In article <SLCdncJnAp7-zoDeRVn-1A@giganews.com>,
PagCal <pagcal@runbox.com> wrote:

Bush cut funding requests from NO for ***** improvements.

Bush cut funding for FEMA, so it couldn't do it's job properly.

The cheese-brain political apointee that runs FEMA should be fired. He
goes on national TV and says things are OK in the Super-Dome, but we get
live TV reports with the real story. The cheese-brain even said he had
no reports from the Super-Dome. He didn't even bother to watch TV.

The Army Core of Engineers (the feds) under Bush, did a cost-benefit
analysis of the dykes and said CAT-3 was good enough - but we find out
now, it was not.

Bush has ignored global warming, and it's after effects - such as global
warming, the rise of sea level, and more severe stormes.

Bush delayed sending in the National Guard until bodies started floating
by national and international TV cameras. Essentually, he did a fly-by
from 30,000 FT in AF1, and just ignored the plight of the people.

---

This is not politics; but rather gross incompetence of the Bush
administraiton.

Really? Well since this wasn't a new issue, we have to ask what
happened under the Clinton Administration? This is a age old problem
and not left to one person. Here's a early report what's out there now.
Copy/Paste:






Louisiana Officials Could Lose the Katrina Blame Game
By Jeff Johnson
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
September 07, 2005

(1st Add: Includes information about restoration of Mardi Gras fountain)
(CNSNews.com) - The Bush administration is being widely criticized for
the emergency response to Hurricane Katrina and the allegedly inadequate
protection for "the big one" that residents had long feared would hit
New Orleans. But research into more than ten years of reporting on
hurricane and flood damage mitigation efforts in and around New Orleans
indicates that local and state officials did not use federal money that
was available for levee improvements or coastal reinforcement and often
did not secure local matching funds that would have generated even more
federal funding.
In December of 1995, the Orleans Levee Board, the local government
entity that oversees the levees and floodgates designed to protect New
Orleans and the surrounding areas from rising waters, bragged in a
supplement to the Times-Picayune newspaper about federal money received
to protect the region from hurricanes.
"In the past four years, the Orleans Levee Board has built up its
arsenal. The additional defenses are so critical that Levee
Commissioners marched into Congress and brought back almost $60 million
to help pay for protection," the pamphlet declared. "The most ambitious
flood-fighting plan in generations was drafted. An unprecedented $140
million building campaign launched 41 projects."
The levee board promised Times-Picayune readers that the "few manageable
gaps" in the walls protecting the city from Mother Nature's waters "will
be sealed within four years (1999) completing our circle of protection."
But less than a year later, that same levee board was denied the
authority to refinance its debts. Legislative Auditor Dan Kyle
"repeatedly faulted the Levee Board for the way it awards contracts,
spends money and ignores public bid laws," according to the
Times-Picayune. The newspaper quoted Kyle as saying that the board was
near bankruptcy and should not be allowed to refinance any bonds, or
issue new ones, until it submitted an acceptable plan to achieve
solvency.
Blocked from financing the local portion of the flood fighting efforts,
the levee board was unable to spend the federal matching funds that had
been designated for the project.
By 1998, Louisiana's state government had a $2 billion construction
budget, but less than one tenth of one percent of that -- $1.98 million
-- was dedicated to levee improvements in the New Orleans area. State
appropriators were able to find $22 million that year to renovate a new
home for the Louisiana Supreme Court and $35 million for one phase of an
expansion to the New Orleans convention center.
The following year, the state legislature did appropriate $49.5 million
for levee improvements, but the proposed spending had to be allocated by
the State Bond Commission before the projects could receive financing.
The commission placed the levee improvements in the "Priority 5"
category, among the projects least likely to receive full or immediate
funding.


http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200509\NAT2005
0907a.html



Now keep in mind these are early reports and the dead bodies aren't even
netted from the waters. I'm sure much more will come out in the future
so I wouldn't be too quick to blame one person or one entity of
Government. The road to this disaster has many more turns than what
people think. And the local politicians who are so quick to blame Bush
for anything are putting up an emergency smoke screen to shield the
blame from themselves.

What has to take place here is to find a timetable and a list of events
leading to this in order to locate the problems associated with this
disaster. Hundreds if not thousands of people were involved before,
during and after this event and to simplify it to Blaming Bush, is just
too convenient and too political. So while the rest of you look at this
as an opportunity to promote your dislike for the President, I'll wait
around for the dust to settle to learn what, where and why before
accusing anybody for anything.

ray wrote:

In article <dfij0h$djt$1@panix5.panix.com>,

In article <xxxrayted-45D77D.18395605092005@news.newsguy.com>,
ray <xxxrayted@aol.com> wrote:

In article <dfi8jc$oou$1@panix5.panix.com>,

Everybody is quite aware of the risks associated with their place of
residence. The real question here is, how many of those people chose to
stay and not forced to stay there for any reason? Fatts Domino wasn't
all that poor. And in storms less severe, how many times have we seen
the media interview people who insisted on staying even though
evacuation processes were taking place? But it's the Governments job.

If we learn anything from this, we should learn that Government is not
going to make everything better. We can spend billions and use
technology to help us out, but Government will never be able to go toe
to toe with God.

That allows people that fucked up to get away with it. He've
responded to hurricanes in that past and for the last 10 years of so
gotten pretty good at it. We also learned from the SF earthquake and
9-11.

In the name of Homeland Security Bush has spent billions in the last 4
years and identified the three most likely national-level events; A
CAT-5 hurricane hitting a gulf coast city, an earthquake in a major
city and a nuke attack on a city.

The hurricane event is unique because it gives several days notice
and it was statistically certain to happen someday.


Bush failed us before the hurricane,
during the hurricane
and after the hurricane.

If you are going to look at it that way, then in every tragedy the
Government fucked up or will ***** up.

We have heard plenty from the anti-Bush crowd about 911 and at times,
still hear it today. There were plenty of fingers pointing after
Oklahoma City bombing. The same goes with Waco and the first WTC

I don't see significant finger pointing for WTC1. We've gotten very
good at responding to hurricanes, especially in Flordia during
election years. What happened for FEMA this time?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/latimests/20050905/ts_latimes/whyfemawasmissinginact
io
n

Well I went to the hyperlink but found nothing beyond that except
advertising. But your report below (which I snipped for convenience)
stated was that money was detoured from FEMA to Homeland Security which
in the current day and times, is paramount.

It's a damned if you do and damned if you don't case here. Not long
after Homeland Security was created, many criticized the new branch of
Government as it was somewhat underfunded. They stated that not enough
money was being allocated to the program. Tom Ridge himself made
similar statements but made excuses for the lack of funds.

If the situation were reversed, and FEMA had appropriate funds and
Homeland Security didn't, Bush and friends would once again be under the
microscope for allocating too much money to FEMA and not enough to
Homeland security in the event of a terrorists attack killing hundreds
of thousands. If this hurricane never hit, reports would be out of the
incompetence of Bush as he sent the money in the wrong direction.

But if this report is true (and I'm assuming it is) then I would say
Bush did the right thing. After all, there are preventative measures
people can take before a natural disaster, but not so with a terrorist
attack.

It would be great to have maximum funding for both programs, but that
isn't possible. And the fact that Bush immediately declared this a
disaster is legal mumble jumble to speed up funds for those in need of
Federal aid. If I remember correctly, Bush had to change his assessment
of 911 from a "Act of War" to a Disaster in order to get Government and
Insurance Companies to pay for that tragedy. This report almost points
blame at Bush because part of claiming a Disaster means Federal
Government assumes all control and responsibility.

As the Blame Game continues, there is less focus on local and State
politicians and more on Federal. Seems a bit unfair to me as this
tragedy was an accident waiting to happen. And I have yet to read or
hear of any reports of such local politicians or agencies participating
in preventative measures. What I did see however was the local and
State politicians blaming Bush and Federal agencies for this aftermath.