| I'll agree that Bush blew it re not insuring that FEMA was better prepared for it's...ostensible...purpose. As far as I'm concerned, given that FEMA is a fed dept. (proper or improper), it should have shown it's expected use a bit more efficiently, given how long it's been around. --- Indeed, the head of FEMA is the one to look at there, before Bush.|
The really bad thing about Bush is that he was so ill-planned for the Iraq War (whether THAT was proper to start or not is irrelevent here) that he needed to 'draft' varied states' National Guards for it (or maybe worse: He planned, before entering Iraq, on the possibility/likelihood OF using them?) Such drafting exacerbated the whole hurricane-disaster problem.
However, but for the latter, Bush is the LAST one in the 'Blame-Chain,' even with his earlier funds-cutting of disaster-relief. --- Interestingly, though 'questions' are pointed out for dept. and organisations re 'blame,' no persons are pointed to...yet...re such except Bush. Wonder why that is?
1st in line should be all those who chose to move into such a locale, disregarding their awareness of the possibilities re hurricane-disasters in the gulf. Some possibilities were historically-established. I was in Biloxi (aka Keesler AFB) when a hurricane hit in the late 60's, and I saw what one could do to the whole coast (never mind Biloxi) up to 'the Big Easy': homes and malls on the 'land-side' of the coastal highway, strip-bars (now, casinos) on the 'beach-side' leveled. And that wasn't an F4. --- Clearly, no one's learned yet to not build a beach front community along that highway through Gulfport, nor have they yet learned to prepare for the obvious. (But then, the same could be said for those living over the San Andreas.) Other possibilities were 'hypothetical,' though one no longer is: New Orleans getting drowned (makes me think of Pompeii.)
2nd in line should be all those raised therein (and, I quite understand not wanting to 'leave one's home' due to nostalgia, 'roots,' etc.) who believed that they have/had no responsibility for being involved politically or privately-communitarily re local actions for at-least-the-known disaster preparedness, but instead, that ONLY govt-authorities (local, state, fed) have such 'responsibilities'. --- Methinks this belief is held by most of those raised therein, mainly because, like the 'good' Muslims who disagree with Bin Laden, I've heard nothing from, or even about, those others who believed differently and who must thereby be a very small minority.
3rd in line should be all those in local and state decision-authority positions who were aware of the above 'possibilities,' whether or not they were 'prodded' by those governed to do anything, and put such concerns on a low-priority, expecting the fed-level to efficiently take care of things WHILE having little/no complaints about their state's National Guard getting drafted for functions it was really never trained for beyond CONUS invasion.
The latter especially applies to the New Orleans situation. While the mayor is complaining about the inefficiency of FEMA, what has he (or any past mayor) shown re preparation (beyond waiting for more tax-teat funds from Mommy's IRS) for his city's basin filling up? The present mayor showed that his lack of evacuation preparations left (among other things) more than 100 of local school-buses parked in a now brand-new lake, rather than being used when clear, dire, warnings were 1st being issued. Further, I've caught nothing re what Louisiana's governor has to say, beyond also complaining about FEMA (ergo, Bush.) --- You'd think that these decision-makers would have taken a hint when the Astrodome was specifically built to deal with an F4 hurricane blast. (And, I'd say the building held up, leaks or not, unlike the local/state authorities' preparation for using it.)
After discussing all those above, one can talk about Fema.
Then, and only then, after all the above people, is it time to talk about Bush (apart from drafting the National Guard, which exacerbated the problem, and created/showed new constitutional ones.)
"The buck stops here" is appropriate to apply to Bush, one way or the other, true.
But, where did the buck START moving from? That's the place to START the 'blame-game' and continue the finger-pointing at all places the buck passes through, before jumping to it's supposed terminus.
Too many people want to live at the bottom of Vesuvius, and stupidly expect accountability/responsibility/blameworthiness to apply ONLY to the executive leader.
I wonder how long the San Andreas is going to keep...hanging in there?
(Edited by John Dailey on 9/04, 9:03am)
(Edited by John Dailey on 9/04, 10:07am)