!The Race Pimps Are At It Again
Kurt Nicklas
Linda Chavez
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/printlc20050914.shtml
September 14, 2005
The race men are at it again, turning the tragedy of New Orleans into a morality
tale about racism in America. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Rep. Maxine Waters
(who qualifies, despite her gender), rapper Kanye West, and a host of
lesser-known black leaders and spokesmen were quick to see racism in the
agonizingly slow evacuation of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. Jackson
compared the situation at the infamous Superdome to "the hull of a slave ship."
West ranted that "George Bush doesn't care about black people." Even Sen. Barack
Obama, who initially said that class was the biggest factor in why many New
Orleans residents failed to make it out of the city before disaster struck,
seemed to blame the president for racial insensitivity. "I mean, it's puzzling,
given his immediate response during 9/11, that he did not feel a greater sense
of empathy towards the folks that were experiencing this enormous disaster,"
Obama said on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday.
But if there was any real lesson about the effects of racism to be learned from
this tragedy, it is that American generosity is colorblind. Americans of all
colors have opened their hearts, their pocketbooks and their homes to those who
have lost everything to nature's fury. To date, Americans have donated nearly $1
billion in private aid, and the federal government has committed an additional
$60 billion to the victims, the most visible of whom were the mostly black
residents stranded in New Orleans.
Even the pictures that emerged as victims were being rescued belied any hint of
racism. Most of the National Guardsmen and other military personnel saving lives
were white, while most of those being saved were black, not surprising given the
demographics of the respective groups. Blacks made up 68 percent of New Orleans'
population, but only about 20 percent of all military personnel and an even
smaller proportion of National Guard troops.
But if white indifference doesn't explain why so many of those left stranded
happened to be black and why it took so long to bring them to safety, what does?
Government surely failed its most vulnerable citizens, but not because of race.
A majority of New Orleans' black (as well as white and Latino) residents made it
out of the city before the storm hit, despite the breakdown in government
communication and assistance. They did so because they didn't depend on
government in the first place. Those left behind were disproportionately
dependent on government because of age, infirmity or poverty -- in many
instances, all three factors played a role.
New Orleans has one of the highest poverty rates in the nation. Nearly one-third
of its citizens live below the poverty line. But as Michael Tanner, director of
health and welfare studies at the Cato Institute, points out, the federal
government has given billions of dollars to New Orleans' poor since George W.
Bush took office. Tanner estimates that the Bush administration has spent some
$10 billion in welfare assistance in Louisiana, including $1.2 billion in cash
assistance and $3 billion in food stamps, as well as public housing, Medicaid
and more than 60 other federal anti-poverty programs. But all that money did not
buy self-sufficiency, the commodity that largely differentiated those who
escaped the deluge from those who got stuck at the Superdome and Convention
Center.
So where was government when its wards most needed it? Local and state
government were nowhere to be seen, and not because, as some now claim, state
and local officials, too, were victims of Hurricane Katrina. Gov. Kathleen
Blanco, safely in Baton Rouge during the storm, admitted in an interview with
CNN that aired this past weekend that she waited until Aug. 31 -- two days after
Katrina made landfall -- to ask for federal troops in New Orleans. When CNN
anchor Miles O'Brien asked Blanco when exactly she made a specific appeal,
Blanco said: "I'm lost. . . . I don't even know what today is," finally
acknowledging, "I made that request perhaps Wednesday." But surely not even
racial demagogues like Jackson would argue that Blanco -- who would not have
been elected governor but for black voters -- delayed deploying troops at her
disposal or asking for more federal troops because those trapped were black.
Blaming racism for the fate of New Orleans in the aftermath of a natural
disaster and ignoring the heartfelt generosity and commitment of so many
Americans of all races to help the victims rebuild have only compounded the
tragedy.
--
Kurt Nicklas
Vocatus atque non vocatus deus aderit
G*rd*n
> They're at it again
> Linda Chavez
>
> http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/printlc20050914.shtml
>
> September 14, 2005
>
> The race men are at it again, turning the tragedy of New Orleans into a morality
Aided by what people saw with their own eyes on television.
It's going to be tough to spin this one. Especially because
the next stop after race is class.
anima...@yahoo.com
Yes, Linda Chavez is behind the curve on this one. If you look
at the stories flying around the net you will find that plenty
of people have noticed that people received bad treatment not on
the basis of race but on the basis of wealth, or rather lack of
it. Now they will get more bad treatment. They will be moved
to instant slums in the hinterlands of Texas and Mississippi
while New Orleans is gentrified and Disneyfied into a bland,
plastic theme park for the rich (whether white or black).
Normally gentrifiers have to work hard to get rid of the poor
people in the way of their projects, and scratch for the money
necessary to do their thing. But in this case Katrina has done
the first part of the work for them, and the U.S. taxpayer will
do the rest.
abracadabra
"Kurt Nicklas" <kurtn...@aport2000.ru> wrote in message
news:dg8vu...@drn.newsguy.com...
> They're at it again
> Linda Chavez
>
> http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/printlc20050914.shtml
>
> September 14, 2005
>
> The race men are at it again, turning the tragedy of New Orleans into a
> morality
> tale about racism in America. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Rep. Maxine
> Waters
> (who qualifies, despite her gender), rapper Kanye West, and a host of
> lesser-known black leaders and spokesmen were quick to see racism in the
> agonizingly slow evacuation of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.
Given that Republicans, including Bush, have worked really hard to keep
blacks from voting, it's no surprise that they suspect racism in other
administration policies.
quibbler
>
> Blaming racism for the fate of New Orleans in the aftermath of a natural
> disaster and ignoring the heartfelt generosity and commitment of so many
> Americans of all races to help the victims rebuild have only compounded the
> tragedy.
That is utterly irrelevant to the issue. The claim was not that
all americans are racist, since it is the american public making the
donations. The claim was that the Bush administration has the problem.
Therefore, donations or the composition of the national guard troops
prove nothing, except how to construct an ignorantio elenchi (look it
up). Furthermore, the idiotic assertion that state and local government
are "nowhere to be found" is idiotic. State and local government were
the only ones doing any significant work in the early days and it's
because of them that so many people survived. They evacuated over 3/4ths
of the city. They provided shelters of last resort, without which most
of the people who were in there probably would have been floating down
the flooded streets. Yes, New Orleans is poor and yes, Bush doesn't give
a shit about poor people. He begrudges them every dime they get of
federal assistance. The reason that federal assistance doesn't buy self-
sufficiency is because the federal government wants it that way. They
want those people to stay poor so that there are people to work the
menial jobs flipping burgers at McDonalds, bussing shopping carts at
Walmart and mowing the lawns of white people. However, that doesn't mean
that they get particularly good treatment. Bush consistently slashed
funding for levees because the poor people didn't deserve any better in
his view. They weren't a priority. He knew that the rich people on high
ground would survive and that the poor people would suffer as they must
in a system he helped to rig against success.
So don't you try to lie about those who died and say it was the
state and local government that was to blame. That's like saying that
the state and local government in New York were to blame for the WTC
disaster. Whether it's a plane striking a building or a hurricane
striking a city it's the plane and the hurricane respectively that is the
proximate cause. Blame that, if you must blame something, or blame your
God for doing nothing, if you insist upon anthropomorphizing the affair.
State and local government did a reasonable job and followed the plan of
privately funded evacuation. That's why the nursing home operators are
the ones to blame for refusing to evacuate patients despite repeated
warnings of the need to move them.
In short, if you thought that one single word that Linda Chavez
wrote was reasonable then you are a clueless, fucking moron.
darth_s...@yahoo.com
keep
blacks from voting>>
can you cite the facts for that garbage?
Tell me how the mayor of NO is doing running his city while living in
Dallas?
Tell me why the gov. of LA denied the red cross and salvation army
access to the occupants
of the super dome? I think that warrants criminal charges!
1896 Dead
wrote:
Knickers, like most racists, tries to predend all discussion of racism
is a liberal conspiracy.
"'I’m not meeting with that goddamned bitch,' Bush screamed at aides
who suggested he meet with Cindy Sheehan, the war-protesting mother
whose son died in Iraq. 'She can go to hell as far as I’m concerned!'"
--Putsch, a decompensating drunk
"Grover Norquist couldn't drown the government, so he drowned New Orleans instead."
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
darth_s...@yahoo.com
the only ones doing any significant work in the early days and it's
because of them that so many people survived.>>
oh please! It took people yelling and screaming before local and state
officials did anything.
Gov. Blanco told the Red cross and the Salvation army to stay away!
Yeah thats real help. And where is the mayor now? Why is he now living
in Dallas with his family instead of
helping clean up the city he was elected to lead?
abracadabra
<darth_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1126705588.6...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> <<Given that Republicans, including Bush, have worked really hard to
> keep
> blacks from voting>>
>
> can you cite the facts for that garbage?
Well, Republicans in Georgia are putting in a defacto poll tax (required
voter IDs at the cost of $20/piece).
Republicans in Florida blocked tens of thousands of blacks from voting in
the 2000 election.
The only garbage here is your ignorance and racial hatred.
nevermore
<zepp1896#2211finestplanet.com@> wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:25:49 +0000 (UTC), g...@panix.com (G*rd*n)
>wrote:
>
>>Kurt Nicklas <kurtn...@aport2000.ru>:
>>> They're at it again
>>> Linda Chavez
>>>
>>> http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/printlc20050914.shtml
>>>
>>> September 14, 2005
>>>
>>> The race men are at it again, turning the tragedy of New Orleans into a morality
>>> tale about racism in America. ...
>>
>>
>>Aided by what people saw with their own eyes on television.
>>It's going to be tough to spin this one. Especially because
>>the next stop after race is class.
>
>Knickers, like most racists, tries to predend all discussion of racism
>is a liberal conspiracy.
Actually, all talk of racism where there is no evidence of racism is
just the loony kool aid drinkers desperation.
--
Steve
G*rd*n
> >>> They're at it again
> >>> Linda Chavez
> >>>
> >>> http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/printlc20050914.shtml
> >>>
> >>> September 14, 2005
> >>>
> >>> The race men are at it again, turning the tragedy of New Orleans
> into a morality
> >>> tale about racism in America. ...
g...@panix.com (G*rd*n):
> >>Aided by what people saw with their own eyes on television.
> >>It's going to be tough to spin this one. Especially because
> >>the next stop after race is class.
<zepp1896#2211finestplanet.com@> wrote:
> >Knickers, like most racists, tries to predend all discussion of racism
> >is a liberal conspiracy.
nevermore <stevencanyon@y***hoo.com>:
> Actually, all talk of racism where there is no evidence of racism is
> just the loony kool aid drinkers desperation.
There's plenty of evidence. But there are important questions
of how significant it is, how it's developing, what it's
related to, and how it's being manipulated.
For instance, one thing is certain: if you start a controversy
about race, a lot of silly things will be said. And so
starting a controversy about race discrimination against
certain people in New Orleans can be used to obscure the fact
of class or economic discrimination. The people who could
not get out of New Orleans weren't prevented from doing so
because of their color; what stopped them was no having a
car, gas money, and credit cards. In many cases that may
have been related to their race, but their race wasn't the
determining factor.
shrikeback
"1896 Dead" <zepp1896#2211finestplanet.com@> wrote in message
news:dqagi11aaho1lin0o...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:25:49 +0000 (UTC), g...@panix.com (G*rd*n)
> wrote:
>
>>Kurt Nicklas <kurtn...@aport2000.ru>:
>>> They're at it again
>>> Linda Chavez
>>>
>>> http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/printlc20050914.shtml
>>>
>>> September 14, 2005
>>>
>>> The race men are at it again, turning the tragedy of New Orleans into a
>>> morality
>>> tale about racism in America. ...
>>
>>
>>Aided by what people saw with their own eyes on television.
>>It's going to be tough to spin this one. Especially because
>>the next stop after race is class.
>
> Knickers, like most racists, tries to predend all discussion of racism
> is a liberal conspiracy.
So I guess the Left doesn't mind engaging in _post hoc, ergo
propter hoc_ reasoning, the foundation of all superstition.
darth_s...@yahoo.com
voting in
the 2000 election. >
which was never proven. it was just simple liberal propaganda because
they were pissed al gore lost.
like I said can post a fact stating this?
Perpetual Confusion
> That is utterly irrelevant to the issue. The claim was not that
> all americans are racist, since it is the american public making the
> donations. The claim was that the Bush administration has the
> problem. Therefore, donations or the composition of the national
> guard troops prove nothing, except how to construct an ignorantio
> elenchi (look it up).
True. However, what is the nature of "proof" regarding this proposed
racism. There is a protocol for how aid is requested and given. At what
point do you feel racism specifically from the administration was
evident?
> Furthermore, the idiotic assertion that state
> and local government are "nowhere to be found" is idiotic. State and
> local government were the only ones doing any significant work in the
> early days and it's because of them that so many people survived.
> They evacuated over 3/4ths of the city. They provided shelters of
> last resort, without which most of the people who were in there
> probably would have been floating down the flooded streets.
Hmmm. Before Katrina hit, evacuation was voluntary. So those who could
did and those who couldn't didn't. The State specifically moved few
people. At that point, it was in no way a federal responsibility.
They did provide shelters. And promptly abandoned them leaving no medical
or police support. Katrina then promplty took away electricity and water.
So, for this they are to be applauded?
> Yes, New
> Orleans is poor and yes, Bush doesn't give a shit about poor people.
> He begrudges them every dime they get of federal assistance.
Your opinion is now known. But that's all it is.
> The
> reason that federal assistance doesn't buy self- sufficiency is
> because the federal government wants it that way. They want those
> people to stay poor so that there are people to work the menial jobs
> flipping burgers at McDonalds, bussing shopping carts at Walmart and
> mowing the lawns of white people.
Again, nice to share your opinion.
> However, that doesn't mean that
> they get particularly good treatment. Bush consistently slashed
> funding for levees because the poor people didn't deserve any better
> in his view. They weren't a priority. He knew that the rich people
> on high ground would survive and that the poor people would suffer as
> they must in a system he helped to rig against success.
Levee funding had been slashed for years even prior to Bush. And since
when (inserting my opinion) should it be a friggin federal responsibility
when someone decides to build a city below sea level and place it right
on the coast?
More nice opinion interjected as well... again ... thanks
> So don't you try to lie about those who died and say it was the
> state and local government that was to blame. That's like saying that
> the state and local government in New York were to blame for the WTC
> disaster. Whether it's a plane striking a building or a hurricane
> striking a city it's the plane and the hurricane respectively that is
> the proximate cause.
Right. The Hurricane is to blame. Nice point.
> Blame that, if you must blame something, or
> blame your God for doing nothing, if you insist upon
> anthropomorphizing the affair. State and local government did a
> reasonable job and followed the plan of privately funded evacuation.
Right. You forgot the federal government... big surprise there.
> That's why the nursing home operators are the ones to blame for
> refusing to evacuate patients despite repeated warnings of the need to
> move them.
Huh. Oh right. But you left out the part where Bush called them and told
them to leave them all to rot. right?
> In short, if you thought that one single word that Linda Chavez
> wrote was reasonable then you are a clueless, fucking moron.
>
Not sure the point of that.
1896 Dead
Oh, look! Someone must have used that phrase on Shinkback, and he
kept it handy for the next time someone said something he had no
response for.
>
abracadabra
<darth_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1126712324....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> <,Republicans in Florida blocked tens of thousands of blacks from
> voting in
> the 2000 election. >
>
> which was never proven
The faulty "felons" lists which blocked thousands of blacks from voting were
never disputed by your side silly.
shrikeback
"1896 Dead" <zepp#221118...@nospamzeppscommentaries.com> wrote in message
news:pnjgi15gpmhlt5h17...@4ax.com...
Not quite, Zepp, but thanks for the attempt. Actually, this
is a fallacy we see a lot in gummint drug propaganda. "This
is Bob. Bob doesn't have a job. Bob stays at home and
smokes pot." Now, when the post hoc, ergo propter hoc
step comes in is when the bureaucrat claims that Bob is
a lazy ass because he smokes pot based simply on the
observation that both conditions obtain.
"X happened to mostly blacks, therefore it happened
_because_ they were black" is, without question, the same
fallacy.
I knocked on wood, and my Yahoo stocks went up!
Therefore...
wood-knocking affects the price of Yahoo stocks.
W smoked pot as a youngster ("me and W down by the
schoolyard"), therefore...
smoking pot makes you talk funny decades down the road.,
smoking pot makes you a Jesus freak decades down the road,
smoking pot can get you elected President.
Take your pick.
1896 Dead
<hewpi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
None of which, of course, doesn't mean that racists like knickers try
to deflect criticism by declaring that accusations of racism are a
liberal conspiracy. The fact that you are trying to misuse the term
to apply here is misguided and bathetic.
>
>"X happened to mostly blacks, therefore it happened
>_because_ they were black" is, without question, the same
>fallacy.
Are you trying to deny that the poverty rates are much higher for
blacks than for whites? And that the effects of Katrina were harshest
upon those without means?
>
>I knocked on wood, and my Yahoo stocks went up!
>Therefore...
Therefore anyone who notes that Yahoo made a profit is accusing you of
knocking on wood?
>
>wood-knocking affects the price of Yahoo stocks.
>
>W smoked pot as a youngster ("me and W down by the
>schoolyard"), therefore...
>
>smoking pot makes you talk funny decades down the road.,
>smoking pot makes you a Jesus freak decades down the road,
>smoking pot can get you elected President.
>
>Take your pick.
Well, you could say that Putsch smoked pot, and Putsch is stupid, but
I would maintain that the man was stupid before he smoked pot. That
doesn't make him any smarter.
quibbler
alw...@confused.net says...
> Comments scattered below
>
> > That is utterly irrelevant to the issue. The claim was not that
> > all americans are racist, since it is the american public making the
> > donations. The claim was that the Bush administration has the
> > problem. Therefore, donations or the composition of the national
> > guard troops prove nothing, except how to construct an ignorantio
> > elenchi (look it up).
>
> True. However, what is the nature of "proof" regarding this proposed
> racism.
A rapid response would have eliminated the need to wonder about the
implicit or institutional racism that might have otherwise inspired
people to look the other way when disaster happened.
> Hmmm. Before Katrina hit, evacuation was voluntary. So those who could
> did and those who couldn't didn't. The State specifically moved few
> people. At that point, it was in no way a federal responsibility.
Absolutely bullshit. Bush accepted federal responsiblity to manage the
disaster in his state of emergency declaration. Homeland security and
FEMA also claim on their website that they take primary responsibility
for dealing with disasters in the nation. Let me ask you this. Why do
we even have FEMA if it's not their federal responsibility to help places
like New Orleans in an evacation. That's precisely their responsibility
and what they were tasked with doing. They just did a very poor, slow
job of it.
>
> They did provide shelters. And promptly abandoned them leaving no medical
> or police support.
The city and state have limited resources for major disasters, especially
when the national guard has been eviscerated by unnecessary wars in Iraq.
>Katrina then promplty took away electricity and water.
> So, for this they are to be applauded?
You just said Katrina was the thing that caused this, not them. They
can't guarantee that everything will run perfectly when a category 4
storm hits.
>
> > Yes, New
> > Orleans is poor and yes, Bush doesn't give a shit about poor people.
> > He begrudges them every dime they get of federal assistance.
>
> Your opinion is now known. But that's all it is.
You have proposed to reason to doubt it.
>
> > The
> > reason that federal assistance doesn't buy self- sufficiency is
> > because the federal government wants it that way. They want those
> > people to stay poor so that there are people to work the menial jobs
> > flipping burgers at McDonalds, bussing shopping carts at Walmart and
> > mowing the lawns of white people.
>
> Again, nice to share your opinion.
It's well-informed, unlike those of Ms. Chavez.
>
> > However, that doesn't mean that
> > they get particularly good treatment. Bush consistently slashed
> > funding for levees because the poor people didn't deserve any better
> > in his view. They weren't a priority. He knew that the rich people
> > on high ground would survive and that the poor people would suffer as
> > they must in a system he helped to rig against success.
>
> Levee funding had been slashed for years even prior to Bush.
Irrelevant. Bush slashed them most dramatically and most recently. He is
the sitting president now for more than half a decade and when it happens
under his watch, it's his problem. That's the same standard we apply to
other presidents.
> And since
> when (inserting my opinion) should it be a friggin federal responsibility
> when someone decides to build a city below sea level and place it right
> on the coast?
It was built in 1718 you stupid asshole. It's the primary port that
connects the Gulf with the Mississippi. Furthermore, it's not all under
sea level and there have long been systems for dealing with that. Ever
been to the Netherlands? As to your question, it is a federal
responsiblity because (1) the storm crossed interstate lines (2) bush
declared it a federal disaster area (3) New Orleans is a city in the
United States and (4) the people of New Orleans are federal citizens.
Both FEMA and Homeland security do include things like Hurricane relief
specifically as a type of disaster to which they routinely respond.
There is no question that these people should have been involved
aggressively on the Federal level. They failed, so now you're making
excuses. That's the bottom line.
>
>
> More nice opinion interjected as well... again ... thanks
>
> > So don't you try to lie about those who died and say it was the
> > state and local government that was to blame. That's like saying that
> > the state and local government in New York were to blame for the WTC
> > disaster. Whether it's a plane striking a building or a hurricane
> > striking a city it's the plane and the hurricane respectively that is
> > the proximate cause.
>
> Right. The Hurricane is to blame. Nice point.
Well it's a point that people on the rightwing frequently make. Whenever
one questions how the pentagon could possibly lack the air defenses to
protect itself from an unarmed passenger jet, the rightards say, "It's
not the Pentagon's fault. It's Osama bin Laden's fault for attacking
us." By that same approach, it is the hurricane's fault. It might not
be a person, but it is still the thing to blame.
>
> > Blame that, if you must blame something, or
> > blame your God for doing nothing, if you insist upon
> > anthropomorphizing the affair. State and local government did a
> > reasonable job and followed the plan of privately funded evacuation.
>
> Right. You forgot the federal government... big surprise there.
They may have played a role, presuming that you can document their
specific actions, but it appears that the state and local actions in the
evacuation were more significant.
>
> > That's why the nursing home operators are the ones to blame for
> > refusing to evacuate patients despite repeated warnings of the need to
> > move them.
>
> Huh. Oh right. But you left out the part where Bush called them and told
> them to leave them all to rot. right?
Oh get over your victimization complex. You can't avoid the fact that
the evacuation plan was primarily voluntary and private. If it had a
larger public component then perhaps the city could have evacuated all of
those people too, though their medical conditions might have made them
hard to move. But then you could blame the city, as opposed to the
nursing home operators who ran the place and had the responsibility.
Perpetual Confusion
news:MPG.1d91fd9a8...@news.readfreenews.net:
> In article <Xns96D1794CE...@216.196.97.142>,
> alw...@confused.net says...
>> Comments scattered below
>>
>> > That is utterly irrelevant to the issue. The claim was not
>> > that
>> > all americans are racist, since it is the american public making
>> > the donations. The claim was that the Bush administration has the
>> > problem. Therefore, donations or the composition of the national
>> > guard troops prove nothing, except how to construct an ignorantio
>> > elenchi (look it up).
>>
>> True. However, what is the nature of "proof" regarding this proposed
>> racism.
>
> A rapid response would have eliminated the need to wonder about the
> implicit or institutional racism that might have otherwise inspired
> people to look the other way when disaster happened.
>
No matter how this played out, we'd still be here discussing this.
Nothing would have been good enough for you.
>
>> Hmmm. Before Katrina hit, evacuation was voluntary. So those who
>> could did and those who couldn't didn't. The State specifically moved
>> few people. At that point, it was in no way a federal responsibility.
>
> Absolutely bullshit. Bush accepted federal responsiblity to manage
> the disaster in his state of emergency declaration. Homeland security
> and FEMA also claim on their website that they take primary
> responsibility for dealing with disasters in the nation. Let me ask
> you this. Why do we even have FEMA if it's not their federal
> responsibility to help places like New Orleans in an evacation.
> That's precisely their responsibility and what they were tasked with
> doing. They just did a very poor, slow job of it.
>
There is no agency which has this level of rapid response capability. It
is simply too expensive to have setting around. No matter what was
promised, We simply can't afford to have enough staff and supplies
sitting around in anticipation of this stuff. Bush declared the disaster
to clear FEMA and others to move in rather then await the declaration
later. But FEMA simply didn't have the staffing for this scale of
disaster.
>>
>> They did provide shelters. And promptly abandoned them leaving no
>> medical or police support.
>
> The city and state have limited resources for major disasters,
> especially when the national guard has been eviscerated by unnecessary
> wars in Iraq.
>
Make sure you make your reference to Iraq. Got your talking points by
your side I see. City and State resourses may be tight. But they were on
site... or should I say ... should have been on site. But were no where
to be found. The city was abandoned by those who should have beeen the
first response. Instead, big daddy washington was supposed to swing in
and save the day. The initial days of disaster are typically handled by
local resources with assistance coming at the national level in coming
days. What happened was there was NO local response.
>
>>Katrina then promplty took away electricity and water.
>> So, for this they are to be applauded?
>
> You just said Katrina was the thing that caused this, not them. They
> can't guarantee that everything will run perfectly when a category 4
> storm hits.
>
no generators?
But the federal goverenment is supposed to be able to swoop in with 1,000
helicopters and pick everyone out of their homes, minorities first of
course, in days?
>
>>
>> > Yes, New
>> > Orleans is poor and yes, Bush doesn't give a shit about poor
>> > people. He begrudges them every dime they get of federal
>> > assistance.
>>
>> Your opinion is now known. But that's all it is.
>
> You have proposed to reason to doubt it.
>
You are simply speaking out of your ass. That is why I doubt. You are
blinded by your politics. You have lots of company on both fronts.
>
>>
>> > The
>> > reason that federal assistance doesn't buy self- sufficiency is
>> > because the federal government wants it that way. They want those
>> > people to stay poor so that there are people to work the menial
>> > jobs flipping burgers at McDonalds, bussing shopping carts at
>> > Walmart and mowing the lawns of white people.
>>
>> Again, nice to share your opinion.
>
> It's well-informed, unlike those of Ms. Chavez.
>
No. Not well informed. You simply seek information with fits your
preconcieved notions. Which is completely natural, but sheepish.
>>
>> > However, that doesn't mean that
>> > they get particularly good treatment. Bush consistently slashed
>> > funding for levees because the poor people didn't deserve any
>> > better in his view. They weren't a priority. He knew that the
>> > rich people on high ground would survive and that the poor people
>> > would suffer as they must in a system he helped to rig against
>> > success.
>>
>> Levee funding had been slashed for years even prior to Bush.
>
> Irrelevant. Bush slashed them most dramatically and most recently. He
> is the sitting president now for more than half a decade and when it
> happens under his watch, it's his problem. That's the same standard
> we apply to other presidents.
>
Completely revelevant. Unless you can point me to some prior posts of
yours where you voice your concerns about this prior to the storm? You're
simply playing monday morning liberal quarterback. "Bush should have
known this would happen.. in fact he did... he wanted it to happen to he
specifically cut funding to kill of the poor" -- I mean ... shit ....
it's friggin black helicopter horse shit.
>> And since
>> when (inserting my opinion) should it be a friggin federal
>> responsibility when someone decides to build a city below sea level
>> and place it right on the coast?
>
> It was built in 1718 you stupid asshole. It's the primary port that
> connects the Gulf with the Mississippi. Furthermore, it's not all
> under sea level and there have long been systems for dealing with
> that. Ever been to the Netherlands? As to your question, it is a
> federal responsiblity because (1) the storm crossed interstate lines
> (2) bush declared it a federal disaster area (3) New Orleans is a city
> in the United States and (4) the people of New Orleans are federal
> citizens. Both FEMA and Homeland security do include things like
> Hurricane relief specifically as a type of disaster to which they
> routinely respond. There is no question that these people should have
> been involved aggressively on the Federal level. They failed, so now
> you're making excuses. That's the bottom line.
>
>
Name the last hurricane that hit the Netherlands .... (waiting) .... ok
...meaningless point.
Not excuses. Just taking it all in and not trying to spin it into the
political world. This was one of the largest storms to hit in decades. It
was the first "real" test of many of our response strategies. The
flooding issues were severe. It is the height of foolishness to have that
many people live in a friggin bowl which sits under water. Hell, at least
with Katrina we had a little warning. I'm quite sure that terrorists have
taking notes. Can you imagine what it'd have been like if it was an
attack.
The storm crossed state lines ? holy shit. So that makes it even MORE a
federal issue? Shit, why do we even need local officials at all?
>>
>>
>> More nice opinion interjected as well... again ... thanks
>>
>> > So don't you try to lie about those who died and say it was
>> > the
>> > state and local government that was to blame. That's like saying
>> > that the state and local government in New York were to blame for
>> > the WTC disaster. Whether it's a plane striking a building or a
>> > hurricane striking a city it's the plane and the hurricane
>> > respectively that is the proximate cause.
>>
>> Right. The Hurricane is to blame. Nice point.
>
> Well it's a point that people on the rightwing frequently make.
> Whenever one questions how the pentagon could possibly lack the air
> defenses to protect itself from an unarmed passenger jet, the
> rightards say, "It's not the Pentagon's fault. It's Osama bin Laden's
> fault for attacking us." By that same approach, it is the hurricane's
> fault. It might not be a person, but it is still the thing to blame.
>
>
rightwing? righttards? What the hell are you talking about?
YOU made the point! The government is not to BLAME for Katrina. Their
response should be examimed and improvements made. Problem is, politards
like yourself simply want to affix blame... period, without regard for
the circumstances. This usually has to do with being in the opposite
politcal party.... ONLY.
>>
>> > Blame that, if you must blame something, or
>> > blame your God for doing nothing, if you insist upon
>> > anthropomorphizing the affair. State and local government did a
>> > reasonable job and followed the plan of privately funded
>> > evacuation.
>>
>> Right. You forgot the federal government... big surprise there.
>
> They may have played a role, presuming that you can document their
> specific actions, but it appears that the state and local actions in
> the evacuation were more significant.
>
I give them all a big fat F. You seem to somhow give state and local a B+
and the federal and specifically Bush the death penalty.
>>
>> > That's why the nursing home operators are the ones to blame for
>> > refusing to evacuate patients despite repeated warnings of the need
>> > to move them.
>>
>> Huh. Oh right. But you left out the part where Bush called them and
>> told them to leave them all to rot. right?
>
> Oh get over your victimization complex. You can't avoid the fact that
> the evacuation plan was primarily voluntary and private. If it had a
> larger public component then perhaps the city could have evacuated all
> of those people too, though their medical conditions might have made
> them hard to move. But then you could blame the city, as opposed to
> the nursing home operators who ran the place and had the
> responsibility.
>
>
>
Why was the evac left to be voluntary? .... State and local decisions.
Blame the local and state level. A nursing home simply doesn't have the
resources to transport all of their patients. Abandoning them was
absolutely wrong don't misunderstand. But how many nursing homes do you
know who could transport all their patients out of a city in 2 days?