• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

Good lord, these people are nuts.

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

Give the craziest people you know everything they want and hope they don’t ask for more? Great plan.

This fight is for everything.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

We are aware of all internet traditions.

I know this must be bad for Joe Biden, I just don’t know how.

If you are still in the GOP, you are an extremist.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

You cannot shame the shameless.

Whatever happens next week, the fight doesn’t end.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

Speaking of republicans, is there a way for a political party to declare intellectual bankruptcy?

Infrastructure week. at last.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

“Squeaker” McCarthy

They traffic in fear. it is their only currency. if we are fearful, they are winning.

Make the republican party small enough to drown in a bathtub.

I’d like to think you all would remain faithful to me if i ever tried to have some of you killed.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Paying Paris Hilton

Paying Paris Hilton

by John Cole|  October 13, 20058:36 am| 155 Comments

This post is in: Domestic Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

Christ almighty:

Straining to meet President Bush’s mid-October deadline to clear out shelters, the federal government has moved hundreds of thousands of evacuees from Hurricane Katrina into hotel rooms at a cost of about $11 million a night, a strategy local officials and some members of Congress criticize as incoherent and wasteful.

The number of people in hotels has grown by 60 percent in the past two weeks as some shelters closed, reaching nearly 600,000 as of Tuesday. Even so, relief officials say they cannot meet the deadline, as more than 22,000 people were still in shelters in 14 states on Wednesday.

The reliance on hotels has been necessary, housing advocates say, because the Federal Emergency and Management Agency has had problems installing mobile homes and travel trailers for evacuees and has been slow to place victims in apartments that real estate executives say are available throughout the southeast.

Why the artificial deadline to move people out of shelters? Because of all the stupid and over the top criticism directed at the White House in the aftermath of the devastation of Katrina. And before one of you wingnuts even tries to say I am attempting to mute criticism, don’t. I am all in favor of criticism. But what we got in the Katrina aftermath was not criticism- it was hysteria, part media-fueled, aided and abetted by fierce partisan motives, all provided without any whiff of perspective but with measured doses of suggested racism.

‘BLACK PEOPLE ARE EATING CORPSES!’

‘BUSH CUT THE LEVEE FUNDING AND KILLED 10,000’

‘FEMA WON’T FEED BLACK PEOPLE IN THE SUPERDOME AND THERE ARE SHOOTINGS AND GANG RAPES CONSTANTLY’

Yes, FEMA fucked some stuff up. That was bound to happen, and inescapable given the sheer magnitude of this disaster, the structural changes made to FEMA and what even now I conclude was a director in over his head. But to those of you who made this a capital case, exaggerated every breeze of a rumor into a gale force wind, and tried to pin everything on Bush and the White House- you won. Bush blinked.

And this bill is on you, as will be the militarization of future rescue operations and the usurpation of great swaths of state authority (which, considering many of you guys STILL refuse to admit that Gov. Blanco and Ray Nagin had anything to do with this disaster aftermath, may be just what you want). There is simply no reason the federal government should promise to have people out of shelters 6 weeks after an entire region is destroyed. It makes no sense. No more sense than it does rebuilding hastily and haphazardly or sending a fleet of trailers to the region, either, for that matter.

Welcome to the nanny state, Bush style. That should scare the shit out of you, if nothing else does.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « More Bad News for the White House
Next Post: The Frist Investigation »

Reader Interactions

155Comments

  1. 1.

    Another Jeff

    October 13, 2005 at 8:47 am

    Don’t worry. Spike Lee is gonna be doing a documentary about the Katrina aftermath.

    I’m sure that will be a completely fair and unbiased look at what happened, and then we’ll have the truth. (Sarcasm off)

    Actually, he’s probably gonna make a film that’s an hour and a half long to just say what Kanye West said in five seconds.

  2. 2.

    SomeCallMeTim

    October 13, 2005 at 8:47 am

    it was hysteria, part media-fueled, aided and abetted by fierce partisan motives, all provided without any whiff of persepctive

    Or roughly the way you lot ginned the country into the Iraq war. As you people never tire of telling us, you’re in control of Congress, the Executive, and now the Court. It’s all on you. Welcome to the burdens of leadership, bubba.

  3. 3.

    Nonny Mouse

    October 13, 2005 at 8:50 am

    Look, that is not how it works. The guys in the stands who boo the team are not responsible for the coach’s poor choice of strategy. Nor are those who cheer somehow responsible for the team winning. Bush is supposed to be a professional and moreover he is supposed to make competent decisions that aren’t poll driven. The man can’t go a day without lying about having never looked at a poll in his life, so I see no reason to let him off lightly when he makes decisions that are obviously wrong and obviously poll-driven. I’m sure putting this on “the left” makes you feel better, but it makes you look like an idiot.

  4. 4.

    Slide

    October 13, 2005 at 8:54 am

    Yes, FEMA fucked some stuff up.

    lol. Some? you just gotta love Cole, once he stakes a position “FEMA doing the best job possible”. He never retreats. Oh, well, maybe a teeeney, weeney, little retreat.

    exxagerated every breeze of a rumor into a gale force wind

    who was exaggerating every breeze? Who refused to send in helicopters because they were being fired on? who didn’t send in food and water because it was “too dangerous”. Who went on and on about all the “looting”? Wasn’t that Sean Vannity? Nah… in Cole’s bizarro world, it was the liberals making all this up.

    but my favorite Coleism has got to be this:

    And this bill is on you, as will be the militarization of future rescue operations and the usurpation of great swaths of state authority.

    ahhhh…. I got it, its those of us the criticized the federal government’s efforts that really are to blame. Lol. Probably all those ice trucks being sent around the country are driven by partisan liberals too. But at least Cole is consistant, as he wants the Dems to apologize for the, soon to be, indictments of top administration officials. Welcome to the Bizzaro world of John Cole. Up is down. Black is white. Bennett is a great guy. Bush is a “decent guy”. William Shatner is a “genius” and shirts get ironed with Lemon Pledge.

  5. 5.

    Krista

    October 13, 2005 at 8:56 am

    Why the artificial deadline to move people out of shelters? Because of all the stupid and over the top criticism directed at the White House in the aftermath of the devastation of Katrina.

    Granted. However, can he not actually say, “You know what? More time is going to be needed for this, so I think the best thing to do would be to extend this deadline.” I know his usual m.o. is to “stay the course”, no matter how ill-advised, once the decision’s been made. But why not show some ‘nads and admit that the earlier decision was hastily made and needs to be revised? Personally, I’d respect him for it.

  6. 6.

    Slide

    October 13, 2005 at 9:01 am

    let me correct something that I said before Cole does. To his credit Cole never said bennett was a great guy, as a matter of fact he was quite harsh to the degenerate gambler, but he does think that he is being unfairly attacked for being racist.

  7. 7.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 9:07 am

    Welcome to the nanny state, Bush style. That should scare the shit out of you, if nothing else does.

    What scares me is the fact that so many African-Americans seem to feel that the Katrina response to some extent was racially motivated. And it’s not so much that they do believe it, but more the fact that most in leadership (as well as most non-blacks) think they are ridiculous for feeling that way and want to blame it on the media, politics, et al.

    the Pew poll found that two-thirds of blacks (66%) agreed that the government response to the hurricane would have been faster if “most of the victims had been white,” compared to less than one-fifth (17 percent) of whites

    Source

    The simple fact of the matter is that the notion of racial inequality is alive and well in this country, whether white people want to believe it or not. As my father says, perception is 9/10 of reality. Denying the reality seen by millions of Americans is fucking terrifying indeed – especially when it is the modus operandi of the federal government these days.

  8. 8.

    TarHeelCP

    October 13, 2005 at 9:08 am

    But why not show some ‘nads and admit that the earlier decision was hastily made and needs to be revised?

    Do you know how many times I’ve said that in the last five years. Frankly, I gave up thinking that would ever happen.

    John, you’re tilting at windmills (or a few wingnuts if you like). Most of us are reasonable, and it’s not our fault that everytime the Bush administration runs into a problem it highlights the same issues over and over again; poor decision making and cronyism.

    Get over it, it was a handful of talking head wingnuts on both ends of the political spectrum that were crying foul on the Bush administration.

  9. 9.

    John Cole

    October 13, 2005 at 9:11 am

    but he does think that he is being unfairly attacked for being racist

    Any human being who has ever had a philosophy or argumentation course, or has ever taught a class and used certain argument forms to make a point thinks bennett is being unfiarly attacked for racism.

    And I love the rest of your ‘argument’ from above- sometimes I wonder just who you think you are arguing with (well, in your case, it is much less an argument than a stream of ill-informed insults) when you call me a Hannity listener. You really do think you are arguing against the archetypal evil VRWC member, don’t you?

    And this quote is rich:

    But at least Cole is consistant, as he wants the Dems to apologize for the, soon to be, indictments of top administration officials. Welcome to the Bizzaro world of John Cole. Up is down. Black is white. Bennett is a great guy. Bush is a “decent guy”. William Shatner is a “genius” and shirts get ironed with Lemon Pledge.

    How does whiskey taste in the morning, Joe?

  10. 10.

    norbizness

    October 13, 2005 at 9:12 am

    Some days I marvel at the power I have, as The Left, to make the Bush Administration do the scary things it was going to do anyway.

  11. 11.

    Tony Alva

    October 13, 2005 at 9:13 am

    Couldn’t be a more truth filled post. It is the unfortunate state of partisan politics that has not improved one iota since the election.

  12. 12.

    Slide

    October 13, 2005 at 9:23 am

    for a Professor you don’t read very well John, I never said you were a Hannity listener, I was refuting your suggestion that all the exaggeration was somehow coming from the critics of Bush when I pointed out it was the supporters of Bush (Sean Vannity for one) that was going on and on and on about the ‘looting’ in NO. Just correcting the record John.

    Point number two: I never said Bennett was a racist. I said his comment was racist and I’m not going to go over the reasons yet again. I think most of rational America has made up its mind on that one.

    Point number three: not a whiskey drinker but I am intoxicated by the implosion of the Bush Presidency.

  13. 13.

    Ekim

    October 13, 2005 at 9:24 am

    Critics of Bush are responsible for his decisions and women in mini skirts are responsible if they’re raped.

  14. 14.

    Nikki

    October 13, 2005 at 9:24 am

    Why the artificial deadline to move people out of shelters? Because of all the stupid and over the top criticism directed at the White House in the aftermath of the devastation of Katrina.

    John, John, John. The artificial deadlines are due to the fact that this administration does everything half-assed based on poll numbers, rather than on any desire to do it RIGHT!

    I mean, please explain all the Iraqi artificial deadlines. Those are due to *GASP*HORROR* criticism as well?

  15. 15.

    Tractarian

    October 13, 2005 at 9:28 am

    Any human being who has ever had a philosophy or argumentation course, or has ever taught a class and used certain argument forms to make a point thinks bennett is being unfiarly attacked for racism.

    I was a philosophy major and I don’t think all of the attacks against Bennett were unfair. In making his argument, Bennett equated “unborn black babies” with “future criminals.” To me, that’s highly insensitive, if not overtly racist.

    It’s true that the allegations of racism in the response to Katrina were reactionary bullshit. And the reports of violence at the Superdome that I saw on Fox News may have been overblown. (What does that say about FEMA blocking aid because of exaggerated violence?)

    But, honestly Mr. Cole, I fail to see any connection between (1) the criticism of government response to the storm, and (2) Bush’s decision to set a drop-dead date of October 15 to move people out of shelters.

    You are treading dangerously close to the extremist Right argument that criticism of government policy by the media and by the public led us to fail in Vietnam (as if, without the hand-wringing and whining, we could have just bombed the shit out of them and wiped our hands of it).

  16. 16.

    neil

    October 13, 2005 at 9:29 am

    Now that, really, is an artful bit of spin. You can just see the gears turning in John’s head. “Now why is it DailyKos’s fault that Katrina relief is such a disaster.. well.. I know! It’s because of that darn CRITICISM they’re always doing.. it drove Bush mad and made him screw everything up even worse! From now on, everybody has to be very quiet when Bush is doing something wrong, and maybe then he will magically do the right thing, just as long as NOBODY PUSHES HIM!”

    John, this defies parody. If you think your president is really such an insecure, petty fool that criticism by his political opponents goads him into making criminal mistakes, then you need to start writing your Congresspeople right now and telling them that he needs to be removed from office for incompetence. Or if you don’t really think that, maybe you should pull out that respect for personal responsibility that you Republicans used to wave around all the time, dust it off and figure out how it applies.

  17. 17.

    Lines

    October 13, 2005 at 9:35 am

    Wow, John, this is just some magnificent spin you’ve got going on this issue.

    Is the failures in Vietnam all the fault of “liberals” for calling the administration at that time on their BS?

    Are the constant string of failures and setbacks in Iraq because liberals don’t “support the war”?

    Do soldiers not have armor because Liberals want a balanced budget?

    Look, we can all play this game, but at some point you can admit you voted for the guy that has screwed the goat and you can once again encourage the party to look past the dismal failures of the Bush administration and try to start cleaning up its act.

  18. 18.

    SomeCallMeTim

    October 13, 2005 at 9:35 am

    Any human being who has ever had a philosophy or argumentation course, or has ever taught a class and used certain argument forms to make a point thinks bennett is being unfiarly attacked for racism

    I think a German using reductio ad absurdum arguments about making social policy by rounding up Jews and killing them is deeply creepy, and I think Bill Bennett doing same thing with African-Americans is deeply creepy. Is racism the right word for it? Maybe not, but it’s the right neighborhood. If you don’t like it, find Mr. Peabody, go back in time, and tell the Republican Party not to base its return to power on a marriage to southern segregationists.

  19. 19.

    Slide

    October 13, 2005 at 9:48 am

    what do these Cole statements have in common?

    and how many Democrats will back down from their previous treason remarks should this all turn out to be about obstruction of justice and conspiracy, rather than outing an agent.

    And this bill is on you [Bush critics], as will be the militarization of future rescue operations and the usurpation of great swaths of state authority

    Its simple. No matter what goes wrong, somehow Cole finds an evil liberal to blame. Amazing. Simply fucking amazing. Control of the Presidency, control of the House, control of the Senate, majority of justices on the Supreme Court and still the Dems control what goes wrong with this adminstration. How desperate can the apologists get?

  20. 20.

    Mr Furious

    October 13, 2005 at 9:56 am

    Welcome to the Bizzaro world of John Cole. Up is down. Black is white. Bennett is a great guy. Bush is a “decent guy”. William Shatner is a “genius” and shirts get ironed with Lemon Pledge.

    LOL! good one, slide.

  21. 21.

    John Cole

    October 13, 2005 at 10:00 am

    It isn’t spin at all. I place the ultimate blame on Bush and the White House, period. They are making a mistake, and a big expensive one.

    But the reason Bush and the White House acted this way is simple- they were responding to the public pressure ginned up by folks who were either flat-out making shit up or exxagerating the situation beyond all reality. And the motivation for this was partisan rage from years of getting shit on by the White House and Republicans, and they saw an opportunity to strike back, and did. I have said before, I understand it. But in this atmosphere, leaders blink and do stupid things.

    It is no different from some of the stupid things Clinton did because of the way the Republicans attacked him mercilessly. I bet you all were singing a different tune back then, though. Pointing that out probably makes me a partisan hack, too. Right Slide?

    And this is just great:

    and how many Democrats will back down from their previous treason remarks should this all turn out to be about obstruction of justice and conspiracy, rather than outing an agent.

    Hacktacular- take that out of context. The actual quote is:

    This is going to get ugly and fast.

    It will be interesting to see how much of our consensus project from this summer turned out to be accurate.

    I guess it will also be interesting to see how many Republicans continue to defend these guys, and how many Democrats will back down from their previous treason remarks should this all turn out to be about obstruction of justice and conspiracy, rather than outing an agent.

    Now explain to me how that is blaming liberals for Rove/Libby’s behavior. I was making a general comment about all the rumor mongering to date about what did and did not happen in the Plame debate, and trying to tie it in with our consensus building effort.

    Tell me, Slide.

    Are you 12, or just an asshole? Because either way, I am sick of trading insults with you. You don’t argue honestly, you take everything out of context and distort it- in short, you are like a left wing Rush Limbaugh and I have better things to do with my time.

  22. 22.

    Lines

    October 13, 2005 at 10:02 am

    Slide, why do you hate John’s shirts?

  23. 23.

    Davebo

    October 13, 2005 at 10:05 am

    Racked yet again by the 2,000th realization that his party is totally fucking nuts and driving the country into the crapper, Perfessor Cole lashes out at the only group he can.

    God you really do miss Sheehan don’t ya John?

    Next week, Cole explains how the crazed environmental terrorists forced Dubya to nominate Miers to the Supreme Court followed by an in depth expose of Sean Penn’s illicit weapons sales to Zarqawi followers in Iraq.

  24. 24.

    Slartibartfast

    October 13, 2005 at 10:06 am

    Who refused to send in helicopters because they were being fired on?

    I give up, who?

  25. 25.

    TarHeelCP

    October 13, 2005 at 10:08 am

    Hacktacular

    Someone call Webster’s!! This one has to be entered.

  26. 26.

    John Cole

    October 13, 2005 at 10:10 am

    Racked yet again by the 2,000th realization that his party is totally fucking nuts and driving the country into the crapper, Perfessor Cole lashes out at the only group he can.

    I thought I was lashing out at Bush for this idiocy, but explaining why he did it. Incompetence and political pressure from opportunistic critics pretty much sums it up.

    And you and I are both paying for it.

  27. 27.

    SomeCallMeTim

    October 13, 2005 at 10:11 am

    It is no different from some of the stupid things Clinton did because of the way the Republicans attacked him mercilessly.

    Can you give examples?

  28. 28.

    neil

    October 13, 2005 at 10:16 am

    I just cannot accept your twisted conclusion that the political opposition is required never to criticize the political incumbency because it might cause them to do stupid things.

    If you can’t take criticism from the political opposition, you should not be in politics. If it causes you to do stupid things, you should not be in politics.

  29. 29.

    Mr Furious

    October 13, 2005 at 10:17 am

    John, you forgot to tag this thread with the standard, “Flame away.”

    Are you just trying to avoid the “boredom” of the other day? I think it worked.

    So Bush compounds a complete fuck-up by overreacting and fucking every thing up even worse and somehow his critics are to blame? This is without a doubt the most convoluted bullshit rationale I can remember reading here in the six months I’ve been hanging around. This is straight from the rush Limbaugh playbook.

    Bush and his party have complete control of the government. Due, mostly, in part to promising to keep the country safe.

    After years of supposed planning and preparation, the first opportunity to demonstrate their prowess they decide to go no-huddle. They send the wrong guys out on the field, immediately drop the ball, proceed to kick it around, finally pick it up and then run into the wrong fucking end zone and then you want to blame the people in the stands who were shouting, “NO!!”?

    That’s rich. Go back to bed and try this morning over again.

  30. 30.

    Davebo

    October 13, 2005 at 10:17 am

    “I thought I was lashing out at Bush for this idiocy”

    No John, you were just lashing out at anything and everything. And yet had the nerve to call others “wingnuts” while doing so.

    Oddly enough in your rant against those tree huggers and commies who are somehow able to control Dubya’s mind you left out part of the article.

    “Even conservative housing experts have criticized the Bush administration’s handling of the temporary housing response. “I am baffled,” said Ronald D. Utt, a former senior official at the Department of Housing and Urban Development and Reagan administration aide who is now a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, the conservative research organization.
    “This is not incompetence. This is willful. That is the only way I can explain it.”

    God. If I’ve gotta listen to another squeal from those pinko commie fucktards at the Heritage Foundation I’m gonna stick my head in an oven.

  31. 31.

    John Cole

    October 13, 2005 at 10:23 am

    If you can’t take criticism from the political opposition, you should not be in politics. If it causes you to do stupid things, you should not be in politics.

    A.) What we saw post-Katrina was not criticism.

    B.) I think it is pretty clear I am to the point where I don’t think Bush should be in politics.

    Can you give examples?

    Anyone of the Dick Morris triangulation bullshit to mute criticism he was a pinko communist. You could start with idiotic school uniform proposals and move on from there…

    No John, you were just lashing out at anything and everything. And yet had the nerve to call others “wingnuts” while doing so.

    Oddly enough in your rant against those tree huggers and commies who are somehow able to control Dubya’s mind you left out part of the article.

    A.) If you still, to this day, can not recognize that the ‘criticism’ was over the top, counter-productive, and, in many cases, unfounded, you are a wingnut. See Joe Albanese.

    B.) I never said they controlled Bush’s mind. Now you esteemed thinkers want to deny that you have had ANYTHING to do with the Bush decision making process regarding the aftermath of Katrina?

  32. 32.

    Davebo

    October 13, 2005 at 10:25 am

    Anyone of the Dick Morris triangulation bullshit to mute criticism he was a pinko communist. You could start with idiotic school uniform proposals and move on from there…

    ROTFLMAO!!

    20,000 killed or maimed in what Cole still thinks was a swell idea and he’s bitching about school uniforms.

    Infuckingcredible.

  33. 33.

    Davebo

    October 13, 2005 at 10:29 am

    “A.) If you still, to this day, can not recognize that the ‘criticism’ was over the top, counter-productive, and, in many cases, unfounded, you are a wingnut. See Joe Albanese.”

    The point, which you deftly evaded, was that the criticism came from all sides.

    Now, someone with a shred of intellectual honesty might come to the conclusion that there was a reason for the widespread criticism.

    Over the top? I’d need some examples of over the top criticism I guess. Preferably not from the comments section at Kos.

    For instance, I thought it was incredibly stupid to gather up 500 buses and drive them to the Superdome without stopping on the way in and picking up some food or water, or perhaps a few loads of Guardsman.

    But hey, I’m just a member of the Vast Left Wing Nitpickers so what do I know?

  34. 34.

    Slide

    October 13, 2005 at 10:29 am

    Pointing that out probably makes me a partisan hack, too. Right Slide?

    No actually I don’t think you are a partisan hack John, you have showed that you are willing to attack the republicans when they do stupid things. That is what is so infuriating about you. You are not a partisan hack but yet sometimes you are so far off of the deep end that it drives me nuts. The “reasonable” John Cole disappears whenever the subject of Cindy Sheehan comes up or when you discuss the Katriana disaster. Your trying to find liberal punching bags for Bush’s failures with respect to Katrina is just the latest example.

    And as far as me not debating fairly, you gotta be kidding right? You say this:

    Are you 12, or just an asshole?

    and say I am not debating you honestly? lol. right John, sorry we can’t all be so honest and fair like you.

  35. 35.

    Mr Furious

    October 13, 2005 at 10:31 am

    I thought I was lashing out at Bush for this idiocy, but explaining why he did it.

    Not quite. That might have been what you thought you were writing, but I think I speak for most of the people who have read lines like this…

    But to those of you who made this a capital case, exaggerated every breeze of a rumor into a gale force wind, and tried to pin everything on Bush and the White House- you won. Bush blinked.

    And this bill is on you

    …to be absolution for a President who couldn’t help but succumb to the enormous pressure from a marginalized minority party, a neutered press and a bunch of online losers in their pajamas pointing fingers.

    Even if I were to grant you your scenario of a desperate President scrambling to survive in a partisan whirlwind, I’d ask you—who’s fucking fault is that? Yeah, that’s what I thought.

  36. 36.

    John Cole

    October 13, 2005 at 10:32 am

    ROTFLMAO!!

    20,000 killed or maimed in what Cole still thinks was a swell idea and he’s bitching about school uniforms.

    Infuckingcredible.

    Again, more dishonest bullshit. I was asked to give an example, I threw one off the top of my head, and you label it as me bitching about school uniforms.

    That is infuckincredible. If any of you were honest, and interested in more than just ‘winning’ whatever this argument has metastatized into, you would probably be able to chuck in a number of what you consider to be Clinton mistakes brought on in part by unfair attacks from the GOP.

    But that would be too much to expect from DaveBo, Lines, or Slide…

  37. 37.

    Jane Finch

    October 13, 2005 at 10:33 am

    Just who are the leaders and decision makers here? “Public pressure” cannot force a government to make a stupid decision…it does that all on its own and bears the responsibility. Sure governments sometimes get caught up in reacting to criticism and come up with some bone-headed reaction, but ultimately things right themselves.

    The Administration has had many weeks to back down from that artificial deadline and hasn’t bothered….perhaps all the indictments, threats of indictments, and Harriet-talk has distracted it. But don’t blame “public pressure” for an ongoing stupid decision.

  38. 38.

    Slide

    October 13, 2005 at 10:34 am

    I think John has been sniffing his lemon pledge today.

  39. 39.

    Veeshir

    October 13, 2005 at 10:36 am

    I have zero desire to get involved in this stream of idiocy, but I do have to take issue with this

    But at least Cole is consistant, as he wants the Dems to apologize for the, soon to be, indictments of top administration officials. Welcome to the Bizzaro world of John Cole. Up is down. Black is white. Bennett is a great guy. Bush is a “decent guy”. William Shatner is a “genius” and shirts get ironed with Lemon Pledge.

    Willian Shatner is a comedic genius. While he might have come to it later in life, he’s jumped in with both feet and become perhaps the finest comedic genius of the 21st century.
    Anybody who disagrees obviously has absolutely no sense of humor.
    Oh wait, I forgot, humorless, nitwit lefties.
    Sorry.

  40. 40.

    Davebo

    October 13, 2005 at 10:36 am

    “If any of you were honest, and interested in more than just ‘winning’ whatever this argument has metastatized into, you would probably be able to chuck in a number of what you consider to be Clinton mistakes brought on in part by unfair attacks from the GOP.”

    I suppose I could think of things Clinton did that I disagreed with and then blame it on Newt Gingrich or Ken Star. But that would be acting as juvenile as you are acting now.

    Believe it or not, I can say “Clinton really fucked up X” without following it with a “but…”

    Then again I’m not a totally disoriented apologist capable of swallowing a broom handle for the cause.

  41. 41.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 10:39 am

    John, you must assign every last bit of the blame to Bush. All of the lies and hysteria propagated through the media, and all the claims of racism and poor response must be laid only at his feet. Can you not see it is the righteous act of the enlightened party to do so? Feel the love man, feel it.

    Why do you hate psychiatrists John? Don’t you know that helping the sufferers of BDS will help the economy? Why do you hate America? Is it racism? Shame sir, shame.

  42. 42.

    Nonny Mouse

    October 13, 2005 at 10:45 am

    There’s only one Clinton era disaster that was anywhere close to the scope of the daily occurrences in this administration, and that is Rwanda. Of course, in that case it was Republican lawmakers, not the polls/proles, who kept Clinton from doing the right thing.

  43. 43.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 10:47 am

    you would probably be able to chuck in a number of what you consider to be Clinton mistakes brought on in part by unfair attacks from the GOP

    What sort of rubbish is this? Why do people assume that just because they would do something that everyone else would do it too?

    I see this ‘everyone does it’ line of fallacious reasoning creep into so many discussions these days that it is hard to keep track of them all.

    What ever happened to personal responsibility? Can people no longer say “I fucked up because…” without tacking on a qualifier that erodes any hint of culpability?

  44. 44.

    Mr Furious

    October 13, 2005 at 10:48 am

    DOMA, Welfare reform.

    Two things bigger than school uniforms that Clinton did purely for the politics/pressure. Just off the top of my head…

  45. 45.

    Lines

    October 13, 2005 at 10:49 am

    John,

    I think most of the left-leaning argument in this thread is that you are attempting to blame, without much in the way of logical argument, the liberals for a poorly-thought-out 6 week limitation on the shelter housing.

    I don’t see anything in your argument other than “their over the top critisism” arguing that somehow opposition politics is to blame for this development.

    Is it still to blame when no one in this administration will extend the deadline? How? I don’t think you can find examples of “over-the-top critisism” in the last two days when this issue became apparent, so whats stopping an extension? Do you think we WANT him to fail on this issue? Hell no, I want those poor people (definately no pun intended) to have comfortable accomodations to get their affairs in order, because many of them are making life-changing decisions and they don’t need to be shuffled around at this point in time.

    How about a decent argument about why there SHOULD be a 6 week limitation? How about some justification? Is that too much to ask for? How about just something that lets the American people know that this plight is recognized by responsible parties?

  46. 46.

    Mr Furious

    October 13, 2005 at 10:50 am

    Nonny mouse brings up a good (bad) one, too.

    But guess what, Clinton admits the mistake and regards it as his greatest regret. Somehow I don’t think we will have ANY moments like that from Bush.

  47. 47.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 10:54 am

    There’s only one Clinton era disaster that was anywhere close to the scope of the daily occurrences in this administration, and that is Rwanda. Of course, in that case it was Republican lawmakers, not the polls/proles, who kept Clinton from doing the right thing.

    Since the president has the right to send troops anywhere, and since he actually made the decision to pull ours out once the genocide had started, I would LOVE to know how you come to this conclusion. In other words, source please.

  48. 48.

    Tractarian

    October 13, 2005 at 10:57 am

    I have zero desire to get involved in this stream of idiocy, but I do have to take issue with this

    Apparently for Veeshir, “stream of idiocy” = painful truths that he’d rather not deal with.

    While he might have come to it later in life, he’s jumped in with both feet and become perhaps the finest comedic genius of the 21st century.

    He’s amusing, but “finest comedic genius of the 21st century”? Maybe his writers are. I can think of at least 5 or 6 comedians off the top of my head who have been funnier than Shatner in the last 5 years and who write their own material.

    I think you just put yourself in the running for “finest comedic genius of the 21st century” by making that comment.

  49. 49.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 11:02 am

    Defense Guy says:

    In other words, source please.

    That’s rich coming from someone who claimed that Benjamin Franklin was a chickenhawk without offering a shred of evidence.

  50. 50.

    EL

    October 13, 2005 at 11:04 am

    Why the artificial deadline to move people out of shelters? Because of all the stupid and over the top criticism directed at the White House in the aftermath of the devastation of Katrina. … But what we got in the Katrina aftermath was not criticism- it was hysteria, part media-fueled, aided and abetted by fierce partisan motives, all provided without any whiff of perspective but with measured doses of suggested racism.

    I’m usually impressed by your reasonable approach, even when I disagree, but this time I have to say ‘no.’ Whether because you’re furious at the initial criticism, or the ridiculous waste of Bush’s decision, or any of a hundred reasons, this argument has gone astray.

    The criticism, ‘hysteria’ if you wish, may have been over the top. It was also spot on in certain areas, and came from both sides of the aisle. But that’s besides the point – Bush has refused to give in to public opinion in the past, as have other presidents. Or if they had to, they came to some more reasonable solution. Public hysteria may have forced Bush to say “We’ll do something, we’ll do better.” It did not force him to say “The deadline for moving evacuees out is October 15.”

    If you are blaming the critics for this, you have effectively said that the administration is incapable of administering.

    But to those of you who made this a capital case, exaggerated every breeze of a rumor into a gale force wind, and tried to pin everything on Bush and the White House- you won. Bush blinked.

    And this bill is on you, as will be the militarization of future rescue operations and the usurpation of great swaths of state authority …

    Welcome to the nanny state, Bush style.

    Again, no. It is not “on me.” It is on the administration for incompetence, and for then reacting with arbitrary deadlines. And I admit there was incompetence and error at all levels, but FEMA are supposed to be the professionals at this – which I think is why they came in for the lion’s share of the criticism. Purely from a disaster management perspective, I (with only a peripheral professional knowledge) could see several basic violations of standard procedure as it was unfolding.

    That should scare the shit out of you, if nothing else does.

    It does, as has all the other evidence of incompetence and cronyism in crucial positions by this administration.

  51. 51.

    Tractarian

    October 13, 2005 at 11:08 am

    John, you must assign every last bit of the blame to Bush. All of the lies and hysteria propagated through the media, and all the claims of racism and poor response must be laid only at his feet. Can you not see it is the righteous act of the enlightened party to do so? Feel the love man, feel it.

    Nice snark, Defense Guy, but no one is saying Bush is to blame for the “lies and hysteria propagated through the media.”

    The issue is, simply put, whether Bush is responsible for setting the October 15th deadline, which, in turn, has caused our tax dollars to flow to Paris Hilton.

    I can maybe understand people blaming the media’s post-storm hyperbole (across the spectrum) for Bush’s excessive spending promises. He’s the one that ultimately made the decision, but I guess you could argue that without the media overreaction, he wouldn’t have done it.

    But I don’t recall anyone in the aftermath of Katrina complaining that “these people must be moved from the shelters to expensive hotels, and fast!”

  52. 52.

    Mr Furious

    October 13, 2005 at 11:08 am

    Clinton has no fucking excuse in my book. Pure political decision. He didn’t want to be accused of “wagging the dog” so he let Rwanda burn.

    Careful though Defense Guy. Bush is doing the same thing with the benefit of a different prism (ie post-Rwanda) and a clear precedent for sending troops into action.

  53. 53.

    BillS

    October 13, 2005 at 11:13 am

    Cole’s repeated attempts to lay the ultimate blame for this train wreck of a political party and administration is just too funny to pass up.

    I have this image of Cole typing standing on his head since he’s alrealdy turned logic on its head.

    Unfortunately for Americans being passengers on the train operated by the three GOP stooges (Bush, Frist and Delay) and cheered by the fourth (Cole) us more tragic than comic.

    Add minimal bonus points for at least admitting that Bush bears some responsibility for the actions and inactions of his administration.

    Substract double those points for ultimately blaming a basically impotent political opposition for, I’d guess, allowing the ruling party’s corruption and incompetence to shine through.

  54. 54.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 11:13 am

    That’s rich coming from someone who claimed that Benjamin Franklin was a chickenhawk without offering a shred of evidence.

    We have played this game, so I think you should read this words slowly until they sink in. I gave you one at a time and when it became clear that you were not going to listen, I stopped. If you wish to continue to whine about it, no one can stop you. I gave you evidence, and you gaven me one liners and definition changes.

    So big guy, since you decided to enter your thoughts on that subject, why not offer up some proof that the Rwanda situation can be put upon a Republican Congress. I realize you may have to admit that it was incorrect and while this may be difficult for you, it would show real growth. Frankly, I doubt you have it in you.

  55. 55.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 11:31 am

    Defense Guy whines:

    I gave you evidence, and you gaven me one liners and definition changes.

    To paraphrase your righteous indignation: source please. If you can provide me with a single instance on this blog where you provided me with a shred of evidence that backs up your claim that Benjamin Franklin was a chickenhawk, then I will take up your challenge.

    I realize you may have to admit that you were incorrect and while this may be difficult for you, it would show real growth. Frankly, I doubt you have it in you.

  56. 56.

    Nikki

    October 13, 2005 at 11:36 am

    Since the president has the right to send troops anywhere…

    Then doesn’t it stand to reason that the president has the right to extend deadlines?

  57. 57.

    Nikki

    October 13, 2005 at 11:39 am

    But to those of you who made this a capital case, exaggerated every breeze of a rumor into a gale force wind, and tried to pin everything on Bush and the White House- you won. Bush blinked.

    And this bill is on you, as will be the militarization of future rescue operations and the usurpation of great swaths of state authority …

    Welcome to the nanny state, Bush style

    Didn’t you guys vote for him because he is a strong resolute leader? Then doesn’t it stand to reason that you’re argument that he came to this arbitrary 15 Oct deadline based on the over-the-top Katrina criticism proves just how much of a pussy he really is?

  58. 58.

    Lines

    October 13, 2005 at 11:43 am

    No Nikki, in this world the fact that the date can’t be changed is due to the overwhelming over-the-top critisism the Administration received at the hands of liberals. Its those same liberals that are making sure John stays a Republican.

  59. 59.

    Veeshir

    October 13, 2005 at 11:52 am

    I should know better than this, but what the heck.

    John S.
    Of course Ben Franklin was a chickenhawk.
    He was a very strong advocate for the Revolution and never fought in a war.
    That’s the definition of a chickenhawk, someone who advocates war without ever having fought in one. Silly, adolescent and puerile as that definition and argument, are. And that, I should add, was the point that Defense Guy was making when he made that comment.

    Now how about you provide your link or admit you’re wrong?
    I understand you will just ignore, bluster and insult, but just once perhaps you could back up your statement or admit you’re wrong.

  60. 60.

    Ancient Purple

    October 13, 2005 at 11:52 am

    But what we got in the Katrina aftermath was not criticism- it was hysteria, part media-fueled, aided and abetted by fierce partisan motives, all provided without any whiff of perspective but with measured doses of suggested racism.

    And the chief “fierce partisan motive” would be this gem:

    A senior administration official said that Gov. Blanco had never declared a State of Emergency for Louisiana.

  61. 61.

    Shygetz

    October 13, 2005 at 12:15 pm

    Of course Ben Franklin was a chickenhawk.
    He was a very strong advocate for the Revolution and never fought in a war.
    That’s the definition of a chickenhawk, someone who advocates war without ever having fought in one. Silly, adolescent and puerile as that definition and argument, are. And that, I should add, was the point that Defense Guy was making when he made that comment.

    Of course, he was 70 years old when the Declaration of Independence was signed. In addition, as a signatory of the Declaration of Independence and an official in the rebellious government, he did stand to be hanged if the Revolution was lost. As such, he literally staked his life on the war. Maybe considering him a chickenhawk is a bit silly.

  62. 62.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 12:19 pm

    Veeshir blusters:

    Of course Ben Franklin was a chickenhawk.

    Source please.

    He was a very strong advocate for the Revolution and never fought in a war. That’s the definition of a chickenhawk, someone who advocates war without ever having fought in one.

    Actually, that is merely the silly, adolescent and incomplete definition of a chickenhawk. The appropriate definition (and the one that seems to be so offensive to Defense Guy) is as follows:

    Chickenhawk is an epithet used in United States politics to criticize a politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who votes for war, supports war, commands a war, or develops war policy, but has not personally served in the military, especially one who opted out of a previous war on dubious grounds. Generally, it is not a label applied to essentially “dovish” leaders who support defensive wars, “humanitarian interventions,” or UN operations.

    Wikipedia

    I believe the reason there are several caveats in that definiton is because they are pertinent to the usage of term, and are not superfluous because you or anyone else deems them so.

    And that, I should add, was the point that Defense Guy was making when he made that comment.

    It is heartwarming to see that Defense Guy has inspired you to comment on his behalf. Perhaps he will send you a Valentine next year.

    Now how about you provide your link or admit you’re wrong?

    So be it. I believe the accepted definition I provided above indicates that I am not wrong. Franklin doesn’t fit the definition in its full scope, and the context in which the term was used to be applied to Franklin made it even more inappropriate. I also submit that the following statement attributed to Franklin (along with the fact that he was a Quaker) makes the insinuation that he was any kind of hawk even more ludicrous:

    All wars are follies, very expensive and very mischievous ones.

  63. 63.

    TarHeelCP

    October 13, 2005 at 12:21 pm

    Using John’s argument, I’ll construct a parallel situation and apply John’s logic to place responsibility. Please do keep in mind that this is a hypothetical.

    I’m a middle school algebra teacher. I know the material that my students mustlearn to take the end of grade testing near the end of the school year. My students, however, want have no interest in learning that material. They tell me that it is too dificult and instead complain, beg, demand that I teach them geometry instead. Wanting to keep the students engaged I teach them some geometry and some algebra. The students perform miserably on the end of grades because we didn’t cover all the material that we needed to.

    According to John’s rationale, the students are at fault because of the demands they made. I suppose you could make a case that they should have listened to me, as the teacher, but they didn’t. It’s that “you want, you got it!” mentality.

    I, however, as the teacher had more information than they did. I was responsible for teaching them the appropriate material. I knew what the right decision was, but I gave in to their demands. I really don’t think the parents, principal, or school board would even hesitate to fire my ass when I give them the lame excuse, “But the kids didn’t want to learn algebra.” The quick response would be, “You’re a teacher, damn it, you have to make them learn what they need to learn!”

    Politicians caving to public critiscism, even though they know better, happens quite regularly. Most of the time, the politicians have more information than the public and are more equipped to make the better decision.

    Presidents are supposed to be leaders. Leaders sometimes have to make unpopular decisions based on the information at hand. Leaders should never make popular decisions, despite the information at hand.

    I get the sense that John believes, at least in this one instance, we should shut up and let the proffesionals handle this. That’s fair, but he should have said that instead of using charged statements like, “But to those of you who made this a capital case, exaggerated every breeze of a rumor into a gale force wind, and tried to pin everything on Bush and the White House- you won.” John managed to anger just about everyone who thought that the federal governments resonse to Katrina was inept.

    John, if you want to set-up straw men and then knock them down, you’d better be prepared for the shit-storm when large numbers of folks agree with those straw men.

  64. 64.

    John Cole

    October 13, 2005 at 12:27 pm

    TarHeelCP and everyone else:

    I will say this slowly and in all caps-

    “I THINK BUSH IS TO BLAME FOR THE SUBSEQUENT DECISIONS.”

    But if you want to pretend that the absurd, hysterical, and partisan bullshit had nothing to do with why they are reacting the way they are, you are on your own.

    Those of you who were screaming and yelling and making shit up are getting exactly what you wanted- they are going to spend hundreds of billions of dollars (much of which will be done carelessly and needlessly), they are going to federalize all sorts of disaster response crp, neuter state and local authority (actually leaving you more defenseless and at the whim and mercy of the federal government), and so on.

    Bush is to blame for the ultimate bad decisions. The idiotic critics who spread the bullshit are not just innocent bystanders, however.

  65. 65.

    Veeshir

    October 13, 2005 at 12:31 pm

    No John S., you were supposed to prove that it was the GOP Congress’ fault that Clinton didn’t do something about Rwanda. Nice ignoring, not so good at bluster and insult.

    As for this:
    votes for war, supports war, commands a war, or develops war policy, but has not personally served in the military,

    He avoided service in the French and Indian war and he never served in the military yet was a strong advocate for the Revolution. As for his odds of being killed if they lost, he was in France for quite a lot of time so he had nothing to worry about. And if all else failed, his Loyalist son could have helped him out. In other words, chickenhawk.

  66. 66.

    TarHeelCP

    October 13, 2005 at 12:33 pm

    John,

    Bush is to blame for the ultimate bad decisions. The idiotic critics who spread the bullshit are not just innocent bystanders, however.

    This statement I can agree with.

    Those of you who were screaming and yelling and making shit up are getting exactly what you wanted- they are going to spend hundreds of billions of dollars (much of which will be done carelessly and needlessly), they are going to federalize all sorts of disaster response crp, neuter state and local authority (actually leaving you more defenseless and at the whim and mercy of the federal government), and so on.

    I know of only a few select wingnuts, however, that this would apply to. You seem to want to apply it to anyone whoe criticized the response. At least thats the way that I perceived it. And I think I can safely say that many others did as well.

  67. 67.

    Lines

    October 13, 2005 at 12:38 pm

    Wait, so kicking the Bush administration in the ass for appointing a kiss-ass crony with no experience, for being WRONG about levee spending, and being only partly wrong for the gang-violence (as was reported on Faux News) and raping and such, LIBERALS are still at fault for his excessive reactions?

    Ummmm, okay, yeah, I can see where you are coming from, but I still think its a dumb ass conclusion.

  68. 68.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 12:39 pm

    Veeshir

    Generally, it is not a label applied to essentially “dovish” leaders who support defensive wars, “humanitarian interventions,” or UN operations.

    This is the part that John S can’t get over. I gave him sources for both Madison and Jefferson, and we got hung up on his idea that they wouldn’t count because he classifies them as dovish, apparently. He did, to his ‘credit’ provide 1 quote each that were against war. I might have been willing to continue the excercise if he was reasonable. Now he will whine because I stopped 1 short of the list I gave.

    You notice he still didn’t provide a quote or source for the Republican Congress assertion.

  69. 69.

    slide

    October 13, 2005 at 12:41 pm

    Cole just doesn’t get it does he? He says this:

    Those of you who were screaming and yelling and making shit up are getting exactly what you wanted- they are going to spend hundreds of billions of dollars (much of which will be done carelessly and needlessly), they are going to federalize all sorts of disaster response crp, neuter state and local authority (actually leaving you more defenseless and at the whim and mercy of the federal government),

    This is what we wanted? Is this what “our side” was screaming about? I though we were screaming about competency? About getting food and water to people dying on live TV? I thought I was about a lot of things but I never thought it was about carelessly and needlessly spending billions of dollars. Thats something that the administration can do quite well without any help from me.

    You know who has been the most critical of FEMA? Joe Scarborough. Do you ever watch his show John? Almost on a nightly basis he shows us the utter incompetence of FEMA and not only in Louisiana but in Mississippi as well. And not only in the days after Katrina hit, but today. Hysteria? Partisan attacks? If that is what you want to believe John fine. Drink up. Have another glass of Kool-aid.

  70. 70.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 12:44 pm

    Wait, so kicking the Bush administration in the ass for appointing a kiss-ass crony with no experience,

    You mean the one who did just fine during the 5 hurricanes that nailed Florida last year? Yeah, no experience whatsoever.

    for being WRONG about levee spending,

    The federal government under Bush spent MORE on levees in New Orleans than it did under the last administration.

    and being only partly wrong for the gang-violence (as was reported on Faux News) and raping and such, LIBERALS are still at fault for his excessive reactions?

    This is the fault of the press, you are only partly responsible if you repeated it. You are completely at fault if you continue to claim it knowing its bs now. Ultimately the blame rests with the press for not doing their jobs.

  71. 71.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 12:44 pm

    Veeshir squawks:

    No John S., you were supposed to prove that it was the GOP Congress’ fault that Clinton didn’t do something about Rwanda. Nice ignoring, not so good at bluster and insult.

    Learn how to read. I never purported that Rwanda was the GOP Congress’s fault. I did indicate that if Defense Guy could show me that he is not dishonest and completely full of shit that I would offer my opinion on the matter, but he has not yet done so, and therefore neither have I. Excellent ignoring on your part, though. I’ll leave the blustering to you.

    As for this:
    votes for war, supports war, commands a war, or develops war policy, but has not personally served in the military,

    You completely ignored this:

    Generally, it is not a label applied to essentially “dovish” leaders who support defensive wars

    Unless you want to contend that declaring independence from England and protecting the colonies was deemed as anything other than defensive, you are conveniently missing the point. As for Franklin avoiding service in the French and Indian war, perhaps you could provide us with a source that indicates his draft dodging ways.

    Or you can just continue to do what you seem to have a penchant for: ignoring the relevant details in order to make your point.

  72. 72.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 12:46 pm

    Defense Guy bullshits:

    You notice he still didn’t provide a quote or source for the Republican Congress assertion.

    I never asserted it, so why would I provide a source?

    I do notice that you have continued to fail to provide any source or evidence that indicates that Benjamin Franklin was a chickenhawk, whic was the original point I made to prove how disingenuous you are.

  73. 73.

    Lines

    October 13, 2005 at 12:49 pm

    DG, I’m saying that critics were WRONG about those things. Drownie is another matter. His latest game of “I retired because everyone else is a screw up” is laughable and insane. His bluster that “webpages printed lies and slander” caused him to react slowly is another line of bullshit.

    The critics were wrong about a few things, but none of what they got wrong got people killed.

    However, blaming the Bush Administration’s over-reaction a month after all of the critisism is just a logical leap that I’m not willing to make.

  74. 74.

    slide

    October 13, 2005 at 12:52 pm

    Defense guy laughingly says about Brownie’s FEMA:

    You mean the one who did just fine during the 5 hurricanes that nailed Florida last year? Yeah, no experience whatsoever.

    The only one’s that got nailed were the taxpayers:

    An article on the report of FEMA mismanagement, outlining the findings of an investigation by the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, was published Sunday in the Sacramento Bee (and many other major newspapers across the country).
    The paper initially investigated FEMA after the series of hurricanes hit Florida last year. After finding extreme examples of not only mismanagement but outright fraud and political cronyism in the FEMA program in Florida, the newspaper conducted a broader, investigation into FEMA’s response in 20 natural disasters nationwide.
    And the results are shocking. Here are several examples:

    $168.5 million given to Detroit residents for a 2003 rainstorm that the then-mayor doesn’t even remember.

    $21.6 million in clothing losses alone given to Cleveland residents for a 2003 storm that brought only less than an inch and a half of rain. City officials found only 72 homes with minor damage, yet the federal government gave 28,500 Cleveland residents a total of $41.4 million.

    .

  75. 75.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 12:53 pm

    John S.

    It is clear you are dishonest. You cling to 1 example and ignore your whining about the 2 that I researched and gave you. Continue to whine about how unfair it all is. I could give it to you but won’t because you are simply an asshole. I should know better than to even respond to you, as you continue along the same vein with every person you ‘communicate’ with.

    So with a hearty fuck off, I bid you go soak your head.

  76. 76.

    TarHeelCP

    October 13, 2005 at 12:55 pm

    You mean the one who did just fine during the 5 hurricanes that nailed Florida last year? Yeah, no experience whatsoever.

    Qoutes from this article shed light on that statement.

    For starters, the agency distributed $30 million to residents of Miami-Dade County despite the fact that it was not part of the disaster area.

    In an earlier review, Skinner found FEMA paid for funerals for deaths that were not attributable to the hurricanes.

    The Florida delegation had Brown appear before them after the disasters, says a Republican staffer. “These were the most heated exchanges I’d ever seen. It was an extremely bipartisan effort,” says the aide, who would not be named discussing private congressional matters. “It was amazing to watch. There’s not a lot of love [for Brown] from Florida members.”

    The librul media just failed to highlight FEMAs failures after the Florida hurricanes in ’04.

  77. 77.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 1:00 pm

    slide & TarHeelCP

    Interesting. I was unaware of that. I am curious why the major publications didn’t have a say.

    I am however not surprised at mismanagment by the federal government. I have come to expect it as the norm.

  78. 78.

    JoeTx

    October 13, 2005 at 1:01 pm

    We still have “FEMA Cities” in Florida from LAST years hurricanes, so why the expectations to move any quicker in LA.

    The response by FEMA was poor and inept, there is absolutely no other way to put it. You can blame the extreme reporting by the press and the negative posts in blogs all you want, but in the end, it just shows that current republicans just plan flat out do not know how to run a government. Budget cuts, diversion of NG troops and equipment and or tax dollars to Iraq, and the gutting of government institutions that have replaced experienced personnel with cronies that bid the highest in republican campaigns has taken its toll and people are FED up with it. Every week a new poll comes out and every week that same phrase is spoken, “lowest poll numbers ever recorded”.

    Worst President and administration ever!

  79. 79.

    KC

    October 13, 2005 at 1:01 pm

    The president a tough guy I thought. I mean, he flew into stadiums with the Top Gun anthem blaring during the election, right? Tough guys don’t bow to a little public criticism, do they? They keep their heads on straight and stay focused, at least that what I thought. Moreover, public criticism just doesn’t excuse incompetent decision making going forward, does it? Wouldn’t one think it would actually improve one’s abilities to make the right decisions?

  80. 80.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 1:08 pm

    Defense Guy:

    Thanks for reaffirming why I find you demanding sources and evidence from anyone so laughable.

    Enjoy spinning your wild theories – I’ll know better than to take anything that you have to say with more than a grain of salt.

    Oh, and try not to meltdown next time someone calls you out for being entirely full of shit. It isn’t very becoming of someone who tries to posture themselves as a voice of reason.

  81. 81.

    slide

    October 13, 2005 at 1:11 pm

    oh… and slightly off topic but back to Bill Bennett and his lecture series on Aborting Blacks to reduce crime, here is something interesting:

    A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds that just 2 percent of African-Americans approve of his leadership. NBC’s Tim Russert — who called the number “a dramatic setback” — looked into it, and he could not “find a pollster who can remember any President ever getting just 2 percent approval from African-Americans.”

    Thank you Bill, got anything to say about Hispanics?

  82. 82.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 1:14 pm

    Except I was right John S and you still happen to be one who would rather win an argument even when it means changing the rules midstream, or outright lying. Have fun with that.

    When I am wrong, I admit it, as I did with slide and TarHeelCP just a few comments ago.

  83. 83.

    jg

    October 13, 2005 at 1:19 pm

    You’ve completely lost your mind here cole. The left is responsible for how fucked up the recovery has been. The left criticised Bush into making stupid decisions. I wouldn’t even expect Darrell or DougJ doing his parody thing to come up with a theory so fucked up.

  84. 84.

    Steve S

    October 13, 2005 at 1:21 pm

    Wow. Talk about over the top hysteria. It’s not the media’s fault that Bush is inept. Why must you always try to lay blame on someone else?

  85. 85.

    jg

    October 13, 2005 at 1:24 pm

    I am however not surprised at mismanagment by the federal government. I have come to expect it as the norm.

    Its the norm now, it wasn’t for a recent 8 year period.

    The strategy: make the federal gov’t so completely inadequate (and broke) that the poplulace will be in favor of reducing it down to nearly nothing.

    Keep expecting nothing from gov’t. Its what they want you to do.

  86. 86.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 1:25 pm

    You are not right simply because you say so. I’m not sure how you conclude that utilizing accepted definitions constitutes ‘changing the rules’ or ‘outright lying’.

    I would deem that ‘changing the rules’ more applies to claiming that offering evidence that Jefferson and Madison were chickenhawks as proof that Franklin was. Then again, I would also consider ‘outright lying’ as holding me accountable for statements that you know very well I never made (Rwanda cough, cough).

    But I guess it all fits your style if you consider this an admission of being wrong:

    Interesting. I was unaware of that. I am curious why the major publications didn’t have a say.

    Have fun with that.

  87. 87.

    Veeshir

    October 13, 2005 at 1:29 pm

    Unless you want to contend that declaring independence from England and protecting the colonies was deemed as anything other than defensive,
    It was definitely anything other than defensive. It was very offensive. England hadn’t attacked us.
    Franklin lied/people died
    Blood for tea
    Ye Olde Haliburtonne
    Yeeeeaaaaarrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhhh!

    As for draft-dodging, there was no draft but he was never in the military and didn’t fight in the F&E war or indeed, ever. He merely sent children out to die in his bid for immortality and personal power.

    You got me on the Rwanda thing, I thought it was you but it was Nonny Mouse. You did appear to stick up for the point of view but you didn’t say it.

    Note:I’m not saying the Revolution was wrong or unnecessary, but it was definitely not defensive. If we hadn’t gone to war with Britain, they wouldn’t have gone to war with us.

  88. 88.

    db

    October 13, 2005 at 1:30 pm

    John Cole-

    I see your point. I do not agree with it but I do see where you are coming from.

    If I take what you are saying to be true, for sake of argument, would you also entertain the possibility that the reason that Bush/White House has done what they have done is because they do not have enough support within their own camp?

    I mean who really cares what those lefty-whacko-pinko-commies think anyway as long as one has support from the base?

    In my opinion, I see that your logic (Bush reacting to the left) could apply equally in the opposite direction (Bush reacting to the lack of support he has on the right, generally). Perhaps, that is what happened here?

  89. 89.

    slide

    October 13, 2005 at 1:31 pm

    jg said:

    The strategy: make the federal gov’t so completely inadequate (and broke) that the poplulace will be in favor of reducing it down to nearly nothing.

    yep. Grover Norquist, also known as the Field Marshall of the Bush Plan, described their strategy on reducing government in these eloquent terms:

    “to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.”

    hmmm…. well, he got the drowning part right, unfortunatly it was the citizens of NO.

  90. 90.

    Kimmitt

    October 13, 2005 at 1:42 pm

    I agree with John — our President is so stupid and easily cowed that even though he controls both Houses of Congress, any foolish action on his part is exclusively due to his elbow being jogged by the powerless minority Party and their adherents.

  91. 91.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 1:58 pm

    Veeshir sez:

    It was definitely anything other than defensive. It was very offensive. England hadn’t attacked us.

    I doubt that the colonists (or History) would agree with you. A prefunctory look at the timeline of events shows that:

    March 5, 1770 – The Boston Massacre occurs as a mob harasses British soldiers who then fire their muskets pointblank into the crowd, killing three instantly, mortally wounding two others and injuring six.

    1775 – February 1, in Cambridge, Mass., a provincial congress is held during which John Hancock and Joseph Warren begin defensive preparations for a state of war.

    1775 – In April, Massachusetts Governor Gage is ordered to enforce the Coercive Acts and suppress “open rebellion” among the colonists by all necessary force.

    The rest is, well, history.

    Apparently, you are of the frame of mind that a colony declaring independence and defending itself from an imperial force is an offensive act of war.

    You got me on the Rwanda thing, I thought it was you but it was Nonny Mouse. You did appear to stick up for the point of view but you didn’t say it.

    If I didn’t say I supported the point of view, how did I appear to stick up for it? Are you a mind reader?

  92. 92.

    Krista

    October 13, 2005 at 1:59 pm

    All right John. I’ll grant you the point that the heightened emotion and accusations following Katrina would have influenced Bush’s decision-making.

    But, that brings me back to my earlier point: why does he not have the stones to revise that deadline, now that people are able to look at the situation with cooler heads?

  93. 93.

    Shygetz

    October 13, 2005 at 2:04 pm

    He avoided service in the French and Indian war

    Franklin was forty-eight years old when that war started. Nice try, but the chickenhawk label doesn’t apply.

    It was definitely anything other than defensive. It was very offensive. England hadn’t attacked us.

    We didn’t invade England. We declared our independence. If England didn’t attack us, there would have been no war. The Declaration of Independence was not a declaration of war; it was a declaration that the colonies no longer recognized the crown as the political authority (and the reasons why).

  94. 94.

    Elinor Dickey

    October 13, 2005 at 2:13 pm

    any foolish action on his part is exclusively due to his elbow being jogged by the powerless minority Party and their adherents.

    I think it is true that the left wing media, not only the left-leaning mainstream media but the increasingly influential far left media (Air American, Daily Kos, etc.) have been very good at this sort of thing, even if there the Democrats in Congress are weak. I heard that both Luttig and McConnell withdrew in part because of reports that the left-wing media was ready to run some very negative stories about their personal lives. I like Miers as a choice, but let’s not pretend that other qualified justices were disqualified in effect by the threat of a left-wing smear campaign against them.

  95. 95.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 2:22 pm

    John S.

    I never offered proof on Franklin. As I said I stopped after Madison and Jefferson due to your insistance that they were otherwise dovish and this disqualified them. You are entitled to live in whatever fantasy world you wish. I hope they at least give you good drugs for the voices.

  96. 96.

    Shygetz

    October 13, 2005 at 2:23 pm

    I heard that both Luttig and McConnell withdrew in part because of reports that the left-wing media was ready to run some very negative stories about their personal lives.

    I heard that the tooth fairy will leave me a dollar if I put my tooth under my pillow and wish real hard.

    Source: Wikipedia

    Wow, I just made a more substantial argument for the tooth fairy than you did for your crap.

  97. 97.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 2:38 pm

    Defense Guy-

    Like I said, you demanding sources from others is highly amusing. When I said as much:

    That’s rich coming from someone who claimed that Benjamin Franklin was a chickenhawk without offering a shred of evidence.

    You claimed in response:

    I gave you evidence, and you gaven me one liners and definition changes.

    But now you admit:

    I never offered proof on Franklin.

    I know connecting the dots is difficult for you, and that you will fail to grasp how my original statement has only been further underscored by your antics, but of course you are entitled to live in whatever fantasy world you wish.

  98. 98.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 2:43 pm

    John S.

    Fine, you win. You are the font of all knowledge and can do no wrong. Clearly my proofs for Madison and Jefferson indicate I do not know what I am talking about.

  99. 99.

    Slartibartfast

    October 13, 2005 at 2:55 pm

    The response by FEMA was poor and inept

    Agreed. The response by FEMA has always been poor and inept. There are reasons why FEMA’s not a first responder (or even a second responder, if there was such a thing), not least among which is they’re not designed to be. I’m a little surprised, though, that no one mentioned the funerals paid for by FEMA: if you died around the time when a hurricane hit, your surviving relatives stood a strong chance of getting FEMA to foot the bill for the funeral, regardless of cause of death. The fact that anyone at all expected FEMA to swoop in and save the collective asses of the Gulf Coast is baffling from several different viewpoints, not least of which is things of that nature are simply not within FEMA’s charter. In Florida the evacuation and cleanup went smoothly precisely because FEMA was involved only to the extent that they wrote a lot of checks.

    That out of the way, the FEMA cities in Florida are still there for a reason: they’re still needed. People still live in the housing FEMA set up because they’ve got nowhere else to go.

    Dunno what all this about Ben Franklin is about; Ben was a colonel in the militia. Either y’all are engaging in some abstract argument whose meaning is far removed from what you’re actually putting in comments, or you’re failing to do even the most basic research.

  100. 100.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 3:00 pm

    Defense Guy laments:

    You are the font of all knowledge and can do no wrong.

    I never said any such thing, but since we have established that you are a disingenuous poster, I’ll just chalk it up to another one of your baseless and over-the-top comments.

    All your hyperbole aside, my point stands: you demanding sources and accountability from other posters is just damn funny.

  101. 101.

    KC

    October 13, 2005 at 3:06 pm

    Bush doesn’t do polls, right?

  102. 102.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 3:07 pm

    Slartibartfast says:

    Dunno what all this about Ben Franklin is about; Ben was a colonel in the militia.

    Thanks for hammering the final nail into Defense Guy’s ‘Ben Franklin was a chickenhawk’ meme. My argument was certainly of the abstract nature, and I had entirely overlooked the fact that he had served in the militia. I believe someone pointed this out about Lincoln, whom Defense Guy also erroneously claimed was a chickenhawk.

    Anyway, thanks for the point of historical fact.

  103. 103.

    Elinor Dickey

    October 13, 2005 at 3:09 pm

    Ben was a colonel in the militia.

    That was the equivalent of the National Guard, right? Seems to me there’s at least one person who served in the National Guard the liberals label a chickenhawk.

  104. 104.

    Kimmitt

    October 13, 2005 at 3:10 pm

    I think it is true that the left wing media, not only the left-leaning mainstream media but the increasingly influential far left media (Air American, Daily Kos, etc.) have been very good at this sort of thing, even if there the Democrats in Congress are weak. I heard that both Luttig and McConnell withdrew in part because of reports that the left-wing media was ready to run some very negative stories about their personal lives. I like Miers as a choice, but let’s not pretend that other qualified justices were disqualified in effect by the threat of a left-wing smear campaign against them.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you: The Eternal Conservative Victimhood Complex.

  105. 105.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 3:14 pm

    All your hyperbole aside, my point stands: you demanding sources and accountability from other posters is just damn funny.

    It wasn’t a demand, it was a request. You are still a crybaby prick who will focus on one small detail and ignore the other larger ones. I do lament, for your ability to be a reasonable human being.

  106. 106.

    Slartibartfast

    October 13, 2005 at 3:24 pm

    That was the equivalent of the National Guard, right? Seems to me there’s at least one person who served in the National Guard the liberals label a chickenhawk.

    Not being a big advocate of the chickenhawk “argument” to begin with, I’m quite reluctant to see it used in either direction. Where the reality contradicts the premise, then, I like to point that out. In the case of Bush, it’s been pointed out by so many people that I don’t even bother anymore.

  107. 107.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 3:38 pm

    Defense Guy-

    The strength of your arguments are inversely proportional to the fevered pitch of your namecalling. Actually, I think that corrolation would apply to anyone, but you have provided us with such an excellent example of it that I feel it only fair to give you some credit.

    Keep up the good work.

  108. 108.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 3:51 pm

    John S.

    I would, but it gets old real fast. I’ll just ignore your little snarky comments from out of left field from now on. You keep at it though, as you are no good at supplying facts to support your arguments. It’s good to have some skills I guess.

  109. 109.

    Darrell

    October 13, 2005 at 4:39 pm

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you: The Eternal Conservative Victimhood Complex.

    Kimmitt, ‘Elenor Dickey’ is DougJ doing his thing. Regarding eternal victimhood, Dems are still screaming about Republicans stealing the 2000 election while making comparisons of Iraq to Vietnam

  110. 110.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 4:42 pm

    Defense Guy-

    If only there were a term to encapsulate someone that falsely accuses others of the very behavior that they themselves are guilty of (being snarky, lying, not supporting their claims with facts, etc).

    Oh yeah, it’s called projection.

  111. 111.

    Defense Guy

    October 13, 2005 at 5:13 pm

    You should know. You should look up tunnel vision too, you have a good case of it.

  112. 112.

    Veeshir

    October 13, 2005 at 5:41 pm

    Apparently, you are of the frame of mind that a colony declaring independence and defending itself from an imperial force is an offensive act of war.

    Yes, that’s a fair statement. I would say that if you lose it’s a rebellion and it’s offensive. Since we won it’s a Revolution, but it was still offensive. They didn’t subjugate us to gain control of our country. In 1760 if you had asked any of the Founding Fathers their nationality they would have said, “Englishman”. Many of them probably would have said the same thing in 1775. They thought of themselves as Englishmen and were most certainly in rebellion. Something I’m sure Ben Franklin, that noted chickenhawk, pointed out most pointedly.

  113. 113.

    John S.

    October 13, 2005 at 6:15 pm

    Defense Guy snarls:

    You should look up tunnel vision too, you have a good case of it.

    Is that like when you refuse to admit that you are wrong about Benjamin Franklin being a chickenhawk even though it has been pointed out that he served in the militia as a colonel?

  114. 114.

    DougJ

    October 13, 2005 at 6:29 pm

    he served in the militia as a colonel?

    A *colonel*! Come on, everyone knows that’s the biggest chickenhawk position there is.

  115. 115.

    Rome Again

    October 13, 2005 at 6:35 pm

    That’s right John, shoot the messenger. Don’t point the gun at the person actually pulling out the checkbook.

    By the way, (just a question I have for anyone who can supply an answer) before Bush starts putting people up in Hotels, are the Carnival Cruise Ships (which the US is already obligatd to pay for) full yet?

    John, sometimes I think you’re vastly intelligent, but on this point I think you’re about as smart as an amoeba.

  116. 116.

    Rome Again

    October 13, 2005 at 6:50 pm

    After years of supposed planning and preparation, the first opportunity to demonstrate their prowess they decide to go no-huddle. They send the wrong guys out on the field, immediately drop the ball, proceed to kick it around, finally pick it up and then run into the wrong fucking end zone and then you want to blame the people in the stands who were shouting, “NO!!”?

    No shit! Awesome analogy Mr. Furious, coming from a non-sports fan.

  117. 117.

    Rome Again

    October 13, 2005 at 7:21 pm

    In Florida the evacuation and cleanup went smoothly precisely because FEMA was involved only to the extent that they wrote a lot of checks.

    Slarti, I can attest to that. I worked for the clean-up effort for Hurricanes Charley, Frances and Jeanne (administrative, through an FDOT contract, working with an engineering firm that hired the work crews (I did the hiring, weekly payroll of those workers, and data input of debris removal quantities and prices that we charged to FEMA). There were a LOT of consultations going on in the office all the time, and I never once saw one single FEMA worker in any of those meetings, but I saw a LOT of FDOT people.

  118. 118.

    Darrell

    October 13, 2005 at 7:55 pm

    No shit! Awesome analogy Mr. Furious, coming from a non-sports fan.

    Yes, Furious’ comments were so brilliantly insightful. What in the hell was he even talking about

  119. 119.

    Rome Again

    October 13, 2005 at 7:58 pm

    Yes, Furious’ comments were so brilliantly insightful. What in the hell was he even talking about

    If you fail to even understand what he said, I pity you Darrell. Turn off the snooze button, it’s time to wake up.

  120. 120.

    Darrell

    October 13, 2005 at 8:09 pm

    If you fail to even understand what he said, I pity you Darrell. Turn off the snooze button, it’s time to wake up.

    Let’s recap the ‘awesome’ post:

    After years of supposed planning and preparation, the first opportunity to demonstrate their prowess

    After years of planning and preparation, their “first” opportunity? Huh? FEMA (led by Brown) dealt with what, 4 hurricanes in FL alone in 2004.. Tell us Rome how such nonsensical comments deserve your praise. Do you see what a half-wit you are?

  121. 121.

    Andrei

    October 13, 2005 at 8:15 pm

    If you still, to this day, can not recognize that the ‘criticism’ was over the top, counter-productive, and, in many cases, unfounded, you are a wingnut.

    Wait… when did Cole start self-mutilation? Oh that’s right… his over the top rants are never unfounded. I guess two out of three or something like that.

  122. 122.

    goonie bird

    October 13, 2005 at 9:38 pm

    How many people are dead becuase EARTH JUSTICE and the SIERRA CLUB wanted to save the invisible levee guppy so much they did,nt care dont you think we should indite the eco-freaks?

  123. 123.

    DougJ

    October 13, 2005 at 11:39 pm

    Darrell, have you ever thought about becoming the White House press secretary? You’d do a much better job that Scott McClellan. I’m not kidding: you do a good job of providing the Rove — or should I make that Card? — party lie.

  124. 124.

    DougJ

    October 13, 2005 at 11:39 pm

    Goonie bird, you, however, have a long way to do.

  125. 125.

    Beej

    October 14, 2005 at 12:52 am

    And here lil ole me thought all along that in a representative democracy elected officials are SUPPOSED TO BE INFLUENCED BY THE VOICES OF THE PEOPLE! Of course it’s much more convenient and comfortable to just let the masses (bless their ignorant little hearts) off the hook so they can say any stupid damn thing they want and then, when it turns out they were wrong, blame the people they elected for being stupid and weak enough to listen to the people in the first place.

    Was Bush’s decision stupid? Yes. Should he have listed to the cries and criticism of the people of this country. Yes, he’s supposed to do that. Of course slide is right that in this case he shouldn’t have done it, but please, please, please don’t go down the path which says that the voters and the media have no responsibility to make their criticism reasoned and knowledgable! That sort of apologia is one of the reasons that Bush is in the White House in the first place.

  126. 126.

    Dexter

    October 14, 2005 at 8:51 am

    After years of planning and preparation, their “first” opportunity? Huh? FEMA (led by Brown) dealt with what, 4 hurricanes in FL alone in 2004..

    FEMA’s efforts were succesful in all of these cases. It was only whe FEMA had to deal with the complete incompetence of Nagel, and even moreso Blanco, that suddenly Brownie became “an incompetent crony.” Even Saint James Lee Witt would have been able to do much with the Nagel-Blanco mess in Louisiana. But it’s so much fun to make jokes about Arabian horses, isn’ it?

  127. 127.

    John S.

    October 14, 2005 at 9:01 am

    It was only whe FEMA had to deal with the complete incompetence of Nagel, and even moreso Blanco, that suddenly Brownie became “an incompetent crony.”

    Or perhaps when they had to deal with a storm more devastating than all four that hit Florida last year combined. Oh, and of course having a governor who is related to the President doesn’t hurt, either.

    But you go right ahead comparing apples to oranges. Those of us that live in Florida know better.

  128. 128.

    Slartibartfast

    October 14, 2005 at 10:07 am

    But you go right ahead comparing apples to oranges. Those of us that live in Florida know better.

    Yes, those of us who live in Florida do know better. Again, FEMA is not and never has been a first responder. The expectation that FEMA was going to evacuate and rescue was completely without…well, honestly: sense.

    Sure, Katrina was huge. Does that mean that state and local governments ought to have exerted less effort to make sure citizens were safe? Does anything you can think of justify this abdication of responsibility?

    Yes, FEMA sucks. There’s very little that large government is involved in that doesn’t suck to some degree or other, IMO. However, the things that FEMA did poorly, how do they compare with the multitude of very important balls dropped by the state of Louisiana and local governments in the NO area? Again, IMO, FEMA is the least of our worries. What, maybe you think they were not quite quick enough with the checkbook, this time? As if that would somehow have gotten more buses rolling?

  129. 129.

    John S.

    October 14, 2005 at 10:28 am

    Slartibartfast-

    Of course there is a qualitative difference between Florida and Louisiana. We are far more used to hurricanes here, and have had a lot of experience dealing with them in recent years, so the state and local response was infinitely better.

    However, you must also bear in mind that nowhere in Florida is the potential for disaster even remotely as great as New Orleans, with perhaps the exception of the Lake Okeechobee area, and that being so far inland would experience a significantly weakened storm should one pass directly over it.

    Another major consideration is that there is no densely populated area of Florida that has the levels of poverty that New Orleans had. If for instance Miami had a 35%+ poverty rate (Broward is around 10% while Miami-Dade is closer to 20%), that coupled with the sheer lack of public transportation down there would probably result in an even greater disaster, but thankfully the circumstances are very different.

    Like I said – apples and oranges.

  130. 130.

    Slartibartfast

    October 14, 2005 at 10:38 am

    However, you must also bear in mind that nowhere in Florida is the potential for disaster even remotely as great as New Orleans

    Well, yes, that’s obvious.

    with perhaps the exception of the Lake Okeechobee area

    Much smaller population density, and no storm surge from the Gulf to deal with. And, as you noted, inland.

    Like I said – apples and oranges.

    I completely agree. Which is one reason why the arguments to the effect that Florida got it better because it was an election year and all completely baffle me: Florida and New Orleans have very little in common. And the FEMA critiques…some of them are apt, but much of them fall away when you think of FEMA as it actually is: the last responder.

    Another thing that separates the various Florida landfall sites from New Orleans is that Florida did a much better mobilizing at the state level. I’d guess that Jeb would have served much better as director of the pre- and post-disaster scene than Governor Blanco did.

  131. 131.

    John S.

    October 14, 2005 at 10:44 am

    I’d guess that Jeb would have served much better as director of the pre- and post-disaster scene than Governor Blanco did.

    Quite honestly, I would tend to agree.

  132. 132.

    Defense Guy

    October 14, 2005 at 10:56 am

    Is that like when you refuse to admit that you are wrong about Benjamin Franklin being a chickenhawk even though it has been pointed out that he served in the militia as a colonel?

    Considering that Lincoln was on my original list, and I conceded that one for the same reason, I’m not sure where you get that from. Had you conceded Madison and Jefferson, we would have moved on to the last one on the list, Franklin. In the end we both would have been batting .500.

  133. 133.

    John S.

    October 14, 2005 at 11:10 am

    Considering that Lincoln was on my original list, and I conceded that one for the same reason, I’m not sure where you get that from.

    Considering if you scour this entire thread you will not find anywhere where you said “I was wrong about Franklin”, I’m not sure where the confusion comes from.

    But, I’ll take the post as your usual bold milquetoast admission of being wrong and leave it at that.

  134. 134.

    Lines

    October 14, 2005 at 11:12 am

    With a constant threat of terrorist attacks, many that would be aimed at crippling whole regions, don’t we deserve a functional FEMA? Wouldn’t the FEMA that we were promised after 9/11 have been better prepared than it was?

    Perception vs. reality. I actually believed we might be able to respond to massive destruction and loss of life. Silly me.

  135. 135.

    Dexter

    October 14, 2005 at 11:27 am

    There’s very little that large government is involved in that doesn’t suck to some degree or other,

    That’s what’s ironic about this whole thing. The liberals think it hurts GWB but the reality is that it shows what mess all their big government favorite programs are.

  136. 136.

    Slartibartfast

    October 14, 2005 at 11:40 am

    don’t we deserve a functional FEMA?

    No, we deserve a functional DHS. Hell, right now I’d settle for a DHS whose very NAME doesn’t suck. Given that “management” is practically FEMA’s middle name, I’m still confused as to why people practically demanded that FEMA send in the FEMA team of management paratroopers.

  137. 137.

    Slartibartfast

    October 14, 2005 at 11:44 am

    Oh, and although I am of the mindset that big government is possessed of the inverse Midas touch in practically any endeavor it embarks upon, that doesn’t mean that I think big government shouldn’t do anything. In this case, though, there’s nothing that big government could have done that state and local government couldn’t have done better, faster, and smarter.

    Or, you could imagine FEMA reaching into its vast shadow-government parking garage full of buses and teleporting them to southern Louisiana, and then bending its mind-control rays on the unevacuated to get them loaded up. There may be some other choices, but I haven’t seen any that make sense.

  138. 138.

    Dexter

    October 14, 2005 at 11:47 am

    FEMA should be privatized.

  139. 139.

    Defense Guy

    October 14, 2005 at 12:14 pm

    But, I’ll take the post as your usual bold milquetoast admission of being wrong and leave it at that.

    Coming from someone who has never admitted error, I’ll take what I can get. You still don’t concede on Jefferson and Madison. However, you still got the snark. Good job on being consistent.

  140. 140.

    CaseyL

    October 14, 2005 at 12:28 pm

    FEMA should be privatized.

    That’s the, what, conservative point of view? Or libertarian?

    Libertarians baffle me, they surely do. They think everything should be privatized, and made available to the public on a subscriber pay-in basis.

    That means, I imagine, that all the things now considered the responsibility of the public sector – utilities, education, police/fire fighters, libraries, mass transit, transportation and road construction/maintenance, disaster response and relief, even emergency police and medical response to freeway pileups – would, “ideally,” be taken over by the marketplace. By for-profit enterprises.

    So, in a truly libertarian paradise, citizens – oops, excuse me, I mean consumers – make out checks every month to the various private enterprises who run the utility companies, police and fire departments, private libraries, private mass transit, Medic One companies, and highway managers? Is that how it would work?

    Would monthly membership be available, or would all those privatized companies insist on annual contracts, like most cable and phone companies do now? What if I move to a place where different companies are running all that stuff before the year is out? Am I just out my yearly fee, and also have to enter into another annual contract with the new companies?

    What if I can’t afford certain things – like, say, a subscription to the local Medic One/highway management companies? If I’m in a car accident, and I’m injured badly, does the ambulance crew check to see if I’m on their membership roll before they do anything else? And, if I’m not, do they leave me dying on the road? And who tows my car away? Or does it just get left there for other drivers to crash into?

    What if I figure I don’t want to subscribe to services I don’t use, like anything related to education or child care? What if there are a lot of people like me in my community, outnumbering the people who do want education and child care for their kids? Should they just move someplace where education and child care are funded? What if they have to chose between a place where education is funded but the highways aren’t?

    What if I’m elderly, and I want to subscribe to eldercare services, but not enough other people in my community have done so, so there aren’t any eldercare services because it’s not a profitable enough market? I guess I have to move to another city – where, again, there might be eldercare services, but maybe not much in the way of libraries, or mass transit. Is that just my bad luck?

    Eventually, I’ll be making out a dozen or so checks every month, with no assurance that vital services won’t vanish if the revenues drop below a certain point, no assurance that the companies will actually provide the services they say they will, and the prospect of having to pay an extra hundreds or thousands of dollars in legal fees if I want to challenge the loss of service or the embezzlement of my subscription fees.

    It seems to me that the logical outcome of civilization-by-private-subscription combines the efficiency of the public sector with the equitous distribution of the private sector – that is, the worst of both sectors.

  141. 141.

    John S.

    October 14, 2005 at 12:51 pm

    Defensive Guy-

    You cite me a statement I made in this entire thread that you perceive as wrong, and I’d be more than happy to issue a formal retraction.

    Considering that the original statement that kicked off your wave of hysteria was in regards to Franklin, I’m not sure where Jefferson and Madison come into play. But if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy, you are perfectly within your right to label them chickenhawks without any further disagreement from me.

  142. 142.

    Dexter

    October 14, 2005 at 2:03 pm

    I’m a little lazy here, so explain to me: why would someone call Jefferson and Madison chickenhawks? I’m used to hearing the left bandy that work about, calling Cheney and Wolfowitz chickenhawks (which is ridiculous enough), but now they’re calling our Founding Fathers that. That’s almost Durbinesque.

  143. 143.

    Defense Guy

    October 14, 2005 at 2:09 pm

    Dexter

    That very subject is what brought it on. A historical comparison, if you will.

    John S.

    I’ll do you one better and give up. It’s just not worth it.

  144. 144.

    John S.

    October 14, 2005 at 4:32 pm

    Dexter-

    Defense Guy is the one who called our founding fathers (erroneously in most cases) chickenhawks, and last time I checked he wasn’t on the left. I’m sorry if he doesn’t want to answer your question, but that’s what he does best.

  145. 145.

    John S.

    October 14, 2005 at 4:36 pm

    I’ll do you one better and give up. It’s just not worth it.

    Translation: I got nothing.

  146. 146.

    Kimmitt

    October 14, 2005 at 6:58 pm

    I’m still confused as to why people practically demanded that FEMA send in the FEMA team of management paratroopers.

    I think it was the combination of the “Emergency” part and the belief that we live in a first-world nation and pay quite a bit of taxes, and therefore expect certain things to be seen to.

  147. 147.

    Dexter

    October 14, 2005 at 7:33 pm

    Defense Guy is the one who called our founding fathers (erroneously in most cases) chickenhawks, and last time I checked he wasn’t on the left.

    Okay, that’s a new one on me.

  148. 148.

    Vlad

    October 15, 2005 at 11:44 pm

    Bearing in mind that the whole thing is kind of a stupid topic for discussion, I think the difference between being a National Guardsman during a war on foreign soil and being a local militiaman during a war being fought right down the street is pretty obvious.

  149. 149.

    Dexter

    October 15, 2005 at 11:54 pm

    I think the difference between being a National Guardsman during a war on foreign soil and being a local militiaman during a war being fought right down the street is pretty obvious.

    Tell that to all the National Guardsmen who are in Iraq right now.

  150. 150.

    whatsleft

    October 16, 2005 at 12:57 pm

    Sorry for chiming in late, but Dexter, last time I checked, those Guardsmen did NOT include Bush (who still owes the Guard some time). And, at the time chickenhawk Bush was spending a minimal amount of time in the TANG, that unit was NOT going to war, which was the whole point of BEING in the unit. Get it?

  151. 151.

    Slartibartfast

    October 17, 2005 at 10:34 am

    therefore expect certain things to be seen to.

    Yes, I expect certain things to be seen to, too. Who ought to be seeing to them, too, has a certain level of directed expectation. I’d expect the local police and National Guard to be deployed in something resembling force and order, for instance. I’d expect the state DHS to be doing something other than sitting on their collective thumbs. I’d expect the Governor to have a fucking clue. And I’d expect FEMA to show up a couple of weeks after the fact with checkbook in hand, as usual.

    You figure out where the outrage should be directed, Michael.

  152. 152.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 11:54 am

    After years of planning and preparation, their “first” opportunity? Huh? FEMA (led by Brown) dealt with what, 4 hurricanes in FL alone in 2004.. Tell us Rome how such nonsensical comments deserve your praise. Do you see what a half-wit you are?

    Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you Darrell, I’ve been working.

    If you take a look at my post AFTER the post you are questioning, you’ll see my point. FEMA was basically a check-writing operation. I worked for hurricane relief through a sub-contract of FEMA (contracted through FDOT) last year and I saw what was going on first-hand. FEMA was not directly involved, they contracted FDOT to do the work, they picked up the tab.

    I also have to wonder, why it is that you make it sound as if Mike Brown did such an awesome job on the hurricanes last year when he was proven to have offered millions of dollars in financial aid to persons who were not even affected by hurricanes? I suppose you consider that “good work”? I consider it sloppy mismanagement.

  153. 153.

    Slartibartfast

    October 17, 2005 at 12:39 pm

    I’ve been telling people that very thing, RA: most of the heavy lifting after hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne was done by state and local agencies possibly funded by FEMA, with a whole lot of help from out-of-state power utility companies (also probably funded by FEMA). Coordination of all of this was, as far as I could see, accomplished by the Florida state and local governments.

    My wife is the comptroller for a medium-sized construction company that did a lot of work for FEMA last year. They still haven’t gotten paid for a lot of it. Maybe they should have had some relatives die in places untouched my hurricanes; the check would be in the mail.

  154. 154.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 1:03 pm

    I’ve been telling people that very thing, RA: most of the heavy lifting after hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne was done by state and local agencies possibly funded by FEMA, with a whole lot of help from out-of-state power utility companies (also probably funded by FEMA). Coordination of all of this was, as far as I could see, accomplished by the Florida state and local governments.

    For the part of the effort that I was involved in (debris removal) FDOT was the main contractor, and they were funded by FEMA. I’m not sure about power lines and such, but considering the wide berth of FDOT responsibilities, I would assume they had quite a bit to do with that also; of course, I could be wrong on that part.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Balloon Juice says:
    October 19, 2005 at 10:49 am

    […] Remember last week when I went ballistic over the money being spent to house Katrina evacuees in hotels? I should charge the Red Cross for my blood pressure medicine: […]

Primary Sidebar

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

2023 Pet Calendars

Pet Calendar Preview: A
Pet Calendar Preview: B

*Calendars can not be ordered until Cafe Press gets their calendar paper in.

Recent Comments

  • NotMax on Late Night Open Thread: All Mah Gapes Gone! (Jan 28, 2023 @ 6:15am)
  • bjacques on Late Night Open Thread: All Mah Gapes Gone! (Jan 28, 2023 @ 6:05am)
  • Geminid on War for Ukraine Day 337: International Holocaust Remembrance Day Amidst Another Genocidal War in Europe (Jan 28, 2023 @ 5:59am)
  • Aussie Sheila on Late Night Open Thread: All Mah Gapes Gone! (Jan 28, 2023 @ 5:58am)
  • NotMax on Late Night Open Thread: All Mah Gapes Gone! (Jan 28, 2023 @ 5:54am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Favorite Dogs & Cats
Classified Documents: A Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup

Front-pager Twitter

John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
ActualCitizensUnited

Shop Amazon via this link to support Balloon Juice   

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!