not participate in that briefing.<<
Originally Posted By Beaumandy What do you know, another bogus " scandal " against the president that led to another liberal starting a thread about the bogus scandal. I guess it's time for the libs to move on to their next Bush hating " scandal ".
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Can we all read what the topic of this thread is again..... Bush Caught Lying about Katrina I wonder if Mort will come in and apologize for lying himself now that the AP has come out and retracted the story.
