sd'sker Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 It's news because Republicans aren't making it a political issue like the other side did during Katrina. let us be clear, the tragedy of new orleans was man made. there is no doubt about that. the damage was not caused directly by the hurricane, but by every protection failing during the subsequent flooding. there is plenty of blame to go around, but that most certainly was a political issue. the criminal negligence and gross misallocation of funds is most certainly political. Oh...exactly so. Now, this discussion is about the President's involvement after a tragedy. The mis-allocation of funds prior to Katrina was caused by local political corruption. I would absolutely love to know how the Presidential administration at the time of Katrina mis-allocated those funds so that the flooding safety mechanisms didn't work. who is in charge of the corp of engineers? is that federal or local? also, i would like to see your evidence regarding the local political corruption's affect on katrina. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Wow...you really are going to go there? why would he not? Once again, this was a break down of the local and state governments. President Bush was heavily criticized for not sending in the military to help out the survivors or to help evacuation. The fact is, IT IS ILLEGAL for the President to send the military into a state without approval of the local and state government. The administration asked several times during the tragedy if they needed help and only after it was painfully clear that they did, did the Governor ask and approve of federal help. On another flip side of all of this. I find it rather amusing that Obama is being praised for helping with relief efforts. Isn't this pretty much done by people several pay levels below him? Meanwhile, when an American dignitary asks for protection over seas by our military and his government fails to provide it, he washes his hands of it by claiming thats all done several levels below him. That all is kind of odd to me. 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 30, 2012 Author Share Posted October 30, 2012 Meanwhile, when an American dignitary asks for protection over seas by our military and his government fails to provide it, he washes his hands of it by claiming thats all done several levels below him. Obama said that? Where? Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Wow...you really are going to go there? why would he not? Once again, this was a break down of the local and state governments. President Bush was heavily criticized for not sending in the military to help out the survivors or to help evacuation. The fact is, IT IS ILLEGAL for the President to send the military into a state without approval of the local and state government. The administration asked several times during the tragedy if they needed help and only after it was painfully clear that they did, did the Governor ask and approve of federal help. On another flip side of all of this. I find it rather amusing that Obama is being praised for helping with relief efforts. Isn't this pretty much done by people several pay levels below him? Meanwhile, when an American dignitary asks for protection over seas by our military and his government fails to provide it, he washes his hands of it by claiming thats all done several levels below him. That all is kind of odd to me. first, obama has no control over who or why people praise him. second, your memory of katrina confuses me. third, if you honestly believe the federal gov't should receive no blame for the failures of katrina, that explains a lot. fourth, so it was jindal's fault? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Google is our friend. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/HurricaneKatrina/blame-delayed-response-katrina/story?id=1102467#.UJAil2K2ZA4 As for corruption: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/01/national/nationalspecial/01corrupt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Louisiana is well known as the most corrupt state: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-corruption-louisiana_wittmar27,0,2957672.story I did find it funny that this comes from a Chicago paper. Most corrupt state: Louisiana ranked higher than Illinois Wait a minute....who is from Chicago again? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Why would it Jindal's fault? Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Google is our friend. http://abcnews.go.co...67#.UJAil2K2ZA4 As for corruption: http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0 Louisiana is well known as the most corrupt state: http://www.chicagotr...0,2957672.story I did find it funny that this comes from a Chicago paper. Most corrupt state: Louisiana ranked higher than Illinois Wait a minute....who is from Chicago again? i am not talking about the response as much as the failures that allowed the flooding. if it was prevented like it could have been and should have been, this would all be moot. Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Why would it Jindal's fault? because, he was not the governor. should have been. should have seen this coming, get elected, and prevented it. Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 like i said, the corp of enigeeners knew for decades of the weaknesses and did nothing. i am only blaming bush, but this is why we have and need a competent federal gov't. from your article: Nonetheless, some experts argue that the federal government should have been more proactive."If the city and the state are stumbling or in over their head, then it's FEMA's [Federal Emergency Management Agency's] responsibility to show some leadership," said Jerry Hauer, director of public health preparedness at the Department of Health and Human Services. Both the president and Congress have vowed to investigate questions of blame. It may already be safe to conclude that there will be plenty of it to go around. Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 30, 2012 Author Share Posted October 30, 2012 Google is our friend, and so is reading the thread. I've already posted a link to FEMA's culpability in the wake of Katrina. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Why would it Jindal's fault? because, he was not the governor. should have been. should have seen this coming, get elected, and prevented it. Nice save. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 like i said, the corp of enigeeners knew for decades of the weaknesses and did nothing. i am only blaming bush, but this is why we have and need a competent federal gov't. from your article: Nonetheless, some experts argue that the federal government should have been more proactive."If the city and the state are stumbling or in over their head, then it's FEMA's [Federal Emergency Management Agency's] responsibility to show some leadership," said Jerry Hauer, director of public health preparedness at the Department of Health and Human Services. Both the president and Congress have vowed to investigate questions of blame. It may already be safe to conclude that there will be plenty of it to go around. Hmmm...I didn't know Bush was President for decades. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Google is our friend. http://abcnews.go.co...67#.UJAil2K2ZA4 As for corruption: http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0 Louisiana is well known as the most corrupt state: http://www.chicagotr...0,2957672.story I did find it funny that this comes from a Chicago paper. Most corrupt state: Louisiana ranked higher than Illinois Wait a minute....who is from Chicago again? i am not talking about the response as much as the failures that allowed the flooding. if it was prevented like it could have been and should have been, this would all be moot. I'll have to look more later. I remember reading articles about how much money had been sent to New Orleans in the decades before Katrina to maintain existing and build new levees. The money was sent and the work was never done. My brother lives in Baton Rouge. The corruption in that state and specifically in New Orleans government is amazing. Link to comment
krc1995 Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 It's called being a human being. Good God, can't we all see that party affliation doesn't matter when people are in danger? I understand why you are wasting so much time by starting thread after thread slinging mud at republicans, but give it a break. Perhaps I'd take your criticisms a bit more to heart if you said the same things to your political brethren when they create similar threads, yet I don't see you concerning yourself with their threads based rumors. To quote a Republican on these boards, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." Find a thread I have created. I could care less if you take my criticism to heart. You start threads just to sling mud and I do not find that very intellectually challanging. You appear very skewed. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Wow...you really are going to go there? why would he not? Once again, this was a break down of the local and state governments. President Bush was heavily criticized for not sending in the military to help out the survivors or to help evacuation. The fact is, IT IS ILLEGAL for the President to send the military into a state without approval of the local and state government. The administration asked several times during the tragedy if they needed help and only after it was painfully clear that they did, did the Governor ask and approve of federal help. On another flip side of all of this. I find it rather amusing that Obama is being praised for helping with relief efforts. Isn't this pretty much done by people several pay levels below him? Meanwhile, when an American dignitary asks for protection over seas by our military and his government fails to provide it, he washes his hands of it by claiming thats all done several levels below him. That all is kind of odd to me. first, obama has no control over who or why people praise him. second, your memory of katrina confuses me. third, if you honestly believe the federal gov't should receive no blame for the failures of katrina, that explains a lot. fourth, so it was jindal's fault? Where did I say the federal government had no blame? I am confused on something. Is the President responsible for what happens several levels below him or not? Link to comment
Recommended Posts