2005-10-6 04:53:00
Brian Writes:
I'm surprised you made this slip, JJ. You are usually very much on top of the facts. I do recall a number of media outlets musing about whether the flack that Bush Sr. took for Hurricane Andrew would in any way motivate W to respond faster. And some were surprised -- or at least expressed surprise -- when he did not respond as quickly as they felt he should. But he did respond faster than did his father. And some outlets gave him credit for that.
Thanks for correcting me Brian. Yes, I am usually careful about my facts. It did seem from my memory that the criticism about the slow response of the President to Hurricane Andrew was nothing like that for Katrina. I'm sure the President got some, but nothing like today, largely caused by the increased partisan war.
I was thinking that Clinton was President then, but I missed that one - close though, off by a few months.
Susan:
My biggest criticism of FEMA was turning away help "they didn't need" when they actually DID need it. Doctors were kept away from people, volunteers with boats were kept away, teams of firefighters were sent on media campaigns instead of rescue operations, people who wanted to house evacuees were turned down. Everyone was waiting to hear from the top and no one was moving. That sort of attitude comes from the top where no one dares move without the right credentials or piece of paper
FEMA certainly deserved criticism and it was probably a good move to fire Michael Brown even though he was no worse than most bureaucratic rulers. Rarely will people take initiative in any bureaucracy for they usually get punished for it.
The problem w e have is people do not see the real problem. People think the problem is the people running the bureaucracies, but it is the bureaucracies themselves. The system needs an overhaul so power can flow from the bottom up as well as the top down. Until this happens a Michael Brown will be seen in every situation like this that reveals bureaucratic flaws.
Susan:
I highly doubt you went and read the article. You did not make one relevant comment to it. My whole concern was that The Washington Post (who I thought everyone knew was democratic) was criticizing the fact that the Democratic party is adopting the political style of Delay. If the Washington Post is concerned about the Democrats, there really must be something wrong.
I did read most of it and went back and read it again. It still looks like an attack piece to me. Ninety percent was on the evil ways of DeLay tactics and a line or two saying that Democrats are forced to now do the same thing.
When they were the majority in Texas they applied similar tactics and are currently doing so in Ohio today.
This trumped up charge against DeLay sounds too much like the one against Idaho Representative George Hansen a few years ago. He was unjustly railroaded into jail and tortured there.
Read this reprehensible story at:
http://www.constitution.org/ghansen/conghansen.htm
Susan:
More government is not the answer to every problem. The fact that Bush, a supposed conservative, is using more government as a solution is the reason I don't trust him very much. I watch what people do and see how closely it is aligned to what they say. Bush concerns me because he says the right words of a conservative but acts like a liberal Democrat (govt. is the solution). He could be a strong leader and take the opportunity to teach the American people about the importance of states rights. If he wants to involve the fed govt., involve them in training the states how to do better. That would be the type of action of a conservative.
One of the reasons Bush is so hated by Democrats is he has tried to decentralize government in many ways. As far as national security goes he has indeed supported more centralized power in this area, but so did Lincoln, Roosevelt and most every other leader in time of war. After the crisis was over many restrictive laws were relaxed. The encroachment of the government under Bush today does not hold a candle to Lincoln and FDR.
Social programs are rarely repealed because there would be a public outcry, but generally restrictive measures (like the 55 MPH speed limit) are often repealed because the public will support this direction.
As fast as laws are devised, their evasion is contrived. German Proverb
Copyright © 2005 by J J Dewey, All Rights Reserved