For the good of the country, Bush and Cheney should resign.

Great Debates
41

Hentor:

To let me be more specific, I am not against constructive criticism at any time it can do good. The problem with politicizing this disaster, and proactively looking to blame people for whatever they can be blamed for is that it changes the effort.

What we should be doing, is encouraging our President, Governor, Mayor, Fema and everybody to do the best rescue and succor and recovery operation that they can.

When we are ready and waiting to point fingers and politicize mistakes or things perceived as mistakes then Bush et al have an even more difficult time doing their jobs than they otherwise would. They must muster a PR effort rather than an emergency effort. They must be sure they do the defensible thing, they must fear missteps solely because of the reaction.

What you end up with is people doing things simply because it looks good, not because it helps. Worse, you can have people failing to make an unpopular but correct decision.

For example, a widely criticized decision is that to keep the Red Cross out of NOLA to facilitate a faster evacuation. There is no question that that decision cost lives. I think, upon reflection, that it is also clear that it saved many more.

42

So when are we allowed to criticize, by your standards? If you can’t give us an exact time, give us an estimate.

43

Scylla, do you not believe that I am trying to effect positive change through my criticism? I think that without criticism, Bush would have no reason to act to get FEMA back into the shape that it was under Clinton. Without criticism, there is no way that Bush will try to get us prepared for the next disaster, whatever that might be. He told us he was the man to do that. It appears he didn’t feel serious about the job.

It’s my feeling that people like you, who spend copious amounts of time trying to deflect criticisms, blame and smear critics, and otherwise actively prevent Bush from feeling any heat for his mistakes have worsened our safety and security. People like yourself have given Bush all the time he needs at every opportunity, and what has come of it? He has had his “accountability moments” and his “mandate” and what have we to show for it.

At some point, people like yourself will need to ask him to be accountable. In fact, it appears to me that Bush’s character is such that you will need to compel him to be accountable. How much time are you willing to give him to do that? What further circumstances will have to arise before you will be moved to act?

44

Hmmm. This is what I currently think: I think the state and local governments dropped the ball. I think a meaningful and coherent Federal response to this takes a couple of days. I think that response was very slow. Slower than it needed to be and that that was excacerbated by the weak state and local response.

Well yes. I think he was doing his best at that point in time. Didn’t he overfly the day after. Yes, I think he was busting his ass. That isn’t the problem. The fact is that there is really very little the President can or should be doing during a disaster like this other than lending moral support.

Stay with me because this is key. The President’s failing is not the way he handled the emergency. I think he did as well as he could. The problem is this: If I go into the woods in winter without food, clothing or shelter, I can work extremely hard and put out a great effort and perhaps survive. This doesn’t mean that I wasn’t stupid for being ill-prepared.

The telling and accurate criticism against the President, IMO, is that the disaster response apparatus was set up poorly and the bureacracy was run poorly long before the hurricane. This is where the President’s efforts would have been meaningful. They were not.

Yes. I do. Like I said, the failure came beforehand in the way FEMA was structured. The failure is even greater at a State and local level, but all three were inexcusably and woefully unprepared and disorganized.

45

Well yes, I think they are. I don’t have evidence, but I have an argument. Here it is:

One of the reasons why the response to Katrina was so poor was that it wasn’t the emergency we were preparing and restructuring the Government for. We’ve been focussed on a terror attack, not a hurricane.

Now of course we will be focussed on a hurricane, no doubt in doing so we will give short shrift to another pressing concern so that we cover our ass vis a vis hurricanes. Doubtless, that will bite us in the ass down the road.

The problem is that we prepare for the disaster that just hit us, and we tend not to be very worried about the one that hasn’t hit us for a long time.

46

Ok, I think any criticism that is constructive and useful is timely. Back seat driving isn’t at this juncture.

Other than that, I think that once the crisis is past, criticism and blame placing is fair.

47

It is outrageous that poor people who could not afford transpotation were not bussed out. That was a local and state problem. Everyone who messed this up, be they Democrat or Republican should be thrown out of office and publicly disgraced to such an extent that they will never hold any public office of trust for their entire lives.

But that doesn’t let Bush off the hook for his lack of response. It’s not like he didn’t have time to prepare either. What did he do about the August 28th letter he received from the governor?

48

I don’t know. I really haven’t read your criticism. It hasn’t stood out as being particularly noteworthy. By noteworthy, I mean shit like “Bush is a racist and doesn’t care about black people.”

Again, I’m not so sure. I agree with you that FEMA has been woefully inadequate. I feel they have been unprepared. What I’m not sure about is why. I think a part of it and a large part of it is that the state and local efforts truly sucked. They were basically nonexistant. Considering where NOLA is located this is truly inexcusable.

This is doing two things, again, IMO. First, it is making FEMA and Bush into everybody’s bitch. They are being blamed for failings that are really state and local, like the evacuation, the superdome and convention center. Secondly, the state and local failings are highlighting the inadequacies of the Federal effort and exagerating them. This is truly unfortunate, because make no mistake, these inadequacies are truly huge and need no emphasis or exageration.

Than again, I wonder about FEMA. It appears to me that FEMA might have the size and structure to handle an emergency like this and that they should have handled it, and that the failure was leadership. I’m not sure who’s. Certainly FEMA, State and local Governments should have meshed their efforts positively and not worked at cross purposes. The fact is that I mostly blame FEMA and Bush. FEMA should be ready for a decapitated and inactive or absent state and local support as a worst case scenario. What we had was bad state and local support which is hardly a worst case scenario.

Well Hentor, what you miss is that I am not trying to protect and apologize for Bush, nor deflect criticism. What I am against are bad and stupid arguments. I’m against politicizing a disaster. The fact of the matter is that this disaster is being played for political effect. That criticisms are being engineered. Some people already know who they want to blame. I think that bad criticism is doubly damaging.

I think the fact of the matter is that Bush skates on legitimate criticism specifically because of the heap of bad criticism that is levelled at him. The valid stuff that we should be concentrating on like the structure and leadership of FEMA and the state and local response, and the integration of the two is being lost in the noise of “Bush is a racist,” or “What was his schedule like the day the hurricane hit.” In order to skate all Bush has to do is pick two or three of the bad and stupid arguments being put forth and show them to be bad and stupid.

Because there is so much politically motivated slander, and bad and stupid criticism levelled at Bush he is able to successfully paint all criticism as belonging to this group.

Meanwhile, we are focussing on stupid shit like whether or not Bush cares about blacks.

This may surprise you Hentor but overrall, I think Clinton was an effective President. I do think he made mistakes.

I also think that Bush is overrall a good and effective President, though he too, has made mistakes. Bush though has had a lot on his plate. These have been, as the proverb goes “interesting times.”

Nevertheless, I’m no longer a Republican nor a Bush supporter. I simply disagree with current Republican thinking and Bush thinking on too many key issues.

I am happy to blame Bush for things he can be legitimately blamed for. I am cautious and careful though about placing that blame. I don’t start from the standpoint of wanting to blame him nor do I find him blaming him to be expediant to my political desires. Surprise, surprise, this means I blame him less.

But, you do me a true injustice to paint me as an apologist. I was on these boards before Bush was Pres, and I was vocal against Ken Starr and Whitewater. I read Dereliction of Duty and found it to be without merit. Do my motivations and desire color the way I see things? Of course. But, I try not to let them.

Surely, we can have a moment of cameraderie, and we can agree that there is an awful lot of very stupid and fallacious, and purely political criticisms being levelled against Bush and that these are bad and counterproductive.

Agreeing on this doesn’t mean that valid and thoughtful criticisms aren’t useful and shouldn’t be voiced.

In fact, it strengthens valid and thoughtful criticisms and increases their usefullness.

Yes? No?

49

The problem with this argument is that the effects of a large-scale terror attack aren’t that different from a major natural disaster. If a dirty bomb had been detonated in the heart of Chicago many of the challenges that we’re seeing would be similar – mass evacuations, mobilization of federal resources to take over for overwhelmed locals, a pressing need for emergency food and medical facilities, and so on.

A terror attack would cover a smaller area. But it would arrive unexpectedly, and would have the additional complication of requiring a criminal investigation to be conducted while the rescue and recovery efforts were still in progress. Not to mention the possible international ramifications.

If the DHS does have better plans in place for a quick response in case of terrorist attack, why didn’t it draw on whichever were relavent in the lastest crisis? Particularly once it became clear that FEMA was floundering, why didn’t Chertoff call on other elements with DHS to help? Surely there was some overlap of mission, no matter how small.

No. I’m sorry. I’m not buying it.

The Bush Administration has just demonstrated that even with advance warning it can’t respond in a timely fashion to a national emergency. And I find that VERY, VERY scary.

50

Well, I’m not sure about this either. When I say “not sure” I’m not politely disagreeing, I’m really not sure.

I’m not recalling that one off the top of my head.

51

Even the Republicans in congress don’t swallow that:

52

Are the Great Lakes on fire yet?

Anybody remember that SNL sketch from election eve 2000 - “A Glimpse of Our Possible Future?” Every now and then it doesn’t feel like an exaggeration.

As long as Bush is in office you’ll find me battening down the hatches.

53

Well, if it was in his first two weeks, it wouldn’t really have been his fault…right? :wink:

-XT

54

Excellent point. It would take even the most gifted screw-up time to drive a superpower from it’s peak of economic, military and social power, completely into the ground. But the guy’s got talent. If he keeps it up, by 2008 we may all be gratefully opening Care Packages sent by the kind people of India. :smiley: :eek: :smiley:

55

If you choose to listen only to those criticism that are easily defeated, then yes. But this argument that there is just too much criticism, thus rendering it all ineffective, is the worst kind of wimpy conservative dodge to come down the pike in ages. There aren’t enough roll-eyes to express how silly and illogical it is.

Honestly, there has been scads of criticism about how the administrators of FEMA showed exceptional incompetence and lack of preparation. The fact is that the levee construction efforts came to a halt under Bush, something that did not happen in 30 years before him. If you want to focus on a criticism that cannot be proven and call it silly, that’s your choice, but it is a fairly obvious attempt to dodge any real defense against legitimate issues. I suspect it is, however, the bread and butter of right-wing commentators, so you may hear them going on and on and building strawmen like there’s no tomorrow.

It is nice to see, in your last post, however, that you circle closer and closer to the fact that screw-ups happened at every level, including Bush and FEMA. Nagin and Blanco should be given a high level of scrutiny. For me, however, they are not my mayor or governor. Bush is unfortunately my president. If he doesn’t change, he can fuck things up in many places other than New Orleans, Louisiana. As President, he should have a higher level of responsibility than a mayor or governor. A person of integrity would recognize that. A party of accountability would honor that.

Are charges of racism stupid or fallacious? Frankly, I don’t know, but I suspect there is not enough evidence to prove it one way or the other. I very much believe that he is predisposed to help rich people and shaft poor people, so in that sense his efforts disproportionately hurt African Americans, due to their overrepresentation among the poor. I also don’t see him doing many things that specifically help African Americans, and I have seen him ply race as a tool in several very hamfisted and stupid political moves.

56

I have to agree with this, and add – I think the criticism and shitstorm surrounding the response to Katrina has been enormously helpful. It’s focused people on the problems at FEMA. It’s gotten Brown nearly sacked and someone competent put in charge of the response. It’s put a bright light on stupid mistakes, which hopefully won’t be repeated. It may push the feds or states to do better disaster response next time, which may save lives.

Let’s hear it for criticism!

57

I am disgusted by this nonsense that we should not play the blame game, should not point fingers, and should not politicize. For the past several years, everything has been politicized by the Right. Plenty of blame has been assigned by the Right. Plenty of fingers have been pointed by the Right. Now that there is no way to hide or explain (lie) away this colossal fuck up (at all levels), suddenly we are not supposed to fix blame or point fingers. I call bullshit. This IS the time to fix blame and make heads roll. The complete breakdown we have all been watching is inexcusable.

58

Have you read that letter (warning: PDF)? I did. I couldn’t understand 90% of it, as it was mostly a bunch of government-speak. In fact, I asked in another thread if someone could translate it for me. Since then, after looking at FEMA’s web site a bit, I can see that what the letter does is conform to FEMA’s requirements for requesting various “things”. But most, if not all, of thost “things” are simply funds that become available once a state of emergency has been declared. And when she states the crisis will be bigger than the state can handle, it sure sounds like she’s talking about clean-up after the storm.

What specific requests in the letter did FEMA no meet? I ask this mainly because I didn’t understand the letter very well, but to the extent that I did, it didn’t seem like pre-storm assistance was being asked for.

I’m not trying to stick up for Bush or FEMA here. I genuinely don’t understand what that letter was supposed to accomplish. But everyone seems to think that just because Blanco sent this letter to Bush, that the Feds should have swooped in and saved the day. Is that actually how it’s supposed to work?

59

Scylla: I think there are a couple points you are missing.

First off, if the President is doing ANYTHING other than trying to find a proactive solution to this problem, then he’s not only failing his country, but his PR department is failing him, because there is NOTHING he could do that would bring him better PR than to work on this problem full steam. Any politician who gets to the calibre where they can handle being PRESIDENT, knows that some people are going to bitch no matter what, and that they need to listen, but not take it personally, because they have an important job to do. If HE is worrying about his opinion polls, then that is further evidence of his incompetence.

Secondly, you are overvaluing the opinions espoused on the straight dope. This forum is average everyday citizens excercising their voice to their peers. This is what they SHOULD be doing, it will help them form how THEY will handle a situation like this in the future, how they will formulate their own personal political goals, and helps inspire them to go out and do something. However, they are not in the position to fix this, that’s why they pay taxes to FEMA in the hopes that FEMA will actually do what they have paid it to do, FEMA has failed it’s customers to put it simply. People discussing this on the straightdope SHOULD be criticizing, that’s what this forum is for.

And you are damn right I am going to politicize this right now. The Bush administration is a boil that must be lanced before we have to amputate. What have I done? Well, I was at a festival called Burning Man where we had excess food when we left, that food has gone to the New Orleans relief effort. The Festival organizers organized a relief effort to take the excess food and water to New Orleans themselves. We actually messed up, and sent the food from Phoenix, which is fine because it might have overtaxed the logistical capability of the Burning Man organizers for us to send it from there.

We have turned my friend’s birthday party into a Hurricane Katrina relief effort, any proceeds taken from this event will go toward that. It might not be that much, but it’s something. We’re turning what we would be doing anyway into helping that cause.

We are working on getting my friend the last $ 300,000 dollars he needs to start his bio-diesel refinery in Brooklyn, the overall goal hopefully being to bankrupt the petro-diesel industry, so that oil is put toward gasoline and recycled fryer grease can power diesel engines, diversifying our energy. If the business model produced cheaper diesel than petrodiesel two weeks ago imagine how much cheaper it is now that fuel is anywhere from .50 cents to a dollar more expensive? We will be working on propagating personal power sources such as wind generators, solar, and backpack generators that reclaim the power of the hiker to charge electronics.

And last but not least, we will be starting a class-action suit against Halliburton for war-profiteering. The Bush administration needs to be crushed, and this is how to do it. Their complete mismanagement has cost us dearly, and New Orleans is the most effective proof of that. If he had not labelled Iran as part of the Axis of Evil, Iran would have a more liberal government now, and we could be working with Iran as a partner to rebuild Iraq, and the Iraq war would already be over. The reason this wasn’t done is because they wanted to create the Halliburton oil monopoly by seizing Afghanistan and Iraq in order to pinch Iran in the middle, profiteering from outmoded cold-war jingoism. If our troops weren’t in the middle east fighting and dying for this failed war, they would have been here, helping people in New Orleans where it really matters. We wouldn’t need to worry about the threat of terrorism if the cold warriors were out of office, the terrorists would not attack us with the removal of a little thing we like to call “motivation”.

Do I think Bush is out for his class? Yes. Do I think he is racist? No. The reason I do not think he is racist is that I don’t think his classism is based upon race, he can handle dealing with rich Saudis just fine, he doesn’t hate black people, he doesn’t hate poor people, he just doesn’t care about them, and thus he is not qualified to be president.

So right now is the perfect time to politicize this, when he is weakest, when people are the rawest, and seeing this most clearly before the political spin machine is able to draw the blinds again.

The problem as has been pointed out, is not that Bush is evil, it is that he is incompetent, and that’s the real issue. Partisan issues aside, I think both Clinton and Bush Sr would have handled this FAR better than Bush Jr did. Do I put the blame at Bush’s doorstep alone? No, it’s much farther reaching than that, we need to reform every level of government. I blame the racist sheriffs who wouldn’t allow people to WALK out of New Orleans as much as I blame the people who didn’t organize the relief effort properly. This isn’t America. America does not act like this. It is time to remove the corruption and put responsible leadership in at all levels.

We need a government that doesn’t focus on nonsense like gay marriage or whether or not the president gets a hummer from a groupie. Why should our government even have an opinion on such things? Why should it care who burns a flag? I am tired of seeing a system that turns laws that should be about managing inebriated idiots into creating the most powerful Intelligence Agency in the world to topple foreign governments so that stupid suburban white kids don’t kill themselves with cocaine.

This is the PERFECT time, to criticize, the PERFECT time to act, the PERFECT time to remove the corruption.

Erek

60

Calling my argument names doesn’t effect it’s validity. That there is camoflage in noise is an established fact. A false criticism is a bad argument. A bad is a bad argument. I’m against bad arguments. There’s nothing “conservative” or “dodgy” about this. It’s not political. It’s basic principles.

You need a cite for this. They weren’t constructing the levees during the four years I lived there, that I can recall, and I know Bush spent more on the levees during Clinton. Actually, don’t bother with the cite. I really don’t care. The whole argument is really just bullshit.

Making unproven or unprovable criticisims and accusations is nothing more than innuendo or slander. On general principles, I think it always sucks and should not be done.

I don’t understand how you think refuting innuendo and slander is a dodge.

I think you need to wait until somebody does something before you criticize them for having done it. This future criticism based on suspicion isn’t exactly reasonable.

You haven’t been reading my posts very carefully. I’m not “circling” anything. I’ve been saying as much, flat out, for several days.

Hmmmm. Tough question. Are you saying that Bush is more responsible for NOLA than the mayor of the city or the governor of the state?

Or, are you saying that because Bush wields more power than either, he bears closer scrutiny?

I don’t understand. If there’s not enough evidence to make the accusation and make it stick than it seems to me that by definition, it is stupid and fallacious. Think about it Hector. Are you saying that it’s ok to make accusations and operate as if they were truth simply because they can’t be disproven?

To me, the logical and ethical stance is that an accusation or a criticism should not be made unless one is willing to stand or fall based on it’s validity.

I dunno. This is too broad a generalization for me to respond to. To me, it’s a moot question. The question to me is whether or not the argument can be reasonably made that the lapses in Federal response can be attributed to racism on the part of Bush.

To me, it’s a stupid and fallacious accusation and criticism and shouldn’t be made.

Your asking a larger and more general question.

Excellent. I support this. I don’t want him doing anything to specifically help African Americans. For that matter, I don’t want him doing anything to specifically help White Americans, either. Pretty much, I want him to stop at “Americans,” and not really look beyond that.

F’rinstance?