Next part of the extended rant: Bush is like a deer in headlights
Meanwhile, back at the Ranch...
Let's take a look at some facts from August 27 to August 31, including Bush's itenerary.
On Saturday, August 27, Bush "declared an emergency exists in the State of Louisiana and ordered Federal aid to supplement state and local response efforts in the parishes located in the path of Hurricane Katrina beginning on August 26, 2005, and continuing."
On Sunday, August 28, Bush spoke about the Iraqi constitution and hurricane Katrina. Regarding Katrina, Bush said the following:
Long before the hurricane approached the coast, it was well known that the levee system in New Orleans was built to withstand a Category 3 hurricane. As noted, the day before the hurricane struck, Bush knew it was a Category 5 storm.
On Monday, August 29 at approximately 6:oo a.m., Katrina made landfall on the Gulf Coast. By that time, the storm was Category 4. That morning, Bush attended a “Conversation on Medicare” in El Mirage, Arizona at 10:06 a.m. Mountain Standard Time. That’s 11:06 a.m. Central Standard Time–the time zone which covers New Orleans.
The flooding which devastated New Orleans happened when several levees broke or were breached. According to the New Orleans Times-Picayune, the first of those breaches occurred late Monday morning, which is to say about the time the "Conversation on Medicare" began.
Other media reports I have found say the breaches occurred in the early hours of Tuesday morning.
In any event, at 11:04 a.m. Central Standard Time on Tuesday August 30, Bush was in San Diego giving a speech commemorating VJ Day. He devoted two paragraphs to the Hurricane, and then spent much of the speech talking about the war on terror.
After the speech (11:34 a.m. Central Standard Time) on August 30, Scott McClellan announced that Bush
This chain of events is simply shocking to me.
Bush did not get back to Washington and devote his time exclusively to to the recovery effort until two days after the storm hit. Two days before the storm hit, he declared a state of emergency. The day before the storm hit, he knew that Katrina was a Category 5 storm, and it was known that the levee system in New Orleans could withstand at best a Category 3 hurricane. He also said that it could not be stressed enough how dangerous the storm was. There is no reasonable way to claim that he did not know the storm would strike land by Monday. And yet, he decided that it was far more important for him to go to Arizona to talk about Medicare.
There was a report available to the entire world that the first levee failure occurred late Monday morning. By Monday afternoon, there is no way that he was unaware of the damage caused by Katrina--not just in New Orleans, but in the other areas of the Gulf Coast that were devastated. And yet, he decided it was far more important to go to San Diego to deliver a speech that was more about the war on terror than VJ Day. Does anyone think that the veterans of WWII--who will always deserve tribute--would place a higher priority on a speech commemorating that victory than on having the President deal with perhaps the greatest natural disaster in our history? These veterans are part of "The Greatest Generation" which selflessly defended the security of this nation and the lives of its citizens. Does anyone really think they would have minded if the President--the leader of our nation--had decided to skip that speech and instead get right to the business of leading in this time of crisis?
Why in the world did it take our "leader' a full day to decide to cut short his vacation and then take an additional day to get back to Washington to start taking charge?
Un-freaking-believable.
Where have I seen this before?
Oh, now I remember. I saw it in "Farenheit 911." It was the footage of Bush being told that our country had just been attacked by terrorists and sitting there without a damn clue what to do for minute after minute after minute after minute. I don't care what anybody thinks about Michael Moore or "Farenheit 911." I defy anyone to watch that footage and not be appalled. As Bill Maher said in his latest HBO special,
Let's take a look at some facts from August 27 to August 31, including Bush's itenerary.
On Saturday, August 27, Bush "declared an emergency exists in the State of Louisiana and ordered Federal aid to supplement state and local response efforts in the parishes located in the path of Hurricane Katrina beginning on August 26, 2005, and continuing."
On Sunday, August 28, Bush spoke about the Iraqi constitution and hurricane Katrina. Regarding Katrina, Bush said the following:
Yesterday, I signed a disaster declaration for the state of Louisiana, and this morning I signed a disaster declaration for the state of Mississippi. These declarations will allow federal agencies to coordinate all disaster relief efforts with state and local officials. We will do everything in our power to help the people in the communities affected by this storm.(emphasis added).
Hurricane Katrina is now designated a category five hurricane. We cannot stress enough the danger this hurricane poses to Gulf Coast communities. I urge all citizens to put their own safety and the safety of their families first by moving to safe ground. Please listen carefully to instructions provided by state and local officials.
Long before the hurricane approached the coast, it was well known that the levee system in New Orleans was built to withstand a Category 3 hurricane. As noted, the day before the hurricane struck, Bush knew it was a Category 5 storm.
On Monday, August 29 at approximately 6:oo a.m., Katrina made landfall on the Gulf Coast. By that time, the storm was Category 4. That morning, Bush attended a “Conversation on Medicare” in El Mirage, Arizona at 10:06 a.m. Mountain Standard Time. That’s 11:06 a.m. Central Standard Time–the time zone which covers New Orleans.
The flooding which devastated New Orleans happened when several levees broke or were breached. According to the New Orleans Times-Picayune, the first of those breaches occurred late Monday morning, which is to say about the time the "Conversation on Medicare" began.
Other media reports I have found say the breaches occurred in the early hours of Tuesday morning.
In any event, at 11:04 a.m. Central Standard Time on Tuesday August 30, Bush was in San Diego giving a speech commemorating VJ Day. He devoted two paragraphs to the Hurricane, and then spent much of the speech talking about the war on terror.
After the speech (11:34 a.m. Central Standard Time) on August 30, Scott McClellan announced that Bush
did make the decision this morning to return to D.C. tomorrow -- tomorrow, after we return this afternoon to Crawford. Tomorrow morning, I expect the President will probably participate in a conference call with some federal officials to receive the latest update and make sure we're doing all we can to coordinate the response efforts. And then we will depart around 10:40 a.m. tomorrow from Waco. He'll return to Washington.Originally, Bush was not going to return to Washington until Friday. So, in other words, Bush decided to cut short his vacation. McClellan also said the following:
When we return, probably around 4:00 p.m. in the afternoon, the President will chair a White House task force meeting on the response efforts to Hurricane Katrina. The White House has established an interagency task force. It consists to supplement and strengthen our response efforts. The interagency task force will consist of all the relevant agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Defense, and others. Those are some of the agencies that will be included. The Department of Energy will be included in it, obviously. And that meeting will take place at 4:00 p.m. tomorrow.On August 31, at 4:11 p.m. Central Standard Time, Bush, now back in Washington, gave his first public speech devoted exclusively to hurricane Katrina.
This chain of events is simply shocking to me.
Bush did not get back to Washington and devote his time exclusively to to the recovery effort until two days after the storm hit. Two days before the storm hit, he declared a state of emergency. The day before the storm hit, he knew that Katrina was a Category 5 storm, and it was known that the levee system in New Orleans could withstand at best a Category 3 hurricane. He also said that it could not be stressed enough how dangerous the storm was. There is no reasonable way to claim that he did not know the storm would strike land by Monday. And yet, he decided that it was far more important for him to go to Arizona to talk about Medicare.
There was a report available to the entire world that the first levee failure occurred late Monday morning. By Monday afternoon, there is no way that he was unaware of the damage caused by Katrina--not just in New Orleans, but in the other areas of the Gulf Coast that were devastated. And yet, he decided it was far more important to go to San Diego to deliver a speech that was more about the war on terror than VJ Day. Does anyone think that the veterans of WWII--who will always deserve tribute--would place a higher priority on a speech commemorating that victory than on having the President deal with perhaps the greatest natural disaster in our history? These veterans are part of "The Greatest Generation" which selflessly defended the security of this nation and the lives of its citizens. Does anyone really think they would have minded if the President--the leader of our nation--had decided to skip that speech and instead get right to the business of leading in this time of crisis?
Why in the world did it take our "leader' a full day to decide to cut short his vacation and then take an additional day to get back to Washington to start taking charge?
Un-freaking-believable.
Where have I seen this before?
Oh, now I remember. I saw it in "Farenheit 911." It was the footage of Bush being told that our country had just been attacked by terrorists and sitting there without a damn clue what to do for minute after minute after minute after minute. I don't care what anybody thinks about Michael Moore or "Farenheit 911." I defy anyone to watch that footage and not be appalled. As Bill Maher said in his latest HBO special,
Seriously--seven minutes is a long time...While I agree with Bill, I think Homeland Security would continue with how a President reacts to a major disaster on our own soil. Waiting over two days to "take charge" while instead making two other appearances simply doesn't cut it.
*******[I]f you defend a President for sitting there for even one second after he is told America is under attack, you are loyal to a person more than you are to the truth, to a principle, or to your country.
[A]ny President, of any party, would have gotten up. Democrat, Republican, Whig--doesn't matter. President Van Buren--"America's under attack"--would have gotten up. President Reagan--"America's under attack"--would have gotten up. FDR would have gotten up--he couldn't even get up!
*******So, when you talk about Homeland Security, I would think it would start with how a President reacts to the country being under attack[.]
posted by WCharles @ 9/06/2005 02:18:00 AM
7 Comments:
OK. We all know when Bush was Texas Governor, he was a figure-head, to a degree. He had people to do the actual work. He is not a Rudy Guilani. As president, he has surrounded himself with people who do the work. We all know that. He did declare an emergency two days prior to the storm hitting. Where were the governor of Louisianna and the mayor of NO? It was their state and their city afterall. Why weren't they providing Guiliani-like leadership rather than just waiting for *Big Brother* to bail them out? Were they just cowering in the corner crying for Georgie to come in on his white horse wearing a white cowboy hat to save the day firing his six-shooters at those looters? Come on. They are Southerners. States rights champions. Well, Southerners were at one time anyway, today they seem to be closer to the dreaded NY Yankee liberals (and I don't mean Steinbrenner's boys). Big, powerful central government. Jefferson, Madison, Monroe would be laughing at the new liberals for depending on the federal government to hold their hands, as they had fought so hard against the Federalism of Adams and Washington. Picture this happening back in the 1930s. The local leadership would have been all over it. They would have done whatever it took. And thanked Georgie for staying out of their way.
Ray, your points do not address the central point of this post, namely Bush's leadership qualities, or, more accurately, the lack thereof. That is not to say your points should not be discussed (and I will discuss them in subsequent comments).
Bush portrays himself as a great leader, a real take-charge guy. However, his actions show something completely different.
"He did declare an emergency two days prior to the storm hitting. Where were the governor of Louisiana[?]"
Follow this link:
http://gov.louisiana.gov/Disaster%20Relief%20Request.pdf
There you will see that Gov. Blanco declared a state of emergency on Aug. 26--one day before Bush.
Blanco's letter also stated the following:"Pursuant to 44 CFR § 206.35, I have determined that this incident is of such severity and magnitude that effective response is beyond the capabilities of the State and affected local governments, and that supplementary Federal assistance is necessary to save lives, protect property, public health, and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a disaster."
The letter goes on to state what steps the Governor had taken.
By the way, any media reports that Blanco had not declared a state of emergency are blatantly wrong. Furthermore, many of said reports had as their source a senior Bush official.
"They are Southerners. States rights champions. Well, Southerners were at one time anyway, today they seem to be closer to the dreaded NY Yankee liberals (and I don't mean Steinbrenner's boys)."
Steinbrenner's boys couldn't possibly be liberals, for, as any Red Sox fan knows, the Yankees are an evil empire. :-)
But seriously, you are correct that Southerners used to be for states' rights. That has changed, as has the GOP's stance on that issue. Under this Republican administration, the federal bureaucracy has grown to record proportions (thanks primarily to the Homeland Security Act, but that will be discussed in another comment), and things like the No Child Left Behind Act are taking discretion away from the states. Thus, while I feel that big, powerful central government can be a bad thing, it is not the "new liberals" that have been responsible for the growth of government the last five years--that would be the GOP.
Part of what Bush and the Republican Congress have done is place primacy on the federal government in more and more areas. This, too, will be discussed in another comment.
"As president, he has surrounded himself with people who do the work."
He has surrounded himself with political hacks, ideologues, incompetents, and toadies.
Of course, in keeping with your earlier statement that "neither party has a lock on the moral high ground," plenty of Democrats have done the same thing.
Speaking of which, prior to the 2000 election, I told people that while Bush would owe more people if he got elected, Gore would be more of a whore because he would do anything to get reelected.
"Why weren't they providing Guiliani-like leadership rather than just waiting for *Big Brother* to bail them out? Were they just cowering in the corner crying for Georgie to come in on his white horse wearing a white cowboy hat to save the day firing his six-shooters at those looters?"
This gets back to my "primacy" comment. Keep in mind that FEMA was made part of the Department of Homeland Security pursuant to the Homeland Security Act (just one part of the wholesale reorganization of the federal bureaucracy). The DHS website defines its mission as follows: "We will lead the unified national effort to secure America. We will prevent and deter terrorist attacks and protect against and respond to threats and hazards to the nation." This definitely applies to natural disasters, and the same web page lists the following as a strategic goal: "Response -- Lead, manage and coordinate the national response to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies."
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/editorial/editorial_0413.xml
I'll need more time to read some of your links before responding, but here is one quick comment.
"Under this Republican administration, the federal bureaucracy has grown to record proportions"
Yep. I alluded in an earlier post that Bush has acted more like a liberal Democrat in some ways and this is one of them. We agree on this one.
Post a Comment
<< Home