Katrina damage is Bush's Fault!

[Mk]

Why is Katrina damage Bush's fault?

Well who else is there to blame but Bush and FEMA?

 

[Pengwuino]

... mother nature?

I've always had a feeling that she's to blame for a lot of things

 

[loseyourname]

I guess a hurricane isn't a person, but you could start by blaming that.

After that,

1) City planners who built a city on a river delta, largely below sea level.
2) Millions of people over the years who allowed so much of the city to fall into a state of disrepair.
3) Senators who authorized the war in Iraq, which diverted funding from the levees.
4) The Army Corps of Engineers (I don't think it's particularly fair to blame them, as their funding was cut, but levee maintenance is their job).

Outside of these, Bush is about the only one you could blame, primarily for cutting funding for the levees. Whether or not they would have held anyway probably isn't known, but even so. FEMA is not to blame in this at all. Their job is to respond to an emergency. They may have done this job terribly, but the physical damage to the city was already done by the time their responsibilities kicked in. The blame on FEMA lies in the area of human causalties rather than damage to the city.

If you believe that greenhouse gases have contributed to strengthening gulf hurricanes, then you can blame atmospheric polluters as well, but that's getting to be an awful stretch.

 

[Mk]

My question was why is Bush taking heat about Katrina, and why him? Because of the War in Iraq New Orleans was destroyed?

 

[Pengwuino]

Well supposedly its directly his fault because an agency that doesn't take direct orders from him didn't do a perfect job after the disaster area's city and state governments failed to take action with their own established emergency procedures.

Completely bush's fault.

 

[loseyourname]

My question was why is Bush taking heat about Katrina, and why him? Because of the War in Iraq New Orleans was destroyed?

It was the levees breaking that caused most of the damage. Bush signed the budget that cut the maintenance funds for them, and you could argue it was necessary because of the war. It's hard to single out Bush for this, though, as the budget is put together by Congress.

 

[Pengwuino]

And of course, what most people ignore is that the study for the levee improvements was alone going to take until 2008.

 

[Mk]

Ok, thanks I see.

 

[kat]

and of course...pengwuino...they also forget to mention that the portion of the levee that failed is the portion that had been improved.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The damage was caused by a storm and a long history of poor planning. The fact that Bush cut funding shows that he is at least as much of the problem as anyone else.

Some number of people who died can be traced directly to Bush's style of so called "leadership". For starters, the coffee boy that he appointed to head FEMA was too busy giving interviews on TV to do his job. And Bush was too busy playing golf, or whatever, while on yet another vacation. Oh yes, and half of the guard's equipment is in Iraq since it was too costly politically to imposed a draft in order to fight a war. If that equipment was here as it is suppposed to be, twice as many rescue helicopters would have been available in three of the affected states, for starters.

 

[cronxeh]

The dead people are Mayor Nagin's fault. The broken leevee is engineers' fault. The post hurricane chaos is FEMA's fault. The poor realization and acting upon those facts is Bush's fault.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

To diminish the deaths caused by Bush is to spit in the face of every 911 victim.

 

[cronxeh]

You know you are not really supposed to glue yourself to the TV watching the hurricane deflower the New Orleans if you are the President. I'm sure there are more important things to do. The local authority, particularly the mayor Nagin, received his warning at least 3 days in advance. If you don't act upon the information of a category 5 storm then you are just as guilty of murdering those people as you are of malpractice.

 

[loseyourname]

Some number of people who died can be traced directly to Bush's style of so called "leadership". For starters, the coffee boy that he appointed to head FEMA was too busy giving interviews on TV to do his job. And Bush was too busy playing golf, or whatever, while on yet another vacation. Oh yes, and half of the guard's equipment is in Iraq since it was too costly politically to imposed a draft in order to fight a war. If that equipment was here as it is suppposed to be, twice as many rescue helicopters would have been available in three of the affected states, for starters.

None of that would have reduced any of the damage done to the city. From what I can tell, the OP was not asking who is responsible for human casualties. He specifically said "damage to the city." There are a hundred other threads devoted to blaming Bush for the deaths.

 

[russ_watters]

My question was why is Bush taking heat about Katrina, and why him? Because of the War in Iraq New Orleans was destroyed?

Because he has an office in a room in a building in Washington. Simple as that. People in general are so short-sighted that they can't see beyond immediate coincident events.

-The economy was good (for a while, anyway) while Clinton was President, therefore, Clinton was responsible.
-A hurricane hit New Orleans while Bush was President, therefore Bush was responsible.

I do, however, think that shortsightedness is more a trait of liberals than conservatives. They are far more interested in instant gratification than long-term planning.

 

[russ_watters]

To diminish the deaths caused by Bush is to spit in the face of every 911 victim.

To blame deaths not caused by Bush on Bush is to spit in the face of every 9/11 victim.

...not to mention spitting in the face of every servicemember serving this country, including those who participated in the Katrina relief effort.

 

[moose]

Well, the levees definitely should have been reinforced. However, I do understand why they held off. It's just like when you have a project which is due in 4 months, and you keep putting it off because you have more important things to do, like study for the next day's test, etc...

 

[Moonbear]

Well, there were plenty of inept government officials at every level who share the blame for the loss of lives (with the exception of the pigheaded people who had the means to evacuate but chose not to do so; they are responsible for themselves and have faced the consequences of their own poor decisions). But, in terms of the property damage, perhaps we need to go back in time and slap around the founders of the city who decided it was a good idea to build a big city in what should be a river delta?

 

[Pengwuino]

Well, the levees definitely should have been reinforced. However, I do understand why they held off. It's just like when you have a project which is due in 4 months, and you keep putting it off because you have more important things to do, like study for the next day's test, etc...

Sounds like humans were put in charge...

Think we all know the weak link in this chain

 

[TRCSF]

If you had been paying attention, you'd have noticed there were two disasters. One was the hurricane, the other was the federal government ****ing up.

 

[Agnostic]

I hate to repond this late, but its not Bush's fault. It really gets annoying when people try to pin every bad thing on bush (not saying that is what you are doing).

The way the government works, Bush or actually FEMA could not do anything until the state government asked them to. The state government is the one that is fault. Everyone wants to call it racism against black people. That entire state, at the local and state level, is ran by black people. It was the black leaders who dropped the ball...

 

[2CentsWorth]

Because he has an office in a room in a building in Washington. Simple as that. People in general are so short-sighted that they can't see beyond immediate coincident events.

You are correct that this can be a double-edge sword, but let's make comparisons within an administration. Bush's approval ratings rocketed to something like 90% right after 9-11 due to perception of good leadership -- because he has an office in a room in a building in Washington, when in reality any president would have behaved similarly.

I do, however, think that shortsightedness is more a trait of liberals than conservatives. They are far more interested in instant gratification than long-term planning.

I realize you are expressing an opinion so there is no evidence for this, but really it is a trait of Americans in general. Ask people from other countries.

 

[blimkie]

The way i see it i don't think there is a point to rebuilding a city which judging by the bowl shaped area should ahve been built in the first place. It is going to cost an extreme amount of money and another hurricane will probably strike again before they the city can rebuild the levees to a high enough standard to defend the city from catgeory 5 hurricanes.
I don't live in new Orleans so it is hard for me to put my self in a situation iof having to leacve my home but the levees were built cat. 3 and a cat. 5 hurricane is heading towards the city with a 30 foot storm surge ? I think i would get myself out of there!
I would just salvage what i could from the rubble and let mother nature have its way.

 

[SOS2008]

Just last week, the $250 billion Hurricane Katrina Disaster Relief and Recovery Act was introduced, and a number of well connected Washington insiders quietly cheered because they stand to make a mint for themselves and their clients on questionable "hurricane relief" projects. So far, the government has awarded a number of large reconstruction contracts, with little or no competition, to the same politically-connected companies like Halliburton that won no-bid contracts for reconstruction work in Iraq.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/25/AR2005092501413.html

The Washington Post reported today that FEMA plans to broadly reimburse houses of worship for their relief efforts. The move, the newspaper noted, “would mark the first time that the government has made large-scale payments to religious groups for helping to cope with a domestic natural disaster.”

“Some religious organizations are openly using the hurricane relief efforts to win new converts,” Lynn said. “If these groups can’t separate their evangelism from their relief work, they should not be eligible for public funding. People displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita should not be subjected to unwanted, high-pressure religious coercion as the price of getting help from their own government.”

http://www.au.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr011=03zvwb2mp1.app5b&abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=7579&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1241

For more links on Katrina’s Aftermath and Accountability:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/09/09/LI2005090901637.html

Who's responsible for these things?

 

[BobG]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/09/09/LI2005090901637.html[/url]

Who's responsible for these things?

What's Lynn's solution? Turn the homeless out so they'll eventually find a shelter with no religious connections? After all, making sure they don't come into contact with religion is the most important thing, right.

All in all, Lynn's comments have to be just about the lamest thing I've heard during the Katrina crisis - even lamer than Brown . The Americans United for Separation of Church and State are embarrassing themselves.

 

[SOS2008]

What's Lynn's solution? Turn the homeless out so they'll eventually find a shelter with no religious connections? After all, making sure they don't come into contact with religion is the most important thing, right.

All in all, Lynn's comments have to be just about the lamest thing I've heard during the Katrina crisis - even lamer than Brown . The Americans United for Separation of Church and State are embarrassing themselves.

True, on the spectrum of things it's not the most disconcerting activity. However, I would prefer to see relief (paid for with tax dollars) distributed through well-known and credible agencies such as the Red Cross.

 

[pattylou]

Frankly, I don't know a single person that has said that all of the "Katrina damage is Bush's fault" as implicated in the OP and throughout the thread.

Who has made this claim? Who is laying it all on the president?

Conversely, I haven't seen anyone say that Bush is blameless.

We all *agree* that he bears some responsibility for this.

Haven't the claims been more along the lines of "Some of Bush's actions made this worse than it had to be" ?

One reason he is scrutinized so closely is (not only because he is in the oval office but also because) his "claim to fame" - his platform - was security of the American people. Over a thousand people died in the Katrina hurricane. Not ten thousand, thank goodness, but a thousand is still a tragedy.

 

[pattylou]

Haven't the claims been more along the lines of "Some of Bush's actions made this worse than it had to be" ?

Those actions may include (1) naming Brown to head FEMA, (2) sending troops/helicopters/etc to Iraq that could have proven very useful for security in our homeland during this crisis, and (3) 'funding' questions. The details of these actions are the basis of a lot of the discussions as to Bush's (and others') responsibility in this event.

 

[Agnostic]

Frankly, I don't know a single person that has said that all of the "Katrina damage is Bush's fault" as implicated in the OP and throughout the thread.

Who has made this claim? Who is laying it all on the president?...

Pick up a copy of the NewYork Times, the LA Times, or the Washington Post for any day of last week or the week before...or ask Kanya West

 

[BobG]

True, on the spectrum of things it's not the most disconcerting activity. However, I would prefer to see relief (paid for with tax dollars) distributed through well-known and credible agencies such as the Red Cross.

Maybe Lynn just expresses himself ineffectively. He proposes no solution for helping victims of a disaster or crisis - he just addresses the punishment that should be dealt out to those that did help.

He comes across as wanting churches that provided help to be punished. This has no effect on the current crisis since that help has already been given, but he would seem to be hoping to prevent church organizations from helping in any future disasters or crises.

That opens a pretty big gap. He really doesn't address how that gap should be filled. Perhaps he feels the federal government should expand its capabilities to fill in the gap and any inability to do so could then be blamed on conservative politicians, maybe even the religious right. Or, maybe he thinks non-religious community groups would be able to fill in the gap.

Not the United Americans for Separation of Church and State, though. If they've ever done anything for anyone's community, they've been extremely modest about it. It probably takes all the contributions they can get just to tackle the crucial issues facing this nation - removing religious symbols from city seals (and we still haven't addressed the issue of how Americans are supposed to tolerate a major city being named "City of the Angels").

Lynn could make a more significant contribution to the nation by personally visiting each shelter and reminding the inhabitants not to run with scissors.

 

[pattylou]

Pick up a copy of the NewYork Times, the LA Times, or the Washington Post for any day of last week or the week before...or ask Kanya West

... The articles I have read from these sources spread the blame around.