Bush Pre-Katrina Video Tape Revealed.

If you're going to blame anyone, blame the engineers that designed piece of crap levees for a city that sits below sea level. If Bush only found out the day before the levees collapsed, theres really nothing anyone could have done.
 
Those levees actually held up to alot, they just needed to be overhauled and the plans too do that were delayed, and delayed, and eventually it was something people overlooked. This video just shows what everybody already knows, Bush and his lackeys are just a bunch of bumbling, fumbling old farts who have no strategic thinking, no course of action, absolutely no leadership skills and above all else, fail to do what they try their hardest at, looking good in front of a camera lens and marketing their lies.
 
[quote name='Metal Boss']Those levees actually held up to alot, they just needed to be overhauled and the plans too do that were delayed, and delayed, and eventually it was something people overlooked. This video just shows what everybody already knows, Bush and his lackeys are just a bunch of bumbling, fumbling old farts who have no strategic thinking, no course of action, absolutely no leadership skills and above all else, fail to do what they try their hardest at, looking good in front of a camera lens and marketing their lies.[/QUOTE]

Yes, you are right, John Kerry would've had those levees overhauled the day he was elected.
 
No actually, they should have been taken care of during the clinton administration, so I guess it's all his fault...


You're blindsiding the topic with your illogic
 
Illogic? My point is, the overhauling of levees is hardly a national problem, and is something that is best left to the local or state government rather than the executive branch of the federal government.
 
More on this here:

WASHINGTON - On the eve of Hurricane Katrina's fateful landfall, President Bush was confident. His homeland security chief appeared relaxed. And warnings of the coming destruction — breached or overrun levees, deaths at the New Orleans Superdome and overwhelming needs for post-storm rescues — were delivered in dramatic terms to all involved. All of it was captured on videotape.

"My gut tells me ... this is a bad one and a big one," then-federal disaster chief Michael Brown told the final government-wide briefing the day before Katrina struck the Gulf Coast on Aug. 29.

The president didn't ask a single question during the briefing but assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: "We are fully prepared."

The footage — along with seven days of transcripts of briefings obtained by AP — show in excruciating detail that while federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, they were fatally slow to realize they had not mustered enough resources to deal with the unprecedented disaster.

A top hurricane expert voiced "grave concerns" about the levees and Brown, then the Federal Emergency Management Agency chief, told the president and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that he feared there weren't enough disaster teams to help evacuees at the Superdome.

"I'm concerned about ... their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe," Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.

The White House and Homeland Security Department urged the public Wednesday not to read too much into the footage.

"There's nothing new or insightful on these tapes," Knocke said. "We actively participated in the lessons-learned review and we continue to participate in the Senate's review and are working with them on their recommendation."

Some of the footage and transcripts from briefings Aug. 25-31 conflicts with the defenses that federal, state and local officials have made in trying to deflect blame and minimize the political fallout from the failed Katrina response:

• Homeland Security officials have said the "fog of war" blinded them early on to the magnitude of the disaster. But the video and transcripts show federal and local officials discussed threats clearly, reviewed long-made plans and understood Katrina would wreak devastation of historic proportions. "I'm sure it will be the top 10 or 15 when all is said and done," National Hurricane Center's Max Mayfield warned the day Katrina lashed the Gulf Coast.

• Bush declared four days after the storm, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans. He later clarified, saying officials believed, wrongly, after the storm passed that the levees had survived. But the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility even before the storm — and Bush was worried too.

Mississippi begged for more attention in that same briefing.

"We know that there are tens or hundreds of thousands of people in Louisiana that need to be rescued, but we would just ask you, we desperately need to get our share of assets because we'll have people dying — not because of water coming up, but because we can't get them medical treatment in our affected counties," said a Mississippi state official whose name was not mentioned on the tape.

Video footage of the Aug. 28 briefing, the final one before Katrina struck, showed an intense Brown voicing concerns from the government's disaster operation center and imploring colleagues to do whatever was necessary to help victims.

"Go ahead and do it," Brown said. "I'll figure out some way to justify it. ... Just let them yell at me."

Bush appeared from a narrow, windowless room at his vacation ranch in Texas, with his elbows on a table. Hagin was sitting alongside him.

"I want to assure the folks at the state level that we are fully prepared to not only help you during the storm, but we will move in whatever resources and assets we have at our disposal after the storm," the president said.

A relaxed Chertoff, sporting a polo shirt, weighed in from Washington at Homeland Security's operations center. He would later fly to Atlanta, outside of Katrina's reach, for a bird flu event. Officials say he was frequently updated on the road about Katrina.

One snippet captures a missed opportunity on Aug. 28 for the government to have dispatched active-duty military troops to the region to augment the National Guard.

Chertoff: "Are there any DOD assets that might be available? Have we reached out to them?"

Brown: "We have DOD assets over here at EOC (emergency operations center). They are fully engaged. And we are having those discussions with them now."

Chertoff: "Good job."

In fact, active duty troops weren't dispatched until days after the storm. And many states' National Guards had yet to be deployed to the region despite offers of assistance, and it took days before the Pentagon deployed active-duty personnel to help overwhelmed Guardsmen.

Other officials expressed concerns about the large number of New Orleans residents who had not evacuated.

"They're not taking patients out of hospitals, taking prisoners out of prisons and they're leaving hotels open in downtown New Orleans. So I'm very concerned about that," Brown said.

Despite the concerns, it ultimately took days for search and rescue teams to reach some hospitals and nursing homes.

Brown also told colleagues one of his top concerns was whether evacuees who went to the New Orleans Superdome — which became a symbol of the failed Katrina response — would be safe and have adequate medical care.

"The Superdome is about 12 feet below sea level.... I don't know whether the roof is designed to stand, withstand a Category Five hurricane," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060302/ap_on_go_pr_wh/katrina_video

Impeach. Now.
 
At this point I think have pretty much given up hope for Impeachement with the Teflon Man in White House. In 2004, at least half of voters proved they have Battered Womens Syndrome. The more they get abused, the more they stand by their man.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']But Bush lied. And we impeach liars, right?[/QUOTE]

Clinton lied to a grand jury. He was actually impeached for little thing we call perjury and obstruction of justice.
 
[quote name='gofishn']Clinton lied to a grand jury. He was actually impeached for little thing we call perjury and obstruction of justice.[/QUOTE]

Bush lied us into an illegal war, lied to Patrick Fitzgerald about his staff being involved with the Plame leak, and is willingly breaking the law by violating the 4th ammendment. That's grounds for impeachment.
 
[quote name='gofishn']Clinton lied to a grand jury. He was actually impeached for little thing we call perjury and obstruction of justice.[/quote]
Which is a great commentary on how ridiculous our society is.

Lying while under oath about a trivial personal matter is "worse" than lying to an entire nation about how you could have prevented a disaster that cost the lives of many, many citizens.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']But Bush lied. And we impeach liars, right?[/QUOTE]

We impeach people that perjure themselves. Lying is not a crime, perjury is.

I think Bush said some dumb shit though, he could have and should have just said look: "The state and local government's dropped the ball on this" but nope, he went around buddy buddy with them like they weren't ass raping their constituents.

I live in Mobile, Al... we were on the bad side but just far enough out that we didn't get it as bad as our neighboring state. Lot of roof damage, no power for a week but that was mainly it. Like Ivan only a little worse.

Anyway, the point is I know how a hurricane works, I know how you are supposed to prepare and so on. This wasn't my first or second hurricane. I believe it was the third one I didn't evacuate for (I left for Ivan because it was supposed to hit dead-on). You begin to understand both how the storm works and how everything else works.

You know it is coming over a week in advance, by about 4 or 5 days you should have your mind made up on what to do. By that time they probably have narrowed down the area significantly and you should have a good idea what side of the storm you will get (most important factor) and so on. Around this time the Governor should be deciding what to do as well. Pretty soon you'll start to hear the evacuation orders, what areas to evacuate (if they say get out, you should get out) and the President will go ahead and declare your state a disaster area. That frees up federal dollars to come flowing in, to get things rolling.

Now, this is the tricky part. The part in which both preparation and watching the news comes in handy. I know the President was told the levees would break, but everyone with a damned TV knew that. I knew at least four days before Katrina hit that New Orleans would probably be flooded if they got hit. The idea that anyone didn't know this was a joke, you'd have to be stupid and not understanding the concept of living UNDERNEATH sea level to not grasp this. Hell, I told a friend years ago how vulnerable New Orleans was and declared it to be a stupid place to live. So, you know the threat is there. Believe me, Foxnews, CNN and all the outlets made it clear it could flood. Ray Nagin made it clear he wanted EVERYONE to leave.

So who screwed up? And how? Well, one reason they emphasize a mandatory evacuation is because EVERYONE is going to leave. EVERYONE! That includes police, medical personnel, military, etc... they're all leaving. Believe you me once they leave they might not be able to get back in soon. So you're told to friggin' leave or else your life is in danger. Now, it is important to remember that a lot of the people that stayed, stayed willingly. If you listened to people you still heard a lot of "oh well I didn't think it was going to be that bad". Well, make no doubt about it, for those people it was no fault but their own. Mississippi got hit worse, in truth... a few small cities destroyed completely. But, common sense seemed to prevail there and most people got out well in advance. They remembered Camille, and they knew you don't play around with a giant hurricane.

Well then, the first bit of blame clearly goes to the people who chose to stay despite the warnings. Let's make this clear, I was all the way over in Mobile, Al... a little bit inland and I was considering evacuating. The people in New Orleans that voluntarily stayed were idiots, plain and simple. Time and money and effort had to be spent saving their asses when it could have and should have been spent on the true victims of the storm. The second bit of blame goes to local government. Yes this was somewhat unique but Florida, Mississippi and Alabama have been through a lot of bad hurricanes. They tend to have handled them well. It should come as no surprise that Louisiana, the same state that elected David Duke, the same state that has some of the worst highways in the country and is also known as one of the most corrupt states couldn't handle this situation (I could go off on a tangent here and bitch about the "save the shellfish" morons that helped prevent a better levee for the lake. But, I can't blame them because it isn't clear how much good that would have done and I'm talking about the immediate preparation).

Obviously, the biggest thing was helping people that wanted to, to evacuate. If they had been able to get everyone that wanted out, in the least they could argue that people in danger put themselves in harms way. As it stands, we can't tell who wanted to be there and who couldn't get out (well ok, people in the Superdome wanted to get out). Rather than pack people into the building, they should have used every public bus and contracted the private buses to get everyone they could out. Considering the fact that they had days to plan this shouldn't have been that hard and I imagine that thousands of people could have been evacuated. I mean look, public school buses alone bus thousands of kids around. The single biggest governmental mistake was to not make a effort to evacuate those that could not leave on their own (although for the record with that kind of advanced warning you could have damn near walked out of harms way).

So, what was the next problem? Clearly the reaction was a bit slow. But, I've been through a few hurricanes and I went through Katrina and I can say that around 24 hours later we had people giving out food and water. Mind you, if we were well prepared we shouldn't need either. They have to pull out of harms way, but they move supplies in as soon as possible. This happened in Alabama for both hurricanes recently and I don't see how anyone can blame Bush for this not happening in Louisiana. If you can not pass on the roads, you have to wait for them to be cleared. This is simple. If the Governor is slow in allowing you to take action you have to wait. Let us be clear on this, the Governor has the final say. The GOVERNOR CONTROLS THE NATIONAL GUARD. The fact is that at best all the federal government can do is push funds into the area. From what I read and heard the Governor clearly postured herself and wanted to make it clear SHE WAS IN CHARGE. And my what a fine job she did.

Then again, I do have to say that the federal government still made asses of themselves. I think most of the problems came from the fact that the local and state governments made a bad problem even worse and that many people did not leave when the should have, but just with words alone the federal government showed they were clearly ill-prepared.

So, to sum it up here's my list of what I think went wrong (shortly before and after):


#1: The storm
Hey look folks, it is a act of nature and if you want to place blame start with the big ass hurricane. Shit happens.

#2: A lot of people wanted to stay.
We were told over and over and over to leave and if you didn't leave no one would be there to help you. Not taking this warning is no fault but your own.

#3: The city of New Orleans in particular should have acted to insure everyone what wanted to get out, could get out.

#3: The Governor should have done a lot less posturing and a she should have acted swiftly.

#5: The federal government should have made their role more clear and have prepared for swifter action.

I think the president has messed up a lot, and this time he messed up again. But, I don't like people who are to blame not being blamed. And the people who are to blame are the people who control the National Guard, the ones in control of the city and the state. The federal government in theory at least, is just there to write checks. The state and local people are the ones that are supposed to handle this situation and clearly they did not.

Anyway, I just wanted to get that off my chest. A lot of people who haven't been through hurricanes or haven't really considered who controls the National Guard of the state and so on just might not realize who is in charge and what the roles are. Which annoys me because I think the people who failed the most are not getting the brunt of the criticism.
 
[quote name='gofishn']Clinton lied to a grand jury. He was actually impeached for little thing we call perjury and obstruction of justice.[/quote]

dude got a bj, he didn't eat cake and play a guitar while a whole city was destroyed... but you've got a point...
 
[quote name='Sleepkyng']dude got a bj, he didn't eat cake and play a guitar while a whole city was destroyed... but you've got a point...[/QUOTE]

See, I don't even like Bush but idiots like you just have no clear sense of reality.

A: Read what I just typed. The federal government WAS NOT IN fuckING CHARGE. It was not their job, not their place and not their NATIONAL GUARD. I can't believe how confused people are to think that the federal government now controls the state. NOW HOW IT WORKS IN AMERICA! The state and local governments really screwed up and yes the federal government to a lesser extent but what you are doing is like blaming the Governor for the Iraq war. I can't believe they're even letting people get suckered in to this debate when as the law stands now it isn't a debate. The state is in charge, bottom line. The state controls the national guard. The Governor decided who to evacuate and how to evacuate them. Hypothetically the federal government doesn't even play a role at all, but they have provisions which allow for the federal government to provide funds. That is why they declare the area a disaster, to let that provision kick into place. Finally, in order for the federal government to be in control the Governor would have to grant that control and in this case she made it clear she wanted to retain control, to the point of making the federal government wait. I can't say the federal government did a great job but I can say the people of Louisiana got crappy service from the people they elected. To pass off blame on the federal government is to not understand they are not even allowed to do jack shit without the Governor's approval.

B: I am not here to defend Clinton's impeachment or to defend Bush. But god fucking damn. What do you understand? It is ILLEGAL to perjur yourself. Not just illegal but breaking a very important law. If everyone lied under oath the entire legal system would crumble. Now, if it becomes clear Bush broke some laws, fine, impeach him. But saying HE ATE CAKE is not a valid argument for impeachment.
 
So, if this is merely a state issue, would you be willing to stand by your federal government if they did absolutely *nothing* at all to help people after the fact?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']So, if this is merely a state issue, would you be willing to stand by your federal government if they did absolutely *nothing* at all to help people after the fact?[/QUOTE]

It depends, if they did nothing because the Governor prevented them from acting, I can't see how to blame them. If they did declare it a disaster area and then refused to honor the commitment I would have a problem with that. The only other issue I see is if there is a refusal to declare a area that is clearly a disaster area, a disaster area. To my knowledge the problem with the federal response was mainly due to how the Governor dealt with them. I know that federal aid got to my area just fine.

Having said all that, I am for state's rights. The problem is that people in that state elected people that are clearly incompetent. However, take my state for example or Mississippi and you see a much more competent response. To be frank I trust my local and state government to handle a local problem more than the federal government. The state and local government are from here, they are elected by people in this area. I think in theory the system works fine. The problem comes from people like Ray Nagin and Kathleen Blanco who are elected but also not very good at their jobs (and they are lucking out because Bush bashing is distrating from the role they played). Then again, someone has to be in charge and there's never any assurance that they are competent. I would prefer it be people elected by people from within the state rather than the federal government being able to impose their will (which at this point in time they can not).
 
Perhaps you can enlighten me on how Blanco interfered with federal aid, since there is plenty of documentation that clearly shows she had notified the federal government in advance of the storm seeking aid.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Perhaps you can enlighten me on how Blanco interfered with federal aid, since there is plenty of documentation that clearly shows she had notified the federal government in advance of the storm seeking aid.[/QUOTE]

I'd have to dig up some stuff but this article spells some stuff out clearly:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/12/D8EETPEO3.html

"Our answer is the National Guard is in charge of security under her direction," Blanco chief of staff Andy Kopplin wrote. "The mayor is in charge of the city. The governor is in charge of the state and the guard and security. The federal government is now meeting important missions that it has."

Does this not clearly spell out responsibility? I mean, you can't get more frank than that. Also, here is a quote from Nagin:

"S. O'BRIEN: You're telling me the president told you the governor said she needed 24 hours to make a decision?
NAGIN: Yes.
S. O'BRIEN: Regarding what? Bringing troops in?
NAGIN: Whatever they had discussed. As far as what the -- I was abdicating a clear chain of command, so that we could get resources flowing in the right places.
S. O'BRIEN: And the governor said no.
NAGIN: She said that she needed 24 hours to make a decision. It would have been great if we could of left Air Force One, walked outside, and told the world that we had this all worked out. It didn't happen, and more people died."

Here is another report:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090301680.html

Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.

The administration sought unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law....

Louisiana did not reach out to a multi-state mutual aid compact for assistance until Wednesday, three state and federal officials said.

I wasn't there, I can't personally verify what went on, but almost everything I heard concerning the issue showed that Blanco was not only defiant (that's ok) but incompetent. She clearly wished to hold onto control, but that also means she clearly bears the brunt of the blame for the response.
 
[quote name='KrAzY3']I'd have to dig up some stuff but this article spells some stuff out clearly:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/12/D8EETPEO3.html

"Our answer is the National Guard is in charge of security under her direction," Blanco chief of staff Andy Kopplin wrote. "The mayor is in charge of the city. The governor is in charge of the state and the guard and security. The federal government is now meeting important missions that it has."

Does this not clearly spell out responsibility? I mean, you can't get more frank than that. Also, here is a quote from Nagin:

"S. O'BRIEN: You're telling me the president told you the governor said she needed 24 hours to make a decision?
NAGIN: Yes.
S. O'BRIEN: Regarding what? Bringing troops in?
NAGIN: Whatever they had discussed. As far as what the -- I was abdicating a clear chain of command, so that we could get resources flowing in the right places.
S. O'BRIEN: And the governor said no.
NAGIN: She said that she needed 24 hours to make a decision. It would have been great if we could of left Air Force One, walked outside, and told the world that we had this all worked out. It didn't happen, and more people died."

Here is another report:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090301680.html

Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.

The administration sought unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law....

Louisiana did not reach out to a multi-state mutual aid compact for assistance until Wednesday, three state and federal officials said. As of Saturday, Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency, the senior Bush official said.

I wasn't there, I can't personally verify what went on, but almost everything I heard concerning the issue showed that Blanco was not only defiant (that's ok) but incompetent. She clearly wished to hold onto control, but that also means she clearly bears the brunt of the blame for the response.[/QUOTE]

QFT and then some. Well thought out, well said, and citation to authorities supporting your arguments.
 
[quote name='gofishn']Brilliant retort[/QUOTE]

That's what Msut is known for. Highly inflammatory responses with little to no basis on fact but rather his vast knowledge of trolling. You and I can both look forward to one of his personal attacks now...
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue'] You and I can both look forward to one of his personal attacks now...[/QUOTE]

I dont care enough.

Oh and Bush is an incompetent liar.

Does anyone even doubt that nowadays?
 
[quote name='KrAzY3']I'd have to dig up some stuff but this article spells some stuff out clearly:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/12/D8EETPEO3.html

"Our answer is the National Guard is in charge of security under her direction," Blanco chief of staff Andy Kopplin wrote. "The mayor is in charge of the city. The governor is in charge of the state and the guard and security. The federal government is now meeting important missions that it has."

Does this not clearly spell out responsibility? I mean, you can't get more frank than that. Also, here is a quote from Nagin:

"S. O'BRIEN: You're telling me the president told you the governor said she needed 24 hours to make a decision?
NAGIN: Yes.
S. O'BRIEN: Regarding what? Bringing troops in?
NAGIN: Whatever they had discussed. As far as what the -- I was abdicating a clear chain of command, so that we could get resources flowing in the right places.
S. O'BRIEN: And the governor said no.
NAGIN: She said that she needed 24 hours to make a decision. It would have been great if we could of left Air Force One, walked outside, and told the world that we had this all worked out. It didn't happen, and more people died."

Here is another report:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090301680.html

Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.

The administration sought unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law....

Louisiana did not reach out to a multi-state mutual aid compact for assistance until Wednesday, three state and federal officials said. As of Saturday, Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency, the senior Bush official said.
[/QUOTE]

I guessed you missed this part in the article that you just posted:

A Sept. 4 article on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina incorrectly said that Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D) had not declared a state of emergency. She declared an emergency on Aug. 26.

Nice try.
 
[quote name='gofishn']QFT and then some. Well thought out, well said, and citation to authorities supporting your arguments.[/QUOTE]

Except that the article was wrong. Whoops.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']Except that the article was wrong. Whoops.[/QUOTE]

I should have noticed the correction at the top. There is a reason I try to link to stories I quote, I want people to be able to see the source for them self and arrive to their own conclusion. As you did, you read it and in regards to when she declared a state of emergency the article's correction as well as yourself both would seem to be correct. It was my own error in hastily putting a few sources/quotes together that allowed for me to let that slip by. I will edit my original post to omit the misleading quote.

I argue my points, but I never want to at the expense of the facts. I apologize if my choice of quotes were misleading. I should have caught it, and I would have had I given it a tiny bit more though. I did provide a disclaimer immediately afterwards so I don't feel the need to prostrate myself too much.

However, that does not dismiss the facts of the situation. The Governor both had responsibility and authority in the state and she asserted it. The President did not, but he did ask for it. The responsibility and blame clearly lie with those in charge and the Governor left no doubt as to who was in charge of the guard, state and security. It was a nice attempt at misdirection though, and it was my fault for giving you a chance to do that.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']Except that the article was wrong. Whoops.[/QUOTE]

There was more to his argument then one article. Whoops.
 
[quote name='KrAzY3']
However, that does not dismiss the facts of the situation. The Governor both had responsibility and authority in the state and she asserted it. The President did not, but he did ask for it. The responsibility and blame clearly lie with those in charge and the Governor left no doubt as to who was in charge of the guard, state and security. It was a nice attempt at misdirection though, and it was my fault for giving you a chance to do that.[/QUOTE]



Sorry you put so much work into but that is incorrect (a pre 9/11 mindset if you will).

In the fall of 2004 the adminstration came up with a National Response Plan that specifically recognized state and local officials would be overwhelmed in a large scale disaster and mandated that the Feds step in immediately without waiting.
The NRP establishes policies, procedures, and mechanisms for proactive Federal response to catastrophic events. A catastrophic event is any natural or manmade incident, including terrorism, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the population, infrastructure, environment, economy, national morale, and/or government functions. A catastrophic event could result in sustained national impacts over a prolonged period of time; almost immediately exceeds resources normally available to State, local, tribal, and private-sector authorities in the impacted area; and significantly interrupts governmental operations and emergency services to such an extent that national security could be threatened. All catastrophic events are Incidents of National Significance.

Implementation of Proactive Federal Response Protocols

Protocols for proactive Federal response are most likely to be implemented for catastrophic events involving chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive weapons of mass destruction, or large magnitude earthquakes or other natural or technological disasters in or near heavily populated areas.

Guiding Principles for Proactive Federal Response
Guiding principles for proactive Federal response include the following:
-The primary mission is to save lives; protect critical infrastructure, property, and the environment; contain the event; and preserve national security.
- Standard procedures regarding requests for assistance may be expedited or, under extreme circumstances, suspended in the immediate aftermath of an event of catastrophic magnitude.
- Identified Federal response resources will deploy and begin necessary operations as required to commence life-safety activities.
-Notification and full coordination with States will occur, but the coordination process must not delay or impede the rapid deployment and use of critical resources. States are urged to notify and coordinate with local governments regarding a proactive Federal response.
- State and local governments are encouraged to conduct collaborative planning with the Federal Government as a part of "steady-state" preparedness for catastrophic incidents
Click to expand...

http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NRPbaseplan.pdf
page 43



Now clearly this doesn't absolve Blanco, Nagin or Barber from State responsiblities but it does show that this notion that the Feds had to wait on local officials is bullocks. The president had both the authority and the responsibility.
 
I think the biggest issue is the federal goverment's poor response to something that was known days in advance. Afterall, how can we expect a fast response to a terrorist attack (something with no advance warning) when there is such a terrible response by the government to a hurricane? By the way, if people want to make this a state issue, then how about making the state responsible for rebuilding New Orleans instead of all taxpayers?
 
[quote name='usickenme']
Now clearly this doesn't absolve Blanco, Nagin or Barber from State responsiblities but it does show that this notion that the Feds had to wait on local officials is bullocks. The president had both the authority and the responsibility.[/QUOTE]

I don't think we should sink into a debate over what role the federal government can play in retrospect. After all, I recall this whole domestic spying case in which the President claimed to have authority and a lot of people felt otherwise. The Governor refused to hand over authority. Could the President have asserted it anyway? Perhaps but that would bring up the whole state's rights debate. The fact of the matter is that the Governor WAS in charge of the state, and made it known she was in charge. Rather than move over and let the President have the authority that you say he had, she chose to stand her ground.

Likewise, the National Guard, police, etc... meaning essentially all the local infrastructure are still under the control of the mayor and Governor essentially. The bottom line, and people can keep dancing around this is that she ASSERTED HER CONTROL OVER THE STATE. It isn't a debate, its a matter of public record. She was in charge, she said she was in charge and she did not hand over any of her powers. Could the president have gone farther? Sure, but it would have been over her, not in cooperation and pointless consider she had the in-state resources. Without control of the National guard, police or any of the state or city infrastructure it is entirely unreasonable to expect the federal government to "fix" things swiftly.

Nagin could have evacuated 20,000 people using public buses BEFORE THE STORM. He did not.

The Governor could have relinquished control of the National Guard, etc... but she did not, nor did she do a good job with the resources she had. As we know, Nagin's police force performed pitifully for example and the her National Guard didn't act very fast either.

The bottom line is the fact that Nagin and Blanco bore the brunt of both the responsibility and the power to help the people of their state. They could have moved thousands out beforehand, they could have better prepared their resources, they could have cooperated more with the federal response, etc... they did not.

I am not trying to absolve Bush of any responsibility, I just find it ridiculous that people would try to let those responsible off the hook or misdirect attention lest they don't have another reason to bash Bush. That is ridiculous. I've been through hurricanes, I've seen federal aid some pouring in and it wasn't just the federal people that screwed it up in this case. The politicians in the state lived up to their reputation as corrupt backassward idiots and their people suffered for it. That's a reason we aren't talking about the areas that got hit worse and instead keep talking about New Orleans. That wasn't because the President screwed things up in one city.

Could Bush and Brown and company have done a better job? Most certainly, but Nagin was in a position to prepare before the storm and he did a poor job, Blanco was in the best position to act immediately afterwards and only after that did the role of the federal government come into play. If Nagin and Blanco had handled things just fine and THEN the feds screwed things up, sure blame Bush. That wasn't the case and to be honest I think consider how horrible Nagin and Blanco did the federal reaction while still lacking was much more competent.

If you want to bash Bush, fine. I just resent people polluting something this close to home (literally). With your arguments many of you are letting the real villains off the hook and I don't appreciate that. Of course Nagin and Blanco do though they to would like nothing more than to blame Bush for their failures.
 
I kind of hate to reply to myself but I just came across these pictures. I don't see how you can get to blaming anyone else before you get past things like this:
Bus_yard-rotate.jpg

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Image:Bus_yard-rotate.jpg
Bus1b-norta.jpg

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Image:Bus1b-norta.jpg

You notice anything? Not only were these buses left sitting there. THEY ARE UNDERWATER! It wasn't just a matter of Nagin NOT using them to get people out, it was a matter of them becoming useless. So, instead of having 20 thousand people already out of harms way, and enough buses just out of harms way to get 20 thousand more people out swiftly they had to round up buses to get the first significant number out.

This is just ONE example of how much they screwed things up. You have to go past several things like this before you even begin to blame Bush. Like I said, I don't even like Bush but how in the hell can anyone let Nagin or Blanco (who didn't seem to help a damn thing) off the hook by diverting attention to Bush. Blame Bush for the war, blame him for spying, what ever but blame the people who royally screwed this up for royally screwing it up. And it wasn't Bush that left all those buses sitting there to get flooded while people were stranded.
 
I looked up passenger capacity. The school bus can handle from 71-83. I think 77 was the most common capacity. So, I decided to go with 75 which is conservative.

Going by your number of 350 and subtracting 70 you have 280. 280X75=21,000
Also, you have public transit buses as well so we aren't even taking those into account.

I also took to manually counting buses to make sure I was getting a sound number (20k was a estimate I saw), I counted one double row of buses and came up with 6,000 capacity which would be in line with estimates. I didn't want it to be like that quote I posted before :)

Anyway, you have buses sitting right there with capacity for 20k people give or take. Now, drivers was a question but it is just a excuse. They employ drivers for most if not all of those buses, you also have police, National Guard, etc... out of many state and local employees not to mention the potential for volunteers out of the evacuees it is entirely reasonable to think they could have come up with a couple hundred drivers. This was, after all a emergency.

I'm not saying this was the only issue, but ALL these buses sat there. Not half or a quarter ALL and it was a huge mistake for many reasons. They got drivers to bus people out afterwards, why wait? I knew it was going to flood, the people in CNN, Foxnews and the Weather Channel said it was going to flood. Get drivers and get at least some of those buses moving. But they didn't and it was just the first in a line of big mistakes that led to the problem we saw. Like I said, I don't even like Bush but you have to look at stuff like this first before you see the end result and try blaming it all on Bush, ya know?
 
Crazy, you arent a Bush supporter yet you compulsively and wrongly defend his foul ups?

The whole entire point is that Bush lied AGAIN.

He claimed that no one anticipated the levees breaking, lo and behold there is video showing he knew.

And all you can do is pull a "LOOK! OVER THERE!".
 
Y'know, I do question why the buses weren't used. That's a valid point.

However, I do think that it's unfair to compare a federal government whose strongest suit, up to this point, was that the public expected it to be better prepared for disaster (natural or otherwise) with the expectation that people will spontaneously steal a shitload of buses.

The failure of FEMA and DHS have implications not just for later natural disasters, but also for intentional attacks on our soil. Despite Katrina, I think the biggest lesson in this ordeal (and not something anybody is arguing) is that the one area of public interest where the Bush administration had consistently high ratings of public approval was shown to not only be filled to the brim with cronyism, but woefully unprepared, 4 years after 9/11, to respond to a disaster situation.

Now, comparing a government agency whose *specialty* is to respond, en masse, when shit's seriously fucked up (that's the scientific term for it, I believe), with the belief that people should have developed an immediate collective understanding to steal buses and get the fuck out of town is absurd. Should they have done it? Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. There would be remarkably fewer lives lost (we hope) if they did that. But in the end, you're comparing an established government agency with the belief that people, in the midst of a looming natural disaster, would (1) act rationally, and (2) act collectively rather than selfishly, not to mention (3) come up with the idea of taking buses AND driving them out of town without stalling/wrecking/etc. simply isn't an adequate comparison.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Crazy, you arent a Bush supporter yet you compulsively and wrongly defend his foul ups?

The whole entire point is that Bush lied AGAIN.

He claimed that no one anticipated the levees breaking, lo and behold there is video showing he knew.

And all you can do is pull a "LOOK! OVER THERE!".[/QUOTE]

Isn't that what you just did though? I responded and this was your retort.

mykevermin, I never said steal the buses! Between Nagin and Blanco they would both have the authority and resources to put those buses to use. Remember we are talking about PUBLIC transit buses and PUBLIC school buses, not private ones. So I'm not advocating they steal anything, I'm advocating they use their own resources.

And that is my primary stance and complaint here. Take this story for example, Nagin said he was "shocked", yeah and I'm sure he was also happy as hell. It is distracting from how poorly they handled it.

Also, the federal government has the greatest means to respond in the long term and to be sure it is FEMA and the like writing billions in checks, not the city and state. In the short term the state and city government is the one with the most means because after all they are the ones on the ground. Take the buses for example, Blanco and Nagin had not only the means but the right to put National Guardmen in the driver's seat and get them moving. They could have, they should have. They did not.

This is just one example though. The point remains that in terms of the immediate response the city and state bear the brunt of the responsibility as well as capability and jurisdiction. Police? National Guard? State and city employees? They answer to their bosses and they happen to be Nagin and Blanco not Bush. I'm not trying to divert from Bush, far from that I'm just trying to make sure people don't intentionally or unintentionally cover up for the people that fucked this situation up the most.

Now, in terms of long term response... sure throw stones at FEMA, Bush and Brown and the like. I think FEMA sucks to (they piss money at problems), but that is long term response not the immediate aftermath in New Orleans, which was in large part a result of poor planning and action on the part of the city and state. As I said before, at best the feds could be expected to come in and clean things up after the fact while the city and the state were responsible for trying to keep things in order up until then. I said it before and I'll say it again, if Nagin and Blanco handled things just fine and THEN Bush and Brown messed it up? I'd be yelling with you guys. But it was Nagin and Blanco that allowed things to get that bad.
 
[quote name='KrAzY3']Isn't that what you just did though?[/QUOTE]

No, I made a response to what you said originally.

My other response was sheer amazement that you will try and deflect W's lies by pointing out something and then claim you dont like the guy.
 
[quote name='KrAzY3']I don't think we should sink into a debate over what role the federal government can play in retrospect. After all, I recall this whole domestic spying case in which the President claimed to have authority and a lot of people felt otherwise. The Governor refused to hand over authority. Could the President have asserted it anyway? Perhaps but that would bring up the whole state's rights debate. The fact of the matter is that the Governor WAS in charge of the state, and made it known she was in charge. Rather than move over and let the President have the authority that you say he had, she chose to stand her ground.

blah blah.. Bush is great. blah blah

If you want to bash Bush, fine. I just resent people polluting something this close to home (literally). With your arguments many of you are letting the real villains off the hook and I don't appreciate that. Of course Nagin and Blanco do though they to would like nothing more than to blame Bush for their failures.[/QUOTE]

good gravey. This is simply not a matter of Bashing Bush. That is such a weak ass way to excuse away his failures. First of all there really is no debate about the role of the Federal Gov't. It is in the Freaking NATIONAL RESPONSE PLAN and it is MANDATED. They spent the time, money and energy to come up with a pretty good plan and they didn't follow it. Do me a favor and read up the plan, mmkay? Because it will hold for the next disaster, be it man-made or weather.

The reality of the sitution undermines your whole premise. The Coast guard was able to act without too much coordination from state and federal officials. And I certainly woudn't call their contribution "pointless". And it's not like the Federal gov't can only use State resources in their response, ya know. Furthermore, the Gov. and Mayor WERE able to move thousands before the storm though, it certainly wasn't enough.

and if you believe Nagin and Blanco were so imcompetent, would that make the Federal response all the more important instead of just shugging your shoulders and saying "Bush bash, Bush bash,Bush bash,Bush bash, Bush bash, Bush bash, Bush bash". We didnt' see any real Federal response until days later.

Additionally, the "real" villians were incomptence at ALL levels. That crack seems to try to absolve Bush of any responsibility despite your protests.
 
I'm not trying to get Bush off the hook. I'm just trying to make it clear that the heart of the problem, the greatest failures were with city and state officials.

If we can place proper blame and responsibility on Nagin and Blanco I am more than willing to discuss the response of Bush and FEMA. I have my gripes there as well, but what we are doing by skipping Nagin and Blanco is like trying to understand a book by reading the last ten pages. This is a real issue and a real problem and I don't want it to break down into a political agenda.

Just looking at one singular thing, we saw hundreds of buses just sitting there. Nagin declared a evacuation but despite anything anyone said they did not help anyone evacuate they just told them to leave. That is quite a big difference. These hundreds of buses sat through the storm while around 100,000 people remained in New Orleans. After the storm Nagin then started complaining he needed buses to get people out of the area. Gee, what about those you have, oh wait you left them there and they're underwater.

How is that not horrid planning? How can anyone sit here and defend his handling of it? I knew it was going to get flooded, I can't believe he didn't know because every news outlet reported the likely hood. But, rather than 20K out and have buses out of harms way he just sat there and the buses sat there and the problem became much much worse from that singular action.

Once again, consider the difference. We are talking about around 20% of the people that ended up left there, out before the storm. The Superdome could have still been used to house another 20K and the buses could have come in and gotten those out much faster than the original 20K ended up making it out. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how much better things would have gone if they just used the buses sitting there.

They didn't, and they followed that MASSIVE mistake up with several more and you ended up with a horrible situation. I don't see how you can see past something that big. It isn't the only issue, but if they people are in a non-disaster area then obviously the problems would have been significantly reduced.

To me the issue of kind of like the Bible verse (don't like Christianity but it is still a valid point):
Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.

I think that rings true here. If we don't see and address the massive problems that Nagin and Blanco had in dealings with things, we can't see properly to see what went wrong with the federal and the FEMA response as well.
 
There was no one to drive the busses, and no place to put the civilians. You can't dump them on a dirt road. It was hard enough to find a place to put them after the hurricane hit, how were they gonna find a place before that? Having a way to get some out (and that's really what you would have done, got some out, and still had to deal with the rest) is only half the answer.

And, as for leaving, many could not afford it. New Orleans had withstood a very strong hurricane previously (meaning people thought their house could withstand it and therefore the result wasn't a foregone conclusion, and the high poverty rates, which correlate with less access to info, did nothing to help that), and for many the only way to leave would be to start walking to nowhere. They had no car, no money for transportation, hotels etc. Nowhere to go. Others didn't leave due to sick or elderly family members who they couldn't take, and some didn't leave due to pets. Feel that way or not, many people are very attached to their pets and weren't going to leave them to die, which became the alternative since very few services would allow them.


"We actively participated in the lessons-learned review and we continue to participate in the Senate's review and are working with them on their recommendation."
Click to expand...

Unfortunately they haven't learned the most important lesson, actually respond to the information in front of you.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']There was no one to drive the busses, and no place to put the civilians. You can't dump them on a dirt road. It was hard enough to find a place to put them after the hurricane hit, how were they gonna find a place before that? Having a way to get some out (and that's really what you would have done, got some out, and still had to deal with the rest) is only half the answer.

And, as for leaving, many could not afford it.[/QUOTE]

For the record, police and transit workers were exempted from the evacuation orders. Had they been put to work driving the buses they would have had drivers. Secondly, the National Guardsmen could have been given authorization to drive the buses as well. It is a excuse on the part of Nagin and the like to pretend nothing could have been done. Yes, it would have taken planning but isn't that what this whole issue is about? What went wrong and how it could have been better planned? I know I keep harping on it but he didn't just not use them, he left the buses in harms way. Next thing I know he's on TV crying about needing buses after squandering his.

The reason I think it was so important to use the buses was because many could not leave. Without much planning 20 thousand of the remaining people could have been evacuated and with more planning 40 thousand could have been evacuated prior to the storm. That would probably account for all the people unable to get out on their own, that wanted to.

I know many in New Orleans did not anticipate things being this bad, but they HAVE flooded before from a hurricane and I knew full well that they were in danger of flooding again. The fact is that they got lucky and missed out on the worst part of the storm, things could have been worse. I was in Mobile, Al and I considered evacuating. The storm was no joke, so the idea that Nagin and the like sitting right in the middle of the storm path couldn't anticipate a bad outcome is ridiculous.

We do have to look at what went wrong, and we have to start back to looking at the levees and the proposed levee that was never built. We have to consider the risk of living under sea level in such a vulnerable area, we have to look at the policemen that failed to do their job, etc... there are a lot of issues here but my primary contention is just that if Nagin and Blanco had been on top of things the aftermath would have been far less chaotic. I can't blame them for everything that can happen but if one IS assigning blame (and clearly many people are) you have to start with them.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']And, as for leaving, many could not afford it. New Orleans had withstood a very strong hurricane previously (meaning people thought their house could withstand it and therefore the result wasn't a foregone conclusion, and the high poverty rates, which correlate with less access to info, did nothing to help that), and for many the only way to leave would be to start walking to nowhere. They had no car, no money for transportation, hotels etc. Nowhere to go. Others didn't leave due to sick or elderly family members who they couldn't take, and some didn't leave due to pets. Feel that way or not, many people are very attached to their pets and weren't going to leave them to die, which became the alternative since very few services would allow them. [/QUOTE]

So, poor people are completely inept and have to be cared for and carted in all aspects of personal responsibility? I'm sorry, just because you're poor doesn't mean you're too dumb to muster some resources to get out of the city to save your own goddamn life. Poor people have access to information. Every "poor" person's house I've ever been inside has a freaking television or a radio. Most have cell phones so they can call their drug dealer. And a newspaper only costs 50 goddamn cents. If they also can't read becuase they're too poor, then I guess that's Bush's fault too.

And some didn't leave becuase of their pets? That the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard. A choice between my life and my pet is a no-brainer. Pet people got what they deserved.

But bussing them to a dirt road would have been better than having to rescue them in a fishing boat or having them die from drowning, don't you think ? I'ts much easier to deliver food to a dry, dirt road than to a Superdome or ramshack house surrounded by water.
 
[quote name='KrAzY3']For the record, police and transit workers were exempted from the evacuation orders. Had they been put to work driving the buses they would have had drivers. Secondly, the National Guardsmen could have been given authorization to drive the buses as well. It is a excuse on the part of Nagin and the like to pretend nothing could have been done. Yes, it would have taken planning but isn't that what this whole issue is about? What went wrong and how it could have been better planned? I know I keep harping on it but he didn't just not use them, he left the buses in harms way. Next thing I know he's on TV crying about needing buses after squandering his. [/quote]

Well, many of the workers fled even though they were exempted.

But, remember, this would have been before the levees broke. How are you going to bus 20,000 people (if it does come to that number) and leave them in the middle of nowhere. Remember, the hurricane hadn't hit yet, and hurricanes had hit before and not done this (this is important to the population who are working on much less info than the federal or even local government). How are you going to honestly get people to get on a bus, and be dumped off without any shelter. And what government is going to enact a plan to do just that? No one is going to bus people to a place where there's no place to put them.

So, poor people are completely inept and have to be cared for and carted in all aspects of personal responsibility? I'm sorry, just because you're poor doesn't mean you're too dumb to muster some resources to get out of the city to save your own goddamn life. Poor people have access to information. Every "poor" person's house I've ever been inside has a freaking television or a radio. Most have cell phones so they can call their drug dealer. And a newspaper only costs 50 goddamn cents. If they also can't read becuase they're too poor, then I guess that's Bush's fault too.
Click to expand...

If you live in a city, how do you get out with no money, no car, no friends outside the city, no credit card etc. You have no resources.

And many poor people have much less access to info. Show me the newspapers that indicated that these events were a foregone conclusion, and over a thousand were going to die.

Most have cell phones so they can call their drug dealer.
Click to expand...

Probably not the best thing to say when you're trying to attack my comments on poor people.

And some didn't leave becuase of their pets? That the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard. A choice between my life and my pet is a no-brainer. Pet people got what they deserved.
Click to expand...

Well, show me where they knew they were going to die. They were just risking themselves but thought they'd probably be safe. Almost no one thinks they're the one who will die.

But bussing them to a dirt road would have been better than having to rescue them in a fishing boat or having them die from drowning, don't you think ? I'ts much easier to deliver food to a dry, dirt road than to a Superdome or ramshack house surrounded by water.
Click to expand...

Hindsight is 20/20. That also assumes that the whole event, that everything was a foregone conclusion.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23'] remember, this would have been before the levees broke. How are you going to bus 20,000 people (if it does come to that number) and leave them in the middle of nowhere. Remember, the hurricane hadn't hit yet, and hurricanes had hit before and not done this (this is important to the population who are working on much less info than the federal or even local government). How are you going to honestly get people to get on a bus, and be dumped off without any shelter. And what government is going to enact a plan to do just that? No one is going to bus people to a place where there's no place to put them.

And many poor people have much less access to info. Show me the newspapers that indicated that these events were a foregone conclusion, and over a thousand were going to die.

Well, show me where they knew they were going to die. They were just risking themselves but thought they'd probably be safe. Almost no one thinks they're the one who will die.

Hindsight is 20/20. That also assumes that the whole event, that everything was a foregone conclusion.[/QUOTE]

Wait a minute, you're admitting that nobody knew for sure that the levies would fail or where the hurricane would hit. That's not a very good liberal, Bush hating mentality, alonzo. Hindsight is 20/20, but the democrats still seem to have tunnel vision becuase Bush didn't use his crystal ball.

And as far as poor people are concerned, two-foot it out of the freaking city if you have to. How much does a cable car ride or a busride cost ? Don't tell me the poor don 't have their taxpayer subsidized bus card that could have taken them to the outskirts a day or two before the hurricane hit. They must have been prisoners of the city since no one would let them out. Either that or they were prisoners of the welfare system that's left them destitute of money, resources, self respect, and half a brain. I guess poor people are so poor they can't even think for themselves when the president gets on TV and says "everybody get the hell out of New Orleans". Bush was just lying to them again, or so they had been taught to think by the liberal shitheads who rule their existence.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Wait a minute, you're admitting that nobody knew for sure that the levies would fail or where the hurricane would hit. That's not a very good liberal, Bush hating mentality, alonzo. Hindsight is 20/20, but the democrats still seem to have tunnel vision becuase Bush didn't use his crystal ball. [/quote]

I also stated that the information available (let alone known) by most civilians differed from what was available to the local government, and that differed from what was available to the federal government. There are a lot of things I don't know that government departments do, or at least should.

I remember a post on this very site, where people were all excited to watch the hurricane hit from a video camera in new orleans. Most seemed to expect the camera to go down, but there wasn't much talk over new orleans being destroyed. It was just something fun to watch.

And as far as poor people are concerned, two-foot it out of the freaking city if you have to.
Click to expand...

And go where? They take their family and walk out of the city, with no food, shelter etc. Good idea. And, again, considering they had survived hurricans before, taking a step so extreme as to make yourself homeless without anything wasn't reasonable.

How much does a cable car ride or a busride cost ? Don't tell me the poor don 't have their taxpayer subsidized bus card that could have taken them to the outskirts a day or two before the hurricane hit.
Click to expand...

I've never heard of free bus cards. Besides, the outskirts where hit too, and, again, where do they stay?

They must have been prisoners of the city since no one would let them out. Either that or they were prisoners of the welfare system that's left them destitute of money, resources, self respect, and half a brain. I guess poor people are so poor they can't even think for themselves when the president gets on TV and says "everybody get the hell out of New Orleans". Bush was just lying to them again, or so they had been taught to think by the liberal shitheads who rule their existence.
Click to expand...

I don't remember bush saying that before katrina hit but, if he had, it wasn't something I saw.

But, again, where do they go? If I had a choice to:
A. Start walking out of new orleans, with no place to go and no food, and risk being exposed when the hurricane hit
or
B: stay in my house with food and shelter, but risk severe flooding

I'd probably choose B. They survived Betsy, most residents didn't seem to expect anything worse than that.

If you have ever been to new orleans you would see that most houses were designed to withstand some flooding anyway.

Most people with the means did get out though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top