# For the good of the country, Bush and Cheney should resign. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 9, 2005, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868 "2005-09-09T19:53:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/161 "2005-09-13T15:46:09Z")
**John** is manufacturing a complaint about ad hominems, huh? Better give that crocodile a hanky. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/162 "2005-09-13T15:59:17Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Got the picture now, chief? Not really guru. A 5 min search turned up [this](http://uspolitics.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/poll%5Fclintonlegacy010117.html): > [@](#): > > End-of Presidency Job Approval Ratings > Bill Clinton (2001) 65% > Ronald Reagan (1989) 64 > Dwight Eisenhower (1961) 59 > John F. Kennedy (1963) 63 > George Bush (1993) 56 > Gerald Ford (1977) 53 > Lyndon Johnson (1969) 49 > Jimmy Carter (1981) 34 > Richard Nixon (1974) 24 How accurate it is I don’t know, but it seems to be saying that Nixon’s approval rating was 24% when he left office. So…I have to question that figure being tossed around all over that Bush is lower than Nixon. Maybe they mean he’s lower than Nixon was at a certain time in his presidency. Maybe they are just full of shit, manipulating the data to make their point (‘Look look! Bush is more unpopular than Nixon!’). I don’t know. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > It didn’t in Clinton’s case, granted. But remember that the Congressmembers who act have to run for re-election, and in most cases can be recalled even before then if they go against public opinion too strenuously. Hardly “zero”. How is it not zero? Has it been a factor in any other impeachment? Should be easy enough to check historically I’d think. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > When you’ve done some research of your own on the levee funding story, come back. Don’t forget the pie, either. So I can throw it at you? 😛 -XT ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/163 "2005-09-13T16:10:58Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > So…I have to question that figure being tossed around all over that Bush is lower than Nixon. Maybe they mean he’s lower than Nixon was at a certain time in his presidency. Bingo. If you’d read any of the information you’d been given, you’d know that already. > [@](#): > > How is it not zero? You must not have read any of that discussion, either. _Do_ make an effort here, okay? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/164 "2005-09-13T16:15:27Z")
Since I don’t have a ton of time to do reseach about the levee question, I’ll just post some things from the [Factcheck](http://www.factcheck.org/article344.html) article I read earlier. It doesn’t go into how much money it would have taken to get the levee system up to a CAT 5 rating…but it addresses the money that was allocated, and what it was going to do for the system. > [@](#): > > It is not so clear whether the money Bush cut from levee projects would have made any difference, however, and we’re not in a position to judge that. The Army Corps of Engineers – which is under the President’s command and has its own reputation to defend – insists that Katrina was just too strong, and that even if the levee project had been completed it was only designed to withstand a category 3 hurricane. > [@](#): > > We can confirm that funding was cut. The project most closely associated with preventing flooding in New Orleans was the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Hurricane Protection Project, which was “designed to protect residents between Lake Pontchartrain and the Missisippi River levee from surges in Lake Pontchartrain,” according to a fact sheet from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (The fact sheet is dated May 23, long before Katrina). The multi-decade project involved building new levees, enlarging existing levees, and updating other protections like floodwalls. It was scheduled to be completed in 2015. > [@](#): > > Over at least the past several budget cycles, the Corps has received substantially less money than it requested for the Lake Pontchartrain project, even though Congress restored much of the money the President cut from the amount the Corps requested. > > In fiscal year 2004, the Corps requested $11 million for the project. The President’s budget allocated $3 million, and Congress furnished $5.5 million. Similarly, in fiscal 2005 the Corps requested $22.5 million, which the President cut to $3.9 million in his budget. Congress increased that to $5.5 million. “This was insufficient to fund new construction contracts,” according to a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ project fact sheet. The Corps reported that “seven new contracts are being delayed due to lack funds” [sic]. > [@](#): > > The Corps has seen cutbacks beyond those affecting just the Lake Pontchartrain project. The Corps oversees SELA, or the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control project, which Congress authorized after six people died from flooding in May 1995. The Times-Picayune newspaper of New Orleans reported that, overall, the Corps had spent $430 million on flood control and hurricane prevention, with local governments offering more than $50 million toward the project. Nonetheless, “at least $250 million in crucial projects remained,” the newspaper said. Ok, so the funding was cut…we all knew that. But what was that funding for exactly? > [@](#): > > We asked the Corps about that “design issue.” David Hewitt, a spokesman for the Army Corps of Engineers, said McClellan was referring to the fact that **“the levees were designed for a category 3 hurricane.”** He told us that, consequently, “when it became apparent that this was a category 5 hurricane, an evacuation of the city was ordered.” (A category 3 storm has sustained winds of no more than 130 miles per hour, while a category 5 storm has winds exceeding 155 miles per hour. Katrina had winds of 160 mph as it approached shore, but later weakened to winds of 140 mph as it made landfall, making it a strong category 4 storm, according to the National Hurricane Center.) This seems to imply that the project was to fix or repair the levee system up to CAT 3…which would have been inadiquate reguardless as it was a CAT 4-5 storm. > [@](#): > > The levee upgrade project around Lake Pontchartrain was only 60 to 90 percent complete across most areas of New Orleans as of the end of May, according to the Corps’ May 23 fact sheet. Still, even if it had been completed, the project’s goal was protecting New Orleans from storm surges up to "a fast-moving Category 3 hurricane,” according to the fact sheet. > > We don’t know whether the levees would have done better had the work been completed. But the Corps says that even a completed levee project wasn’t designed for the storm that actually occurred. I did find a [brief mention](http://politics.yahoo.com/s/usnews/20050903/ts_usnews/understandingkatrina) of what it would take to get the system up to CAT 4 or 5, but haven’t had time to read through the whole thing (they claim 2-3 billion…thats far short of what they were saying on the show I watched last night. No idea who is right on this right now). I’ll post it anyway: > [@](#): > > Shared blame. The failure, however, was not on everyone’s part. For years, officials in the New Orleans district office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which built and administers the levee network, pushed to raise the protection level from Category 3 to Category 5. “We have the ability to protect this city [from Category 4 and 5 storms] for a 2-to-3-billion-dollar investment,” Al Naomi, a senior project manager for the corps, told U.S. News in June. “It’s not rocket science; its concrete and steel.” Environmental groups, meanwhile, lobbied for more than a decade to restore southeastern Louisiana’s vanishing wetlands, which once provided New Orleans with a robust, natural hurricane buffer. They got nowhere. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/165 "2005-09-13T16:17:07Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > I saw it on a show I was watching last night…so, I conceed it could very well be wrong or misremembering. Do you have a cite amplifying that $430 million number to claim that it would get the levee’s up to a CAT 5 rating, because what I read on Factchecker seems to say that this isn’t so. Here’s one cite that describes the $14 billion plan in more detail. > [@](#): > > Neglected Flood-Control Plans Now Must Be Done > by Richard Freeman > > By 1998, a detailed plan, Coast 2050, had been drawn up to deal with the infrastructure needs of the Louisiana Delta, including plans to shunt silt and sediment to restore and rebuild the coastal region, to act as a natural storm-breaker system; and to build a new port, 30 miles south of the city. The pricetag was $14 billion. I have no idea what dollar figures have been discussed regarding getting the levees up to withstand a Category 5 hurricane. Since you have some apparent familiarity with the issue, could you please provide your own citations. > [@](#): > > Well, again, I could be mis-remembering, but I seem to recall Nixon was in the 20’s…if I have time later I’ll see if I can dig that one up. As for Bush, no idea where you are getting your numbers from…the polls seem to be all over the place. [This](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9317203/) article that I was just reading puts it at 42 percent: You can always go to [www.pollingreport.com](http://www.pollingreport.com), or directly to the [Bush Job Approval page](http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm) to see what is going on in the polls. Rather than being “all over the place,” they are banded pretty tightly between 38% and 42%, and all heading south. > [@](#): > > Assuming you are correct and a majority of American’s favored impeachment over Bush’s ‘lies’ about WMD…whats been done? Has he been impeached when I wasn’t looking? Lets say you are right and Bush’s poll numbers really are at 38% or even lower…do you really expect him to be impeached because of this? I said a near majority, and here’s the results of the Zogby poll I was talking about: > [@](#): > > Zogby America Poll. June 27-29, 2005. N=905 likely voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.3 (for all likely voters). > “Do you agree or disagree that if President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment?” > -------------Agree-------Disagree------Unsure > -------------- %------------ %----------- % > ALL----------42------------50----------- 8 I also made very clear in my post that I don’t expect him to be impeached until there is enough heat to make Republicans uncomfortable, and that I don’t suspect this will happen. Folks like you seem quite content with Bush no matter what he does. > [@](#): > > While I acknowledge that I do enjoy playing devils advocate, I don’t see how it has any bearing on this Hentor. Be honest. You don’t really just play devil’s advocate, because you never advocate against the conservative or Bush defending position. You thus are someone who takes up in defense of Bush just to be doing it (i.e. not based on any real knowledge or information). One then has to work fairly hard to work through arguments you’ve proposed on a whim, and you show no lasting changes as a result. For instance, you agreed that the Bush administration lied about justifications for Iraq, but extend them every iota of credibility regarding their claims about disaster preparation regarding Katrina. It has everything to do with this debate or any other. Since I feel strongly about these topics, it really means “nada” to me to work to convince someone who is whimsical about the issues. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/166 "2005-09-13T16:31:33Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Bingo. If you’d read any of the information you’d been given, you’d know that already. Interesting…lets see what I was responding too. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Pretty close. His approval ratings are reaching Nixon’s bottom, and, dare I point out, barely half of Clinton’s during his own impeachment. Nixon’s bottom…reaching Nixon’s bottom. Were you refering to Nixon’s ass, or the bottom of his ratings? There is no qualifier here saing ‘Nixon’s bottom rating at a certain point in his presidency’. Maybe I missed your qualifier? This SEEMS (to me granted) to be saying that Bush is reaching the low point of Nixon’s presidency…which seems to be the ‘24%’ approval rating when Nixon left office. Maybe you meant that you project Bush’s ratings to BE that when HE leaves? Because frankly I can’t twist enough to see how you can make this work otherwise considering the second quote. > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > You can always go to [www.pollingreport.com](http://www.pollingreport.com), or directly to the Bush Job Approval page to see what is going on in the polls. Rather than being “all over the place,” they are banded pretty tightly between 38% and 42%, and all heading south. Ok, fair enough, though ‘all over the place’ was just a turn of phrase…wasn’t implying anything with that. 38%-42% is probably with the MoE, depending what that is. > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > I also made very clear in my post that I don’t expect him to be impeached until there is enough heat to make Republicans uncomfortable, and that I don’t suspect this will happen. Folks like you seem quite content with Bush no matter what he does. Folks like me, ehe? Were I content with the man I’d have voted for him. I used to have a higher opinion of you Hentor…now I wonder why. > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > Be honest. You don’t really just play devil’s advocate, because you never advocate against the conservative or Bush defending position. You thus are someone who takes up in defense of Bush just to be doing it (i.e. not based on any real knowledge or information). One then has to work fairly hard to work through arguments you’ve proposed on a whim, and you show no lasting changes as a result. For instance, you agreed that the Bush administration lied about justifications for Iraq, but extend them every iota of credibility regarding their claims about disaster preparation regarding Katrina. It has everything to do with this debate or any other. Since I feel strongly about these topics, it really means “nada” to me to work to convince someone who is whimsical about the issues. Bullshit. I have been against any number of ‘conservative’ positions…and have blasted Bush when he deserved it. Just because I don’t agree with you on THIS issue (or, more to the point, just because I’m not going to jump on the Bush Bash train as it left the station 2 hours after the dikes broke) you want to spout this bullshit. ‘You Bush lover!’ seems to be the extent of your debating abilities Hentor…at least, recently. You USED to be must more interesting. As to extending Bush ever iota of credibility about this disaster, thats bullshit too. I notice you never came back and addressed the points (which turned out to be true btw) I made in your pit thread…not once it was clear things weren’t going your way. What I’ve done on this issue is try and hold back to make an informed decision…instead of jumping to my feet and beating my chest that its all Bush’s fault, blah blah blah blah blah. Oh, whats the use? Who is John Galt…? -XT ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/167 "2005-09-13T16:54:59Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Bullshit. I have been against any number of ‘conservative’ positions…and have blasted Bush when he deserved it. Well, then, I apologize, but I just have not seen it. In fact, I can only think of instances of mindless Bush defending on your part. If it’s important, perhaps you can cite examples of your having done otherwise. Maybe a different thread would be more appropriate. > [@](#): > > As to extending Bush ever iota of credibility about this disaster, thats bullshit too. I notice you never came back and addressed the points (which turned out to be true btw) I made in your pit thread…not once it was clear things weren’t going your way. You mean where it turned out that the Bush administration did actually recruit specialized firefighters to hand out leaflets? Oh yeah, I see. I was wrong to propose that they did so inadvertently and that Mary Hudak was covering up with spin afterwards. I fully acknowledge I was wrong, and that in actuality, they **fully intended from the outset to recruit firefighters to hand out leaflets after giving them a day’s training in sexual harrassment and equal opportunity employment practices.** Boy, how embarrassing to be proven wrong in my belief that it was a mistake, rather than a purposeful incompetent fuck-up. :o Now, weren’t you claiming that they sent out a general request and were getting all kinds of administrators and secretaries as well as firefighters? Were you really proven correct on that? > [@](#): > > Who is John Galt…? > > -XT I think you’ve known all along, and have just been playing devil’s advocate. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/168 "2005-09-13T17:01:50Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > A lot of apologist are trying to shift the blame to the Mayor for not commandeering the school buses we’ve all seen under water. Just to note that, yes Virgina, this is [another exaggerated smear from the apologists:](http://mediamatters.org/items/200509120005) > [@](#): > > The claim appears to have originated in a September 6 column by _Washington Times_ editor-in-chief Wesley Pruden, who inaccurately charged that, although Nagin ordered a mandatory evacuation before the hurricane’s arrival, he “kept the city’s 2,000 school buses parked and locked in neat rows when there was still time to take the refugees to higher ground.” Conservative websites, including the Power Line and Little Green Footballs weblogs, quickly linked to Pruden’s column. > > But Pruden dramatically overstated the number of New Orleans school buses. As of 2003, the most recent year for which data appears to be available, **the Orleans Parish school district, which operates New Orleans’ public schools, owned only 324 school buses.** In addition, a Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development profile of the New Orleans Regional Transit Authority (RTA), last updated May 5, notes that RTA owned 364 public buses, bringing **the total of the city’s public transit and school buses to fewer than 700** (assuming the fleet of school buses has not been dramatically increased since 2003), far fewer than the 2,000 Pruden claimed. Even so, Pruden’s claim was repeated that evening on Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes by co-host Sean Hannity, who insisted, “Two thousand buses sat; 2,000 school buses.” The falsehood was echoed the next day by Fox news political analyst and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-GA), who baselessly suggested that the city owned more than enough buses to help every poor person leave the city. Also note that Mayor Nagin _did_ use what busses were available to evacuate residents: > [@](#): > > Moreover, _The New York Times_ noted that a number of New Orleans buses were in use as the hurricane approached: “But Chester Wilmot, an L.S.U. [Louisiana State University] civil engineering professor who studies evacuation plans, said the city successfully improvised. He said witnesses described seeing city buses shuttle residents to the Superdome before Hurricane Katrina struck.” ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/169 "2005-09-13T17:05:47Z")
> [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > Well, then, I apologize, but I just have not seen it. In fact, I can only think of instances of mindless Bush defending on your part. If it’s important, perhaps you can cite examples of your having done otherwise. Maybe a different thread would be more appropriate. Certainly a different thread would probably be more appropriate. I can tell you that my positions on things like gun control, abortion (most of the quasi-religious bullshit from that branch of conservativism in fact)…even things like legalization of drugs and prostitution…are at complete odds with many ‘conservatives’. As for Bush I’ve blasted him on thing like trade, deficit spending and increasing the size and scope of the government, Iraq…and I’m not giving him a pass on this storm either. I’m just not willing to blindly heap all or even most of the blame on his scrawny little shoulders. > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > You mean where it turned out that the Bush administration did actually recruit specialized firefighters to hand out leaflets? Oh yeah, I see. I was wrong to propose that they did so inadvertently and that Mary Hudak was covering up with spin afterwards. I fully acknowledge I was wrong, and that in actuality, they fully intended from the outset to recruit firefighters to hand out leaflets after giving them a day’s training in sexual harrassment and equal opportunity employment practices. Boy, how embarrassing to be proven wrong in my belief that it was a mistake, rather than a purposeful incompetent fuck-up. Yes, that one. You seem to have forgotten what points I was making…and your usual (lately) knee jerk response of ‘Bush lover’ without actually trying to take in what I was getting at. > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > Now, weren’t you claiming that they sent out a general request and were getting all kinds of administrators and secretaries as well as firefighters? Were you really proven correct on that? Yep, I was claiming that…and I was big enough IN THE THREAD to acknowledge that I was full of shit on that point. Since I was also freely admitting I was merely speculating and trying to pose some questions to look more critically at the issue, it stung when you jumped in with your Bush lover BS. Its like one can’t even look critically at something if it might put a more favorable light on Bush’s (or in this case FEMA’s…a distinction lost on many) actions without the knee jerk reaction. > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > I think you’ve known all along, and have just been playing devil’s advocate. Ha! Well, whatever else you are Hentor or may be, you are certainly a droll fellow. 😛 -XT ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/170 "2005-09-13T17:30:30Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Just to note that, yes Virgina, this is [another exaggerated smear from the apologists:](http://mediamatters.org/items/200509120005) > > Also note that Mayor Nagin _did_ use what busses were available to evacuate residents: I’m confused. Did the Mayor use the school buses (whether 400 or 2,000) or not. What I’m reading in your post and elsewhere seems to say: 1)school buses are part of the city’s bus fleet 2)the Mayor used some buses (undefined) to evacuate some residents 3)therefore, the charge that the Mayor didn’t use the school buses is false I’ve seen some NO city officials use the same logic. From what I’ve heard and read it seems that what happened is that the Mayor did use city buses to evacuate some people, but not the school buses. That they did, in fact, just sit there. But that doesn’t seem right either. I mean, they were using buses to evacuate people, so why didn’t they use them as well. There were certainly many people who weren’t evacuated. Did they all stay by choice? Did the evacuation by bus have to stop because of the whether? Were the school buses being used in conjunction with the city’s public buses? Anyone have a timeline regarding the evacuation by bus. Maybe that’ll help clear things up. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/171 "2005-09-13T17:36:10Z")
I’m not sure why the school busses weren’t also used (lack of drivers?), but my understanding is that even using the entire fleet of 700 city and school busses would not have been enough to evacuate the folks who were stranded. To quote from the abovelinked article, > [@](#): > > …Louisiana emergency planners believed it would take as many as 2,000 buses “to evacuate an estimated 100,000 elderly and disabled people” in the event of a catastrophic hurricane like Katrina. But, _The New York Times_ wrote, this was “far more than New Orleans possessed.” In any event, the notion that Mayor Nagin twiddled his thumbs while “2,000 busses” sat idle is a gross distortion of the facts. ---
**Author:** ![zeeny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zeeny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zeeny)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/172 "2005-09-13T18:38:06Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > I’m not sure why the school busses weren’t also used (lack of drivers?), but my understanding is that even using the entire fleet of 700 city and school busses would not have been enough to evacuate the folks who were stranded. To quote from the abovelinked article, > > In any event, the notion that Mayor Nagin twiddled his thumbs while “2,000 busses” sat idle is a gross distortion of the facts. You are correct in that it wouldn’t have been enough to evacuate everyone - assuming that the contraflow order was in place (i.e., not allowing vehicles to return once out of parish limits). Commandeering those busses would have been easy enough to do. But that fact overlooks the realities of the rest of the ‘plan’. - There was no active list of qualified drivers for those busses. - There were not active (i.e. pre-storm) shelters outside parish limits ready and waiting to bring that number of people to. - No provisions in the ‘plan’ for medical needs of passengers. That there was a ‘plan’, in writing, is not enough. Based on what I’ve read of that plan, there was no way it could be implemented without additional assistance and/or resources (assumably on a federal level, since it would involve multi-state cooperation). The local and state govt knew the plan was not fully implementable as written. But so did the Feds. Under those conditions, how would you portion out the blame? Just out of curiousity - is there any major city in the US that has the resources and jurisdictional power to evacuate the entire population in that time-frame without federal assistance? Think about it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/173 "2005-09-13T19:30:34Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > I was also freely admitting I was merely speculating and trying to pose some questions to look more critically at the issue…Its like one can’t even look critically at something if it might put a more favorable light on Bush’s (or in this case FEMA’s…a distinction lost on many) actions without the knee jerk reaction. You didn’t look critically at anything. You didn’t do your homework. You posted speculation when the facts were, in fact, available to you. When someone who \*did \* do their homework, and \*did \* have the appropriate facts available, provided them to you, you chose to pout about Bush-bashing. No, friend, what you’re seeing is simply finding presenting the facts and drawing the only reasonable conclusion. That’s how it _works_. Anyone, not limited to you, who acts as irresponsibly as you have here merits only derision. Clear now? I’m sure you know damn well what the point is about Bush’s public support and the appropriate criteria for his removal. If you were able to address that issue responsibly, you no doubt would have done so by now. > [@zeeny](#): > > Just out of curiousity - is there any major city in the US that has the resources and jurisdictional power to evacuate the entire population in that time-frame without federal assistance? Think about it. How many other major cities would have the \*need \* to evacuate their entire populations for any reasonably-foreseeable reason? The one under sea level, protected only by fragile levees, is obviously one, but we only have one of those. What other cities and reasons did you have in mind? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/174 "2005-09-13T19:39:50Z")
> [@](#): > > You didn’t look critically at anything. You didn’t do your homework. You posted speculation when the facts were, in fact, available to you. When someone who did do their homework, and did have the appropriate facts available, provided them to you, you chose to pout about Bush-bashing. No, friend, what you’re seeing is simply finding presenting the facts and drawing the only reasonable conclusion. That’s how it works. Anyone, not limited to you, who acts as irresponsibly as you have here merits only derision. Clear now? Horseshit. Go back and read the other thread. When I was posting there WEREN’T any ‘facts’…and no ‘homework’ to do. Because it was hot off the presses and no one knew the details. Didn’t stop the immediate howls from guys like you though. We were ALL speculating in the beginning. When someone DID bring in a fact that contridicted my speculations (wasn’t YOU of course…ironic that you would call me on such a thing though I doubt you see the irony) I retracted that part. Much of the rest of what I was speculating was borne out by folks doing their ‘homework’. As for the Bush-Bashing…yeah, I mentioned it. Was kind of hard to miss, since there were floods of the same crapola all over the board…and every post before mine was an uncritical kumbya circle jerk. But I grow bored with this Elvis. You simply aren’t worth the bother. -XT ---
**Author:** ![zeeny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zeeny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zeeny)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/175 "2005-09-13T19:54:15Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > How many other major cities would have the \*need \* to evacuate their entire populations for any reasonably-foreseeable reason? The one under sea level, protected only by fragile levees, is obviously one, but we only have one of those. What other cities and reasons did you have in mind? Good question. Apart from hurricanes? Earthquakes? Nuclear attack? Some other natural or terroristic attack I didn’t mention specifically? Just what are we paying Homeland Security for? My point was, it is probably not within the local govt’s jurisdiction to facilitate a total evacuation of a major city without state or federal assistance. Do you disagree with that? ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/176 "2005-09-13T21:43:32Z")
New Orleans bus update, courtesy of the _Boston Globe:_ [On Sunday, the day before the storm, the Louisiana National Guard asked FEMA for 700 buses to evacuate people. It received only 100.](http://www.boston.com/news/weather/articles/2005/09/11/chronology_of_errors_how_a_disaster_spread?mode=PF) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/177 "2005-09-13T22:21:46Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > New Orleans bus update, courtesy of the _Boston Globe:_ [On Sunday, the day before the storm, the Louisiana National Guard asked FEMA for 700 buses to evacuate people. It received only 100.](http://www.boston.com/news/weather/articles/2005/09/11/chronology_of_errors_how_a_disaster_spread?mode=PF) That is a factoid devoid of context and therefore of little use. How many buses does FEMA own? I’d be surprised (and disapointed) if FEMA owned thousands of buses stationed throughout the country. How long should it take to relocate 700 buses from who-knows-where? 24 hours? Unlikely. We know there were hundreds of buses owned by NOLA that sat in a flooded lot. No one moved them to higher ground. I saw an interview with Naigin asking him what happened. His response (paraphrased, alhtough I might have it exactly right): “That’s a question for someone else to answer”. ---
**Author:** ![zeeny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zeeny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zeeny)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/178 "2005-09-13T22:33:45Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > That is a factoid devoid of context and therefore of little use. > > How many buses does FEMA own? I’d be surprised (and disapointed) if FEMA owned thousands of buses stationed throughout the country. How long should it take to relocate 700 buses from who-knows-where? 24 hours? Unlikely. > > We know there were hundreds of buses owned by NOLA that sat in a flooded lot. No one moved them to higher ground. I saw an interview with Naigin asking him what happened. His response (paraphrased, alhtough I might have it exactly right): “That’s a question for someone else to answer”. This quite nicely side-steps my previous post, doesn’t it? - Who should have stepped up to drive those busses out, knowing they could not return (to save their own families, or whatever) - If those busses had been commandeered, and driven out of parish limits, where would/should they have taken those people? I’m still waiting for answers to these questions. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/179 "2005-09-13T22:38:49Z")
> [@zeeny](#): > > My point was, it is probably not within the local govt’s jurisdiction to facilitate a total evacuation of a major city without state or federal assistance. > > Do you disagree with that? No, you’re absolutely right. > [@John Mace](#): > > That is a factoid devoid of context and therefore of little use. 'Bout time you started providing some facts and context yourself then, huh? ---
**Author:** ![vibrotronica](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a9a28c/32.png) [@vibrotronica](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vibrotronica)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2005, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868/180 "2005-09-13T23:10:36Z")
**John Mace** , a bit upthread you claimed that there had not been a second terrorist attack against the United States since September 11. You were mistaken. [There was a little dust-up involving some anthrax in late 2001](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attack). Nobody has been brought to justice for that one, either. Bush delenda est. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-the-good-of-the-country-bush-and-cheney-should-resign/320868.md?page=10)