View Full Version : Republicans in Full Cover Up Mode after Katrina
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 17:57
Looks like the Republican response to Katrina is now kicking into high gear, if only the Administration's emergency response had been as energetic.
The House and Senate Republicans got together to start a bicameral, but not bipartisan investigation of the Katrina response. :furious3: The Democratic members learned of it from the media. Looks like we can kiss our hopes of an independent commission good-bye. This is being done as a cover up, not an investigation. GOP political organs (like FOX ~;) ) and its leadership have been pulling out all stops to blame the poor Federal response on Louisiana.
Watched FOX spinning on the Astrodome this morning..."lockdown" was used. Comment about how "some who probably don't need (or was it deserve?) the promised money" etc. Several other efforts of distortion in the few minutes I watched.
The day before I watched some blond twit on FOX saying how it was unbelievable that several hundred cops were unaccounted for and could we imagine if that had happened in New York? She said she "understood" (???) but it was just amazing. She seems to have not "understood" all the obvious differences:
1. New York officers homes were not demolished for the most part (like 70% of New Orleans police.)
2. New York officer's families were not evacuated or needing evacuation for the most part. Some with large families had to leave with their family.
3. New York had onlly limited/temporary communications damage compared to New Orleans. And they still had power, they still had sewer, they still had transportation.
4. There was a lot of help arriving in New York within 72 hours of the attack. There was almost no relief for those New Orleans officers.
Now we have certain conservative members on the board trying to blame this on a welfare state. Of course they will say that about any poor region because it us unlikely to be a GOP stronghold due to demographics. Easier to blame the victims than face the problem. Is this what you want? A govt. that only responds to disaster in GOP leaning areas? Stupid me, I thought this was supposed to be a govt. by the people, for the people. Not by the GOP, for the GOP.
Doesn't matter what kind of state it was, the truth is that the main emergency response by our Federal govt. couldn't respond within 5 days of the first major warning. That is unacceptable and it merits independent investigation, as do the state and local responses. Anything else is a cover up.
P.S. FEMA still does not have its housing vouchers worked out. They are a week late now.
Looks like the Republican response to Katrina is now kicking into high gear, if only the Administration's emergency response had been as energetic.
Nothing to state - haven't read the news yet to determine if its the administration or just the political party itself.
The House and Senate Republicans got together to start a bicameral, but not bipartisan investigation of the Katrina response. :furious3: The Democratic members learned of it from the media. Looks like we can kiss our hopes of an independent commission good-bye. This is being done as a cover up, not an investigation.
Well if your ever in Dallas - I will take a nice cold beer - only one mind you. ~:cheers: - Seems that we predicted this did we not?
GOP political organs (like FOX ~;) ) and its leadership have been pulling out all stops to blame the poor Federal response on Louisiana.
Had to seperate this one out - so I could make my comment about a cold beer.
Watched FOX spinning on the Astrodome this morning..."lockdown" was used. Comment about how "some who probably don't need (or was it deserve?) the promised money" etc. Several other efforts of distortion in the few minutes I watched.
Now that is just wrong - the money needs to be given to all the those who are stricken by the crisis -regardless of their economic scale. What a stupid comment from Fox.
The day before I watched some blond twit on FOX saying how it was unbelievable that several hundred cops were unaccounted for and could we imagine if that had happened in New York? She said she "understood" (???) but it was just amazing. She seems to have not "understood" all the obvious differences:
1. New York officers homes were not demolished for the most part (like 70% of New Orleans police.)
2. New York officer's families were not evacuated or needing evacuation for the most part. Some with large families had to leave with their family.
3. New York had onlly limited/temporary communications damage compared to New Orleans. And they still had power, they still had sewer, they still had transportation.
4. There was a lot of help arriving in New York within 72 hours of the attack. There was almost no relief for those New Orleans officers.
Which blond was it?
Now we have the conservative members on the board trying to blame this on a welfare state. Of course they will say that about any poor region because it us unlikely to be a GOP stronghold due to demographics. Easier to blame the victims than face the problem. Is this what you want? A govt. that only responds to disaster in GOP leaning areas? Stupid me, I thought this was supposed to be a govt. by the people, for the people. Not by the GOP, for the GOP.
Only some now - don't go lumping me into the blame the victim crowd for a natural diaster where all three levels of government failed.
Doesn't matter what kind of state it was, the truth is that the main emergency response by our Federal govt. couldn't respond within 5 days of the first major warning. That is unacceptable and it merits independent investigation, as do the state and local responses. Anything else is a cover up.
Very true
P.S. FEMA still does not have its housing vouchers worked out. They are a week late now.
Oh it will most likely be another week before FEMA sorts its issues out on this crisis. I remember it taking about 6 to 7 days for them to sort out San Antonio vouchers. But I could be wrong since I dislike the way current and past operations by FEMA have been handled.
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 18:14
Well if your ever in Dallas - I will take a nice cold beer - only one mind you. ~:cheers:
I'm hoping this can still swing the other way, and expressing outrage seems the only chance of it.
Which blond was it?
Think her name was "Edie", I'm not familiar with their misc folks. It wasn't just her, it was coordinated.
Only some now - don't go lumping me into the blame the victim crowd for a natural diaster where all three levels of government failed.
Edited to fix that error. Quite right you are.
This thread is comical. Couldn't this have been tacked onto the FEMA bashing thread?
Well hopefully congress and the adminstration gets their acts together. It seems that the ability to duck and cover might be limited however given breaking news like this one I just found.
Sept. 11 Recovery Loans Loosely Managed
By DIRK LAMMERS and FRANK BASS, Associated Press Writers
25 minutes ago
The government's $5 billion effort to help small businesses recover from the Sept. 11 attacks was so loosely managed that it gave low-interest loans to companies that didn't need terrorism relief _ or even know they were getting it, The Associated Press has found.
And while some at New York's Ground Zero couldn't get assistance they desperately sought, companies far removed from the devastation _ a South Dakota country radio station, a Virgin Islands perfume shop, a Utah dog boutique and more than 100 Dunkin' Donuts and Subway sandwich shops _ had no problem winning the government-guaranteed loans.
Dentists and chiropractors in numerous cities, as well as an Oregon winery that sold trendy pinot noir to New York City restaurants also got assistance.
"That's scary. Nine-11 had nothing to do with this," said James Munsey, a Virginia entrepreneur who described himself as "beyond shocked" to learn his nearly $1 million loan to buy a special events company in Richmond was drawn from the Sept. 11 program.
"It would have been inappropriate for me to take this kind of loan," he said, noting that the company he bought suffered no ill effects from Sept. 11.
Arvind "Andy" Patel, 50, said he used his $350,000 loan in fall 2002 to remodel his Dunkin' Donuts shop in western New York state and never knew it was drawn through the Sept. 11 program.
"Not at all," Patel answered, when asked whether his business had been hurt by the attacks.
Government officials said they believe banks assigned some loans to the terror relief program without telling borrowers. Neither the government nor its participating banks said they could provide figures on how many businesses got loans that way.
But AP's nationwide investigation located businesses in dozens of states who said they did not know their loans were drawn from the Sept. 11 programs, suggesting at least hundreds of millions of dollars went to unwitting recipients.
The Small Business Administration, which administered the two programs that doled out Sept. 11 recovery loans, said it first learned of the problems through AP's review and was weighing whether an investigation was needed. But officials also acknowledged they intended to spread the post-Sept. 11 aid broadly because so many unexpected industries were hurt.
"We started seeing business (needing help) in areas you wouldn't think of _ tourism, crop dusting, trade and transportation. ... So there were a lot of examples you wouldn't think of, at first blush," SBA Administrator Hector Barreto told AP.
In all, the government provided, approved or guaranteed nearly $4.9 billion in loans, and took credit for saving 20,000 jobs. That would put the average cost of saving a job at about a quarter million dollars each.
Of the 19,000 loans approved by the two programs, fewer than 11 percent went to companies in New York City and Washington, according to an AP computer analysis of loan records obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.
"I had nothing here," said Shirla Yam, who runs a clothing store in the former shadows of the twin towers that got a $20,000 grant from a local advocacy group but no federal aid after Sept. 11. "I don't know if I'll be here next month."
Under one of the programs, SBA lent money directly to companies that provided detailed statements on how they were hurt. The other program provided incentives _ and guaranteed loans from default _ so banks could lend money to companies they determined were hurt by the post-Sept. 11 economic downturn.
Most loans were well below market rates _ as low as 4 percent, documents show.
SBA officials acknowledged the second program, the Supplementary Terrorism Activity Relief (STAR), left banks on an honor system to determine worthy loan recipients.
"One lender could have been really strict and specific about the borrower providing the documentation to prove that they were affected by the Sept. 11 attacks, and another banker may not have, or may have had ulterior motives for approving loans," said SBA spokeswoman Carol Chastang.
SBA documents obtained by AP show banks had a strong incentive to approve as many loans as possible from the terror program. The banks profited from the interest while incurring little risk because the government guaranteed 75 percent to 85 percent of each loan.
And the annual fee the lenders paid to SBA to get the government guarantee was slashed from 0.5 percent to 0.25 percent _ meaning lenders saved an additional $5,000 a year for every $2 million they loaned under STAR.
"There was definitely an advantage to the lender to get that reduced fee," said Christopher Chavez, an SBA official in Colorado. He said he suspects lenders might not always have talked to businesses about damage from Sept. 11 before moving loans into STAR.
While SBA officials expressed surprise at AP's findings, banking officials said the agency encouraged the industry to use the post-Sept. 11 programs liberally, especially when its normal guaranteed lending program was hit by steep budget cuts in 2002.
"They had personnel at our conference stand up and say if you cannot find a reason to move the loan over to the STAR program, contact us and we'll help you find a reason to move it over," recalled Tony Wilkinson, president of the National Association of Government Guaranteed Lenders.
Major lenders like Wachovia and Wells Fargo declined to say how many loans they shifted into the terror relief program, saying only that they followed the law.
Wells Fargo, the nation's second largest SBA lender, said the STAR program enabled lenders "to provide funds to new and mature businesses impacted by 9/11" and the bank "continues to strictly adhere to SBA operational standards for all SBA loan originations."
Many loans went to local outlets of some of America's most famous and lucrative companies. For instance, 55 Dunkin' Donuts shops across the country, 14 Quiznos sandwich shops and 52 Subway sandwich shops got loans. Fourteen Dairy Queens _ part of the ice cream franchise partly owned by Wall Street billionaire Warren Buffett _ won more than $5 million in loans.
"I just applied for the loan at the bank. I had no idea where the funds came from," said Tom Mayl, who got two SBA Sept. 11 loans totaling more than $800,000 to open a Subway shop in suburban Dayton, Ohio, and a Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant in Sidney, Ohio.
"It doesn't seem right, just on the surface, but I really don't know the details," Mayl said.
Don Robinson said he too didn't need or ask for terrorism relief when he got a $765,000 government-backed loan in 2003 _ drawn without his knowledge from the Sept. 11 program _ to start a motorcycle shop in Brigham City, Utah.
"Actually, the motorcycle industry grew after 9/11," Robinson said. "People just took their money out of the stock market to buy toys."
Dentists and chiropractors also were frequent, but unwitting, beneficiaries. "They weren't putting their health second to anything else," chiropractor Colby Shores said of his patients in the suburbs of Rochester, N.Y. He was unaware his $87,000 loan with a 4 percent interest rate came from the terror relief program.
The loan patterns uncovered by AP left some seething in the neighborhoods directly scarred by Sept. 11.
"You have to take it back and give it to us. Even now, I could use it," said Mike Yagudayev, who said the SBA would only provide him $20,000 of a $70,000 loan he requested to rebuild his hair salon flattened by the collapse of World Trade Center towers in New York.
"I said, `You know what, take it back. Twenty thousand is like an insult,'" he recalled.
Thousands of businesses far from the devastation had no trouble getting SBA loans, simply submitting short applications that linked their slow business to the widespread economic fallout caused by Sept. 11. For instance:
_Karl Grimmelmann, general manager of KBFS-AM "Hit Kickin' Country" in Belle Fourche, S.D., borrowed $135,000 from SBA's disaster program after learning about it from a news release. He said his station was forced to pay more money to cover national news and also lost advertisers. "Everybody started holding onto their money, plain and simple," he said.
_Margie Olson, co-owner of the Torii Mor Winery in McMinnville, Ore., said her business needed a $125,000 loan because it couldn't sell high-end pinot noir to Manhattan restaurants that had closed. "Everyone started hitting the heavy stuff," Olson said, laughing.
_Melva Kravitz, co-owner of the Little Dogs Resort & Salon in Salt Lake City that offers boarding and grooming services for small dogs, said people stopped taking vacations and boarding their pets after Sept. 11, requiring her $50,000 loan. "It was awful," she said. "You just couldn't go on."
_Christine Hilty, co-owner of Violettes Boutique on St. Croix in the U.S. Virgin Islands, said the perfume shop lost 60 percent of its business overnight as tourism stopped. She got a $169,500 loan from SBA. "Would we have closed our doors? It was close," she said. "Everyone was afraid to get on a plane. Tourism was totally halted."
Though the loan programs have ended, the government is inheriting a residual burden. Already, taxpayers have been forced to cover about 600 defaulted disaster loans _ some approaching $1 million each _ from companies that went bankrupt or closed. More defaults are expected.
Jim Hammersley, who runs the SBA's collection arm, said many applicants asked for too much or too little money to keep their businesses afloat.
"The folks that were dealing with the aftermath of 9/11 didn't have anything that certain to try and gauge whether they needed money or how much they needed," he said.
___
AP Writers Paul Foy in Utah, Amy Westfeldt and Ben Dobbins in New York, Steve Paulsen in Colorado, Carrie Spencer in Ohio and Stephanie Stoughton in Virginia contributed to this story.
Now that is poor big government in action is it not?
Or is the government trying to head off criticism from that story combined with this one.
10,000 Katrina-Related Jobless Claims Filed
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer
53 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - An estimated 10,000 workers who lost their jobs because of Hurricane Katrina filed for unemployment benefits last week, the first wave of what likely will be hundreds of thousands of displaced workers seeking benefits.
The Labor Department said Thursday that the 10,000 figure was an estimate of the number of disaster-related claims based on spot checks with claims offices in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and neighboring states such as Texas who have agreed to accept benefit applications from workers who have relocated from the hurricane areas.
Overall, a total of 319,000 newly laid off workers filed for claims last week, a slight drop of 1,000 from the previous week.
However, department analysts cautioned that that the big-picture figure would have been higher except for the fact that many claims offices in the path of the hurricane were shut down. They predicted the number of disaster-related claims will rise sharply in coming week.
Private economists agreed with that assessment and said that last week's total is likely to be revised higher as well once the government collects more complete data on benefit filings last week.
"We know that a flood of Katrina-related claims is coming," said Stephen Stanley, chief economist at RBS Greenwich Capital. "The magnitude and the timing are uncertain but the figures will clearly be boosted sharply very soon."
The Labor Department on Thursday announced $30.8 million in grants to Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas to expand their ability to process claims for unemployment benefits as well as to speed up the payment of benefits to people who found themselves out of work because of Katrina.
The money will help "expedite unemployment insurance payments through mobile field units, hiring temporary staff, increasing Internet and telephone claims processing and rebuilding damaged facilities," said Labor Secretary Elaine Chao.
Meanwhile, the Bush administration announced that it was dispatching three Cabinet members and the head of the Social Security Administration to the Gulf Coast on Friday to help get the word out about government benefits storm victims can receive.
Chao, Treasury Secretary John Snow, Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez and Social Security Commissioner Jo Anne Barnhart will be making stops in Houston, Baton Rouge, La., and Mobile, Ala.
The Congressional Budget Office on Wednesday forecast a total of 400,000 lost jobs in coming months as a result of what is expected to be the costliest natural disaster in U.S. history. That would mean that the 600,000 to 800,000 payroll jobs that the economy was expected to create from September through December will be cut by half or more.
Economists will be closely watching the department's weekly jobless claims report for any signs that the impact on employment from Katrina could become even more serious.
The concern is that consumers, who account for two-thirds of total economic growth, could suddenly reduce their spending because of the rising cost of gasoline and other energy products. In such an event, the drag on the economy could be larger than is currently being forecast.
This thread is comical. Couldn't this have been tacked onto the FEMA bashing thread?
No more comical then certain allegations of blaming the welfare state for the situation in New Orleans. Its a combination of a whole lot of things. While I hate the welfare state - it was only a portion of why the situation degraded so fast in New Orleans.
Devastatin Dave
09-08-2005, 18:37
Let me do the math for you again Red Harvest...
There's a Democrat Mayor, a Democrat City Council, a Democrat Chief of Police, a Democrat Attorney General, a Democrat Governor, a Democrat Lt. Governor, 24 of 39 Louisiana State Senators are Democrat, 67 of 105 Louisiana State House Representatives are Democrat, there's a Democrat Representative in the House from New Orleans, and one of two Senators in the Senate is a Democrat.
But when the democratic party has great PR firm, the liberal media, then why let the truth get in the way of your partisan foolishness...
Careful Dave, they'll have to start a new thread if you bog this one down with logic and facts.
I thought we'd established that there was plenty of blame for everyone- especially state/local management.
It's like we're going back to square 1 again... it's all the Republicans & Bush's fault and they're covering it up.
Let me do the math for you again Red Harvest...
There's a Democrat Mayor, a Democrat City Council, a Democrat Chief of Police, a Democrat Attorney General, a Democrat Governor, a Democrat Lt. Governor, 24 of 39 Louisiana State Senators are Democrat, 67 of 105 Louisiana State House Representatives are Democrat, there's a Democrat Representative in the House from New Orleans, and one of two Senators in the Senate is a Democrat.
But when the democratic party has great PR firm, the liberal media, then why let the truth get in the way of your partisan foolishness...
Here, here Dave ~:thumb: . Nice post. The Dems ammo pouch is running
very, very low at this time.
Devastatin Dave
09-08-2005, 19:44
Careful Dave, they'll have to start a new thread if you bog this one down with logic and facts.
I thought we'd established that there was plenty of blame for everyone- especially state/local management.
It's like we're going back to square 1 again... it's all the Republicans & Bush's fault and they're covering it up.
Well, for the most part I've tried not to use this tragedy as a partisan tool to show the failure of one party or another. Unfortunately there are some in these forums that believe that if a comet were to collide with the Earth it would be because Bush's policies in Iraq. :dizzy2:
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 19:47
Let me do the math for you again Red Harvest...
There's a Democrat Mayor, a Democrat City Council, a Democrat Chief of Police, a Democrat Attorney General, a Democrat Governor, a Democrat Lt. Governor, 24 of 39 Louisiana State Senators are Democrat, 67 of 105 Louisiana State House Representatives are Democrat, there's a Democrat Representative in the House from New Orleans, and one of two Senators in the Senate is a Democrat.
But when the democratic party has great PR firm, the liberal media, then why let the truth get in the way of your partisan foolishness...
Let me do the math for you...the GOP has control of the Whitehouse, the House and the Senate. They have control of FEMA and Homeland security (their political appointments in a dept rife with them.) The Federal response is the one that failed most visibly. So what does Louisiana have to do with it? Not a hell of a lot.
What is wrong with most of the right wingers here? They can't see the forest for the trees. More importantly, they JUST DON'T CARE. That black rapper was closer to the truth than I would like to admit. The local response was manageable despite mistakes. What clearly failed was the Federal portion. Letting the GOP investigate it is stupid.
Devastatin Dave
09-08-2005, 19:52
Let me do the math for you...the GOP has control of the Whitehouse, the House and the Senate. They have control of FEMA and Homeland security (their political appointments in a dept rife with them.) The Federal response is the one that failed most visibly. So what does Louisiana have to do with it? Not a hell of a lot.
What is wrong with most of the right wingers here? They can't see the forest for the trees. More importantly, they JUST DON'T CARE. That black rapper was closer to the truth than I would like to admit. The local response was manageable despite mistakes. What clearly failed was the Federal portion. Letting the GOP investigate it is stupid.
You obviously have a zero understanding of how the government (State or Federal) works when and who has the authority to intervene when things happens like this. Your ignorance is sad, and I pity you for your lack of understanding. So keep sitting back and blaming the Republicans for everything, its much easier than thinking...
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 19:52
This thread is comical. Couldn't this have been tacked onto the FEMA bashing thread?
No, the Cover Up deserves its own thread. The "comical" part is that after 9/11 we are less prepared for a disaster than before. Only it isn't that funny, we've been doing all this crap for security, and it was a lie, a farce.
Dubya and his apologists deserve not an F, but a ZERO.
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 19:55
You obviously have a zero understanding of how the government (State or Federal) works when and who has the authority to intervene when things happens like this. Your ignorance is sad, and I pity you for your lack of understanding. So keep sitting back and blaming the Republicans for everything, its much easier than thinking...
Oh I understand all right. The system is set up to exhaust the locals, so that the Feds can blame the problems on them. Great system, ideal for the GOP to stand behind. COWARDS!!!!!
Adrian II
09-08-2005, 19:59
Well well. It looks like the Louisiana representatives in Washington brought home the pork year after year, for one economically failed project after another. Just about the only project they did not secure was the improvement of the levees.
The Washington Post has a very informative article today about all the money that flowed to Louisiana for over a decade, often after cost-benefit analyses that turned out to be fake, manipulated or flat wrong. Over the five years of the Bush administration, Louisiana received far more money for Army Corps of Engineers projects than any other state: about $1.9 billion. The Corps had just started a new $748 million construction project on the Industrial Canal levee when it burst ten days ago. Only the project had nothing to do with flood control. It was a canal lock intended to accommodate the Canal's increasing barge traffic. And guess what? There has been no increased barge traffic over the years.
Of course that is pork barrel politics for you. But if I understand that typical U.S. mechanism correctly, it can also be used to the advantage of projects and areas that really need money. The LA representatives could have faked or manipulated some alarming reports on the town's flood risk, just so they could secure the federal money for those levees. They didn't even try, it seems.
Link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/07/AR2005090702462.html)
No, the Cover Up deserves its own thread. The "comical" part is that after 9/11 we are less prepared for a disaster than before. Only it isn't that funny, we've been doing all this crap for security, and it was a lie, a farce.Yeah, the I remember how the Democrats were screaming in protest while the Republicans forced through their plans for creating bloated beaurocracies... not. Yet somehow it's still all Bush's fault. Again, this was covered in a previous thread- I'm going to have to start quoting myself. I swear, it seems these new threads are made just so people can sling the same disproved allegations anew.
The Democrats did fight parts of Bush's DHS bill, but it was because he wanted to be able to have hiring/firing powers for security reasons, while they wanted the workers to be able to unionize. :rolleyes:
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 20:21
Well well. It looks like the Louisiana representatives in Washington brought home the pork year after year, for one economically failed project after another. Just about the only project they did not secure was the improvement of the levees.
The Washington Post has a very informative article today about all the money that flowed to Louisiana for over a decade, often after cost-benefit analyses that turned out to be fake, manipulated or flat wrong. Over the five years of the Bush administration, Louisiana received far more money for Army Corps of Engineers projects than any other state: about $1.9 billion. The Corps had just started a new $748 million construction project on the Industrial Canal levee when it burst ten days ago. Only the project had nothing to do with flood control. It was a canal lock intended to accommodate the Canal's increasing barge traffic. And guess what? There has been no increased barge traffic over the years.
Of course that is pork barrel politics for you. But if I understand that typical U.S. mechanism correctly, it can also be used to the advantage of projects and areas that really need money. The LA representatives could have faked or manipulated some alarming reports on the town's flood risk, just so they could secure the federal money for those levees. They didn't even try, it seems.
Link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/07/AR2005090702462.html)
No surprise there. Louisiana politics have always been some of the more corrupt.
As for spending by the Corps. in Louisiana, most of the big Corps projects are levee, locks and dams. Considering the Mississippi is THE river through the middle of the nation, and Louisiana has more need for these type projects than any other state, it isn't at all surprising that it would get the lion's share. Many other states depend on Louisiana's opening to the Gulf since the traffic has to pass through there. Not to mention the oil and gas and refining that are also involved with major hubs and all that. So even with a perfect system, you would see more expenditure in Louisiana than elsewhere.
Devastatin Dave
09-08-2005, 20:55
No surprise there. Louisiana politics have always been some of the more corrupt.
Like most Democratic controlled areas, Chicago to name another, is it Bush's fault as well?
PanzerJaeger
09-08-2005, 21:19
Another republican bashings thread by Red Harvest. How many is it now, 6? 7?
The left has decided this is Bush's second term scandal and they wont let facts get in their way. Reagan had Iran-Contra, Clinton had.. well.. a lot, now they've decided this is their last, best opportunity to attach a permanent taint on the Bush Administration and republicans.
The sad thing is, they are using the suffering and death of thousands to advance petty politics. :no:
PanzerJaeger
09-08-2005, 21:42
Which democrats did Bush blame for 9/11? It is notable that you do not contest the fact that the democrats are using Katrina to attack Bush.. interesting. :thinking:
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 21:42
The Republicans as a whole do not want an independent investigation. That is becoming clear. Why? If they want to clear Bush, that's how you would do it. They should embrace it if they think he did well. If they want to pin down things done wrong by state and local officials, that is also how you would do it.
So why do they oppose an independent investigation? The only conclusion I can find is that they already suspect the Administration is at fault.
Why is it ok for the GOP to use 9/11 and the war in Iraq as a political tool, but it isn't okay for anyone opposing the administration to suggest *independent* investigation? The bias is obvious. Am I ripping on the GOP for this. You bet! The cowards deserve it and I'll call them up on it. It remains political as long as they make it so. Want to pull much of the politics out of it? Stop the blatant GOP backpatting and have an independent investigation.
No matter what anyone says, the Federal response was insufficient. There are systemic problems, and there are individual ones. It needs thorough investigation and fixing. Otherwise, we'll watch this same sort of thing happen again.
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 21:51
You obviously have a zero understanding of how the government (State or Federal) works when and who has the authority to intervene when things happens like this. Your ignorance is sad, and I pity you for your lack of understanding. So keep sitting back and blaming the Republicans for everything, its much easier than thinking...
I understand it better than you admit. I also can clearly see a leadership vacuum when one exists. The Federal govt. can take on quite a bit of power if it choses. Seems like the Coast Guard was in action right away, while Bush appointees were still rearranging pencils and preparing a memo to start training folks for a response. Bush himself wasn't too concerned for several days.
Strong leadership is not something Bush possesses. I've known that from back when he was governor, but too many suckers buy his "strong leader" mystique. I saw him on 9/11--stunned duck. For Katrina he was oblivious.
I don't think the Louisiana governor did very well either, but at least she was doing something.
PanzerJaeger
09-08-2005, 21:51
You and your moveon handler's idea of an independent investigation is a joke.
It was clear from the start that you guys were going to try and pin this all on Bush, and not let facts get in your way.
How would your supposed independent investigation be set up? Who would form and lead it? Surely anyone who has ever voted GOP or ever showed conservative leanings wouldnt be allowed on it. Surely no one who holds a different opinion would be allowed on it. It would do nothing but make the liberal propaganda thats been flying around "official".
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 21:54
You and your moveon handler's idea of an independent investigation is a joke.
It was clear from the start that you guys were going to try and pin this all on Bush, and not let facts get in your way.
How would your supposed independent investigation be set up? Who would form and lead it? Surely anyone who has ever voted GOP or ever showed conservative leanings wouldnt be allowed on it. Surely no one who holds a different opinion would be allowed on it. It would do nothing but make the liberal propaganda thats been flying around "official".
I don't have any handlers.
I know it is hard for you to imagine a more or less non-partisan group. Redleg and I have discussed the formula for this before. My concern is not what opinion they hold, but what REAL expertise they have.
Gawain of Orkeny
09-08-2005, 21:55
Apparently Americans arent going for this propoganda. The left and its mouth piece the liberal media no longer are taken seriously it seems. Only 13% of Americans blame Bush. I suggest 13% of Americans would blame Bush for anything bad that happened.
How would your supposed independent investigation be set up? Who would form and lead it?
Hopefully better than that farce that was the 911 commision. Maybe we should put the head of FEMA on this one.
There's an unused pike sitting about somewhere that is just calling for the head of FEMA, or more specifically the head of the head of FEMA.
yesdachi
09-08-2005, 22:11
I'd like Ken Star to lead the investigation. ~;)
A timeline of the response to the Katrina disaster, with documentation for every quote:
http://www.thinkprogress.org/katrina-timeline
Points of particular interest in that timeline:
Friday August 26th, Governor Blanco declares state of emergency in Louisiana.
Saturday, September 3rd, a senior Bush administration official (probably one of the usual suspects a la Plamegate) tells a reporter for The Washington Post (and it makes the Sunday edition on the 4th) that "As of Saturday, Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency, the senior Bush official said.” They were forced to issue a correction hours later. (see August 26th info).
Now, tell me again, who is playing the blame game? Who is telling flat out lies in order to place the blame? Why let a few facts get in the way of the Republican talking points? ~D
Red Harvest
09-08-2005, 22:22
Apparently Americans arent going for this propoganda. The left and its mouth piece the liberal media no longer are taken seriously it seems. Only 13% of Americans blame Bush. I suggest 13% of Americans would blame Bush for anything bad that happened.
People should check out Pollingreport.com if they want a more accurate picture. Gawain is glossing over the real poll results.
Yet 65% said he personally responded too slowly in one poll I saw today while another poll had 60% saying he personally handled it poorly. Another poll had 42% saying Dubya's response was "bad" or "terrible" (with a "fair" and two positive responses also thrown in the mix.) Another has 47% disapproving of the way he handled Katrina.
Of course the one you are quoting asks who is MOST responsible:
The breakdown is
Bush 13%
Fed. Agencies 18%
State/Local 25%
Noone 38%
Unsure 6%
So in reality 31% see either Bush or the Federal govt as most responsible, while State/Local combined at 25%.
And in another poll from 9/2 when asked how much blame Bush deserved for the poor Federal response:
A Great Deal 23%
A Good Amount 20%
Only Some 33%
None 22%
Unsure 1%
PanzerJaeger
09-08-2005, 22:52
Through your furious "calculations" in an effort to prove that Americans are on your side and against Bush, you're only showing your agenda.
You're judge, jury and executioner it seems. Even while calling for a supposed "independent investigation", you've passed judgement.
Why do we need an investigation at all? You can simply tell us exactly who is at fault, as you have already decided on a version of the events that supports your hatred of G.Dubya..
Goofball
09-08-2005, 23:04
Through your furious "calculations" in an effort to prove that Americans are on your side and against Bush, you're only showing your agenda.
Actually PJ, all he did was post the numbers and add "13 + 18," which hardly qualifies as "furious calculations." Are you trying to say his math is wrong? Or are you simply unable to admit that he is right so you make denigrating remarks rather than addressing the facts?
Tribesman
09-08-2005, 23:12
you're only showing your agenda.
Yet in every single thread concerning this disaster Panzer all you seem to be saying again and again is basically ....
"you are only saying the government ballsed it up because you hate Bush" .
So what was this agenda you were talking about ? ~D ~D ~D
you're only showing your agenda.
Yet in every single thread concerning this disaster Panzer all you seem to be saying again and again is basically ....
"you are only saying the government ballsed it up because you hate Bush" .
So what was this agenda you were talking about ? ~D ~D ~D
Hell I will help you Tribesman what should be stated is that the government ballsed it up because its the government
Tribesman
09-08-2005, 23:20
Same the world over Redleg ~:cheers:
PanzerJaeger
09-09-2005, 00:05
Panzer never fails to make a thread feel hostile.
Hehe, and your latest contribution to this thread has been what? A hostile character attack of course!
Be careful with that rock Cube, you're standing in a glass house.. ~;)
Devastatin Dave
09-09-2005, 00:51
Here we go...
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--katrina-democrats0908sep08,0,3588467,print.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork
Predictable...
Devastatin Dave
09-09-2005, 03:08
Good article..
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200509\NAT20050908a.html
Look it's Cybercast News! Brought to you by the good folks at the Media Resource Center and L. Brent Bozell III. (see other thread)
The only possible way this could get funnier would be for one of our conservative friends here to start posting links to one of Lyndon LaRouche's web sites.
Red Harvest
09-09-2005, 03:20
Look it's Cybercast News! Brought to you by the good folks at the Media Resource Center and L. Brent Bozell III. (see other thread)
The only possible way this could get funnier would be for one of our conservative friends here to start posting links to one of Lyndon LaRouche's web sites.
The Queen was behind this I tell ya...
Just to make your day
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2005/3235fema_ruined.html
FEMA Made Inoperative By Bush/Cheney Agenda
by Mary Jane Freeman
New Orleans emergency official Terry Ebbert called the Bush Administration's response to Hurricane Katrina's assault "a national disgrace." On the morning of Aug. 31, at the New Orleans Superdome, he warned that the slow evacuation there had become an "incredibly explosive situation," and he complained bitterly that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was not offering enough help: "This is a national emergency. This is a national disgrace. FEMA has been here three days, yet there is no command and control...."
A day earlier, on Aug. 30, more than 150 newspapers carried an op-ed titled "Destroying FEMA" by Eric Holdeman, who has served as the director of the state of Washington's Office of Emergency Management in King County from 1996 to the present.
Holdeman, who served as a career U.S. Army infantry officer before he joined Washington State's Emergency Management Office, stated bluntly that FEMA, which has been swallowed up by the Department of Homesland Security (DHS), "is being, in effect, systematically downgraded and all but dismantled." He elaborated: "This year it was announced that FEMA is to 'officially' lose the disaster preparedness function that it has had since its creation... FEMA employees have been directed not to become involved in disaster ... functions, since a new directorate (yet to be established) will have that mission."
FEMA's disaster preparedness mission has been in a "take-down" mode virtually since George W. Bush took office in 2001. The pro-active, pre-disaster-event mitigation planning and implementation has all but been shelved since the post-9/11 creation of DHS, which diverted nearly all FEMA money and efforts to terrorism planning.
Mark Ghilarducci, a California-based emergency preparedness specialist, confirmed Holdeman's assertion (EIR interview with Mr. Ghilarducci). "The pre-disaster mitigation aspect ... in reality ... almost 100% of the money, and 100% of the effort is being pushed towards terrorism preparedness." Ironically, he said, it was FEMA that worked before and after 9/11. (See accompanying interview.)
The deadly consequences of such short-sightedness is writ large in the unfolding catastrophe of Hurricane Katrina's wake.
Under the direction of James Lee Witt from 1993 to early 2001, FEMA was rescued from its past inertia and failures by Witt's launching of "catastrophic disasters" planning, among other initiatives. Four to five regions, prone to catastrophic disaster, such as the Louisiana coastline of Los Angeles basin (for earthquakes), were selected, which would require infrastructure inputs prior to a catastrophe, in order to mitigate the devastation that could be anticipated. Resources were then deployed to begin implementation and training of staff in those areas.
In his op-ed, Holdeman gave as an example Witt's "Project Impact," a Federally funded emergency preparedness and mitigation program at the local level, that provided funds to retrofit homes, schools, and hospitals in the Puget Sound area so that when earthquake Nisqually hit, on Feb. 28, 2001, damage was minimal. Ironically, it was also that day "the then-new President chose to announce" the end of Project Impact, Holdeman wrote.
In mid-July 2005, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff, in Congressional testimony, unveiled his "Second Stage review" of the reorganized government agencies under his control. He made it clear that he will end FEMA's role of mitigation planning and implementation, saying, "it [FEMA] will now focus on its historic and vital mission of response and recovery." That is, it was intended to take FEMA back to the time when it merely responded to disasters after the fact.
It was that legacy from which Witt rescued FEMA, and gave new life to the agency, which had been created by the Stafford Act in 1974. Chertoff's claim of an "umbrella of greater security" strategy to promote "freedom, prosperity, mobility, and individual privacy" blew away in Katrina's winds and with the countless lives needlessly lost.
Despite the fact that Chertoff used all the right buzzwords, alleging that DHS is an "all hazards" agency, Holdeman told EIR in an interview: "A lot of folks took issue with his announcement. The traditional role has been disaster planning, preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery." "An ounce of prevention, isn't a pound of cure in this situation; it is a ton of cure," Holdeman said.
A fatally flawed aspect of the DHS regime has been the lack of coordination between DHS headquarters and state and local government officials responsible for disaster planning (and this is expected to get worse under the Stage 2 plan). "DHS doesn't have regional offices," Holdeman said. "There's nobody on the ground to work with here, or nationally."
"I'm not against change. I think change, many times is good. There is a philosophy, 'if it is not broke, break it.' I feel in this case that is what DHS is doing." Holdeman said that DHS doesn't respect the opinion of FEMA people with years of expertise and experience. "Their opinion doesn't count. It has not counted to date. Hopefully it will count in the future."
Glad to be of help.
Edit: Just read that article - what a hoot. Does anyone really take this guy seriousily?
Oh and this one is even better
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2005/3234auto_execs.html
What a crack-up and to think I have been ignoring this guy all these years.
Seamus Fermanagh
09-09-2005, 03:31
BCC: GofO and SFTS
Hey Gawain and SFTS:
I didn't get my assignment for the cover-up effort. Can one of you forward me a copy of the memo. My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy address update didn't get turned in on time....
Seamus
~D
ICantSpellDawg
09-09-2005, 03:36
i got it - mission success
LaRouche is such a complete nut job. The sad thing is, he's believed by people. Some of you weren't even alive then; but way back in 1984, during the presidential campaign, LaRouche paid for an entire half hour of primetime for a campaign ad. I made the mistake of watching it; curious to see if he was even crazier on TV than his airport panhandler people. It was like watching a train wreck. You knew it was going to happen. You could see it happening; and you can't quite turn your eyes away. He had charts. He had graphs. He had evidence showing that the Trilateral Commission, the Nazis and the Green Party were in cahoots with the Gnomes of Zurich to take over the world. And he got votes! Almost as bad as Nader. I shudder to remember it.
Oh, and for all those who still think that the mayor of New Orleans had plenty of time to decide what to do, even though the National Hurricane Center couldn't pin down a strike area smaller than 500 miles wide by late Saturday night; check out the computer model predictions the 5-day track for hurricane Ophelia as of tonight:
http://maps.wunderground.com/data/images/at200516_model.gif
If this were a cat 5 storm, who should evacuate? Miami? Or Savannah? Bermuda, maybe?
Oh, and for all those who still think that the mayor of New Orleans had plenty of time to decide what to do, even though the National Hurricane Center couldn't pin down a strike area smaller than 500 miles wide by late Saturday night; check out the computer model predictions the 5-day track for hurricane Ophelia as of tonight:
If this were a cat 5 storm, who should evacuate? Miami? Or Savannah? Bermuda, maybe?
Hmm, going out on a limb here.... but I'd say people in areas that are under a warning? Maybe? Like they did for the Gulf Coast?
From the NHC:
A TROPICAL STORM WARNING IS IN EFFECT FOR THE EAST COAST OF FLORIDA FROM SEBASTIAN INLET NORTHWARD TO FLAGLER BEACH. A TROPICAL STORM WARNING MEANS THAT TROPICAL STORM CONDITIONS ARE EXPECTED WITHIN THE WARNING AREA WITHIN THE NEXT 24 HOURS.
It should also be noted that Ophelia is currently near stationary, so the comparison is invalid- there was little doubt where Katrina was going when the warnings were issued.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphics/AT16/refresh/AL1605W5_sm2+gif/024800W_sm.gif
Ophelia isn't really predicted to move much in the next few days...
Spetulhu
09-09-2005, 10:08
I didn't get my assignment for the cover-up effort. Can one of you forward me a copy of the memo. My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy address update didn't get turned in on time....
Just follow standard OP. Blame any Democrats that are present. If there's a Republican involved you'll have to backtrack until his positions was held by a Democrat and blame that person for today's trouble. Respond to any attacks on Bush by blaming Clinton. ~;)
The most powerful country in the world, ran by two parties of five-year olds. "He did it"! "No, HE did it"! :dizzy2:
snip... s we don't have to see graphics twice.
Xiahou, you do know that the reason parts of Florida are under a tropical storm warning is because those parts of Florida are currently experiencing tropical storm conditions, not because the storm is moving that way? I thought you might want to know. As for the storm staying pretty much stationary, I refer you again to computer models and the 5 day forecast. You know, back before you were born, probably, in the late 70's, the mayor of Galveston, Texas was villified for ordering an evacuation of the island and city before an approaching hurricane. The hurricane turned and went straight west instead. They ran him out of office for being too cautious.
Second, if you go back and look at the projected storm track for Katrina, you'll find that until Saturday night before it hit, the National Hurricane Center was unable to pin it down closer than 500 miles. That's a mighty long stretch of coast. Grab a map and look. New Orleans was on the left side of that track, which also happens to put it in the weakest portion of the storm.
Third, Katrina was not upgraded to a category 4 until 2 am on Sunday morning. The National Weather Service did not issue a special hurricane warning until 4pm on Sunday, almost 8 hours after mayor Nagin ordered a mandatory evacuation, more than a day after governor Blanco made sent an official request to Bush to declare a federal state of emergency for Louisiana saying (on Saturday before a clear storm track was even predicted and while it was still a cat 3) "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.”
Fourth, Dr. Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center of NOAA, personally warned Bush, Brown and Chertoff in phone calls on Sunday afternoon of a possible levee failure.
On Monday morning, on NBC's Today Show, mayor Nagin stated "I’ve gotten reports this morning that there is already water coming over some of the levee systems. In the lower ninth ward, we’ve had one of our pumping stations to stop operating, so we will have significant flooding, it is just a matter of how much."
At noon on Tuesday, Michael Chertoff had this to say on Meet the Press, "It was on Tuesday that the levee–may have been overnight Monday to Tuesday–that the levee started to break. And it was midday Tuesday that I became aware of the fact that there was no possibility of plugging the gap and that essentially the lake was going to start to drain into the city."
No, Michael, it was on Monday morning. Maybe he wasn't out of bed yet to watch the Today Show. ~;)
While the Director of Homeland Security was either lying or making ignorant statements on Meet the Press, a Pentagon spokesman told a reporter for WWL TV, "Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said the states have adequate National Guard units to handle the hurricane needs."
On Thursday morning, Bush (having finally cut his vacation short that morning) said in an intwerview on Good Morning America, "I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees."
Apparently, Dubya forgot his phone call from Dr. Max Mayfield before the storm. Who can blame him? He was excited about going to cut birthday cake with John McCain on Monday and playing the guitar with Mark Willis on Tuesday, they probably pushed a little thing like a major hurricane right out of his mind. ~;)
But, obviously, the whole thing was mayor Nagin's fault.
Any more Republican talking points I can clear up for you?
Gawain of Orkeny
09-09-2005, 17:12
But, obviously, the whole thing was mayor Nagin's fault.
No obvioulsy it was Bushs fault for starting the war in Iraq and not signing the Kyoto accords LOL. If he had done these things there would have been no hurricane and if there was no disaster as the NG would have saved everyone. This will in the end be very good for Bush as he helps rebuild these devasteded areas. I believe the same charges of the emperor fiddling while Rome burned were made on 911.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.