Third Party & Independents: Archives

We are hearing that Michael Brown was not qualified to be the Director of FEMA due to the lack of experience in natural disasters. There is evidence that for whatever reason, FEMA was expected to do a better job.

I would be curious to see a list of candidates who would be considered qualified based on natural disaster experience to head up FEMA. This list would date back to the time that Brown was hired.

David,
Excellent post.
Apparently an investigation by Bush was not neccessary to know that this guy should not have had this job. Instead of admitting that he appointed an underqualified person(cronyism)to supervise disaster planning and relief(piece of cake).I’m surprised he hasn’t appointed Raphiel Palmeiro to head steroid investigation in MLB.They are friends.
I hear there was an offer to Lance Armstrong to head NASA(HA HA).Bikes and space shuttles are kinda the same thing, just like horses and hurricanes.

steve smith,

Just because the general public can’t name a legitimately qualified candidate off the top of their head, doesn’t mean there aren’t several out there.

My instincts tell me that someone who has been in a high level position at FEMA for the last 20 years or so might be a pretty good candidate. Or someone with high level military experience with disaster/warzone protocols.

Not someone who fondled horse’s balls for a living. And got fired from that job to boot.

The bottom line is that the FEMA Director post should be manned by someone with EXPERIENCE in dealing with natural disasters. That’s just common sense. Brown had no such experience.

Andrew L.,

With all due respect the explanation in your post is exactly what I expected. There has never been such an outcry to equal the one that has been made regarding the qualifications of Mike Brown yet, that’s all it is.

Not a single voice or whisper of an alternative is heard. The critics are just that, critics. There is no substance to a criticism without offering another course of action.

You guys amaze me. All you have to say is that someone is not qualified and you actually believe that makes it so.

I’ll make it easy for you if you can stop referencing this fascination with horses balls long enough. Name two EXPERIENCED people handling NATURAL DISASTERS who you THINK would have done a better job than Brown. Of course we will never know because he/she was not involved in the Katrina disaster.

Thanks, Andre. Don’t count on me being any easier on a Democratic President or party, in 2008, though. This country needs higher standards in politics regardless of party.

steve, c’mon, like a recommendation for a replacement from Nader or Democrats or LaRouche, or anyone else here would be taken seriously by this administration. What a laugh!

David,

It doesn’t matter if the name would have been taken seriously. What matters is that when someone or, a group makes a claim that someone is horribly unqualified and has hundreds of reasons why, it is not unreasonable IMO to ask what type of individual they would have selected for the position.

It should be easy since now you have an entire disaster to evaluate and match peoples strengths and weaknesses.

It would be nice to learn from the naysayers who they would have selected pre-disaster as that was when Brown was selected.

This entire horses balls thing is ridiculous. I know it’s just for fun and I do get a chuckle.

The point is that sometimes (maybe not this time) the ability of someone to be analytical, a good leader, decisive, knows how to put the right people in the right support positions, etc. transcends having to need prior experience in a specific discipline.

steve, and the answer was provided. Someone with experience. Someone with knowledge of all the resources of government that can be brought to bear. Someone with experience with all the agencies involved. Someone with a legal knowledge of jurisdictions and empowering legislation for his office.

steve, someone like Colin Powell. There, you have a name. Now what difference does it make?

Nice one David.
You wrote:
“Because of Pres. Bush’s appointees, America is still vulnerable. Katrina drove home the cost of political cronyism which places incompetents and the inexperienced into positions of responsibility as a form of political compensation for campaign aid and loyalty.”

This is what kills me the most about BushCo. It’s not just your average sort of political cronyism — it’s the lowest common denominator sort. It’s cronyism so idiotically dumbass that it’s a danger to all of America. And I feel it’s also a shameful embarrassment to us that their incompetence and inexperience is so clearly visible to rest of the world.

“Let Americans never forget the words of Aaron Broussard, the president of Jefferson Parish outside New Orleans. Days into the disaster, he broke down during an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program.”

Nobody is coming to get us. Nobody is coming to get us. The secretary (of Homeland Security) has promised. Everybody has promised. They have had press conferences,” he said. “I am sick of the press conferences! For God’s sakes, shut up and send us somebody!

I swear, it just broke my heart when I saw that. Did you see the clip of him from the following day on CBS’s Early Show? He said:

“Bureaucracy has murdered people in the greater New Orleans area. So I’m asking Congress, please investigate this now. Take whatever idiot they have at the top of whatever agency and give me a better idiot. Give me a caring idiot. Give me a sensitive idiot. Just don’t give me the same idiot.”

Steve, Here’s a name.

James Lee Witt, former director of FEMA during the Clinton administration.

Govexec.comGovexec.com

Too little too late could be the battle cry for more than just Bush. It would be nice if this was such a neat easy package to try to present as somehow this is solely the fault and responsibility of the Bush administration.

That is not the reality. It would not have mattered if Mickey Mouse would have been in charge of FEMA the situation was set up for a disaster from the initial stages. Many of the now dead were doomed to their fate thru no fault of FEMA. Many died after that because of the added layers of red tape that existed and basic lack of knowledge of what was necessary for the Governor of Louisiana to even request aid.

There still has been no clear answer as to why the levees failed. The hurricane was no longer a level 5 or even level 4 storm and did not make a direct hit on New Orleans. No one predicted a levee failure at that stage.

Many breathed a sigh of relief that New Orleans had been once again spared.

New Orleans was destroyed because of the very system created to protect it failed. This had supposedly been discussed, planned, practiced this was the worst case scenario that had been talked about for decades. Though I think it fair to say no one can prepare for total destruction.

I will again point out my problem in making this a solely Republican/Bush issue. Handing this to the Democrats as an area where they somehow escape responsibility only increases the chance that we will merely replace Bush with an equally poor Democratic President.

What we independent/third party people should be doing is continuing to pound home the fact that neither party is the solution and both contributed to the failure. I don’t see the ideal solution as having more Democrats elected, so at times David I disagree with your take on some of this because even though we share some of the same goals I don’t think merely concentrating on making Bush the target is going to get us to a place where we have less Republicans and Democrats.

steve smith,

hey..it’s me again…i have another problem with something you wrote…shocking i know…

you wrote:” The point is that sometimes (maybe not this time) the ability of someone to be analytical, a good leader, decisive, knows how to put the right people in the right support positions, etc. transcends having to need prior experience in a specific discipline.”

um…does that logic apply to anyone? can someone go to an accountant for their chemotherapy? it’d save a bunch of cash!

when it comes to certain positions…you bet i want someone who is qualified. i want the most qualified person for the job…hell my mother is a decisive, analytical organizer…should she be head of FEMA?

we want the best person to fix our car, help us set up our damn DSL, fix our plumbing and electricity, etc…

why should we ask anything LESS of people who are supposed to be in charge of emergency organizations such as FEMA?

the fact that several of the heads of FEMA are Bush cronies, and they are blatantly ill-prepared for thier positions, is an outrage.

what i don’t get is why are you not outraged by that?

I’d suggest to you views, not to speak for Steve but in my own opinion, that there are some jobs that it’s not possible to demonstrate prior experience. Disaster management being one of those since it is not something we often experience to have a wealth of candidates with proven experience.

I’d also ask where was the outrage when he was appointed to FEMA as well as the others that are now being questioned? Where was the Time expose on his lack of qualifications then? I’d suggest that it appears alot of this might have been avoided had an issue been made of his qualifications after his appointment rather than waiting until now. If the real goal was a better government rather than more monday morning quarter backing you’d think not only the media but congress would have made that an issue then.

Lisa:
“in my own opinion, that there are some jobs that it�s not possible to demonstrate prior experience. Disaster management being one of those since it is not something we often experience to have a wealth of candidates with proven experience.”

This is just wrong. There are people all over the country who deal with emergency and disaster management in the military, or in their respective states — and who do so very responsibly and sucessfully for many years. My Dad was one such person, and there are numerous other folks out there just like him. And it isn’t only important to have people who take that kind of responsibility seriously at the head of such a Dept. but all along the chain of command.
One of the major problems with this administration is that they’ve been losing people who have excellent experience because it’s an insult to their intelligence when one of W’s idiot cronies are put in charge of things. I’d be willing to bet that we’ve lost a lot of highly skilled people in FEMA for this very reason — similar to how we’ve lost so many experienced people in the intelligence field because of guys like Bolton.

Lisa Renee,
Disasters of this scale don’t often happen, but disaters happen all the time. How about someone who has been in charge of a fire department in a major city? Or coordinated post-tornado planning? There are many such incidents each year that allow people to gain experience.

Also, are you suggesting that the Democrats are at fault for trusting Bush enough to let him appoint who he wants? That basically, we shouldn’t have let him appoint people to positions, he’s just not capable (I agree with this statement, but it’s really not practical)? You saw what the Democrats went through with the Bolton thing. I thought that Democrats were supposed to be unconstitutional obstructionists for not letting Bush have whatever he wants. The president doesn’t care about what the Democrats or the press thinks, or even what reality is.

Lisa, almost any colonel or general officer with battalion or greater command experience in a theater of combat operations has the logistical, planning, and coordination experience for the job. That is precisely why no one is criticizing Chertoff’s replacement for Brown in the Gulf area.

So, to disagree, there are quite a few others retired and active duty who upon retiring could have been called upon for the position. There are also intelligence agency personnel with comparable experience and knowledge of government agencies and resources.

Also, there are a number of ex-Governors.

Wow, I feel popular for a moment there, lol.

My point was were was the outcrying and outrage about his lack of qualifications when he was appointed? If he was a bad candidate now then he surely was the same bad candidate then.

A proven record in disaster experience is hard to demonstrate. The qualifications needed to suceed don’t necessarily mean a proven disaster background. Of course it’s easy to say what a bad candidate with no experience he is now, however where was this discussion before this became an issue? That is the never ending scenario, never any attempts to address what is now supposedly apparently clear before a crisis. Nor would I ever surmise that a Bush appointment should be given automatic approval. I did not vote for President Bush, I do not particularly agree with the majority of what he has done, however I also do not pretend that Democrats could do a better job because I do not believe that is the case. If anything, I feel there is so little difference between either party when in the majority that to me is the biggest fear. That the Bush mess ups will not make a better government, just one as bad but with a D as the majority letter rather than an R.

Am I claiming I felt Brown should be there? Nope. However I also feel that what I posted below is also true, that this is another appeasement attempt rather than real action in solving the real problems.

David, I don’t expect you to agree with me, and I continue to appreciate the manner in which you do express when you do not agree and realize we do share some of the same goals which is what is most important. If we all agreed life would not only be very boring but we would miss out on learning so much from others.

Adrienne, I’d suggest that I seriously doubt there is anyone or anything that Bush could do that you would agree with. That is probably the primary difference between us. You appear to believe that the Democrats are better equipped, I do not. I see our own solution to eliminate the system that gives either party a majority. I also do not believe we need more Federal government. We need less Federal government and more State powers. That said I have found that there have been times I agreed with what President Bush has done, as well as President Clinton even though I did not want either one as President. I think the lack of responsibility on the part of the Democrats is just as a large of a responsibility factor as the Republicans. I do not give either side a free pass as I see the hypocrisy in both and I am so tired of the never ending game of “it’s different when it’s us”.

Do I doubt there were better candidates out there for the FEMA position? Of course not. My father is dead, however his ashes probably could have done a better job in channeling spirit support than what has been done by many that were appointed by Bush. My issue is that this becomes a blame situation when a crisis happens rather than anyone in Washington bothering to make this an issue before something happens.

The old boy network of appointing unqualified candidates is not something that only Republicans can be blamed for. Another reason in the ever growing list of why both should be removed from a majority power position.

I realize it appears to be expected that you are either pro or against Bush, however I claim neither as I continue to make my goal for support of what I do see as good and a continued effort to return the balance of power to what it was designed to be, which was not the current two party system.

I continue as always to appreciate your input as you often bring some valid points into discussion but respectfully I’d be shocked if we did agree though I hope that does happen at some future point. When we do find points we do agree on? I’d predict with both of our passion towards that belief we’d be unstoppable.

What you notice again and again in the left’s post hurricane attacks is very small set of illogical and intellectually dishonest debating tricks.

Instead of pointing out what FEMA did wrong—since they can’t, having no apparent grasp of what FEMA’s actual duties are and what legal limitations they work under—they use the red herring of Michael Brown’s resume. Seldom if ever do you see even a single citing of an actual mistake FEMA made.

You frequently hear that Brown was “unqualifed” for the job and had no experience in dealing with disasters. Nonsense. Katrina is the fourth hurricane aftermath he’s worked on. They say that he had poltical connections that got him the job. True. No cabinet member ever gets their position without political connections. Look at the huge number of Arkansas cronies that served in Clinton’s cabinet. And what a remarkable coincidence that JFK’s own brother happened to be to be “the best qualified” person in the entire nation to serve as attorney general.

The librals say that Brown’s previous work experience was with horses. On NPR tonight, I heard a commentator say that that was his job “during the nineties.” Bull. Brown held that horse job for less than two years, and the rest of the nineties he worked in goverment administration—including, suprise, surprise, administration of local emegency response.

When I asked in another topic for an example of something Brown actually did wrong, I got stuff like “Well, people’s telephone area codes didn’t work,” as if that is FEMA’s responsibility.

They point to delays of hours or a couple days in mobilizing certain parts of FEMA. But FEMA is not, was not, and never has been resposnbile for first-responder duties.

Well Sanger I can give you an example of where I think FEMA has dropped the ball, not as a first responder either.

The whole issue of the failed debit card system. It was one that would have provided easy aid for those who needed it and with the limited banking ability for most of the poor that have been affected by this disaster would have saved them not only having to wait for a check but trying to find a way to cash it.

Last I heard this had been scrapped because of problems when in reality? This should have been made to work because it would have been better for the victims.

I wish I knew how to post just two pictures with the capation Election Year and Non-Election Year.

Just having learned how to link on my own blog, I tied and want to go to sleep; however, before I do I just want The Left & Right to think back a year ago (September 2004) and the photo op of President Bush handing out water to Florida Residents (Election Year) and than remember a few days ago when we all show a photo op of President Bush on Air Force One looking out the window (Non-Election Year) and ask yourself one simple question. Why the difference in response to the same type of Natural Disaster?

Talk about pictures speaking a thousand words.

Lisa, a failed debit card system?

Has providing a debit card system ever been a FEMA duty in the past, or is this a brand new and creative but never before tried measure? It sounds to me like some genuine out-of-the-box thinking, something far and away beyond the usual duties of FEMA.

What happened with this measure? Why did it fail if it has?

Funny that you don’t seem to know any of the details but have already decided that it’s a FEMA failure.

Henry, that’s ridiculous. Saying that a single photograph of one tiny moment represents what a person did the rest of the day.

When you sort out how to put photos on your blog, why don’t you also post a picture of Mother Theresa taking a nap with a caption saying “Mother Theresa Demonstrates her Commitment to the Poor.” Maybe one of Nelson Mandela stepping out of a limousine which says “Nelson Mandela Shows his Solidarity with the Underprivileged of Africa.”

Sanger, MSNBC I believe it was reported on this last night or the one before indicating that on the first day issuing, the crowds were barely kept from becoming unruly and a mob. Think about, an announcement of the government handing out 2 Grand for the asking? Folks were showing up from all over the place.

It wasn’t a bad idea. It was just implemented without forethought or benefit of a sociologists input. What was going to happen with the announcement as issued was predictable. They may have discontinued the issuance to any but those already residing in the dome, for the simple reason that there is no accountability for who will show up for their 2 grand handout.

Lisa said: “My point was were was the outcrying and outrage about his lack of qualifications when he was appointed? If he was a bad candidate now then he surely was the same bad candidate then.”

What is the point? No one can stop a non-criminal from being appointed by the President to head an an agency within the executive branch of government. The Constituiton does not require the Senate advice and consent role for such appointees, which is why they are called appointees and not nominees like Justices.

A wise and prudent president would however, realize that experience often equates with competence where the performance of his appointee would impact public opinion. Such does not appear to have been the case here, however. But Bush is not alone, I remember a Kennedy who appointed his younger brother as Attorney General without a lot of experience. Of course, back then we shot appointees without experience and the Presidents who appointed them.

We have made some progress.

David R. Remer:

err… I seem to remember that younger brother Attorney General going after Jimmy Hoffa and the Mafia. Its not as if the guy was a complete idiot like Brown.

Having apparently responded competently to the Florida Hurricanes in Sept 2004, what makes Katrina unique for FEMA’s Brown is not having a region/state familiar, tested and prepared for such an event. Which also goes for its residents and local/state officials.

Therefore, it mandates and falls to FEMA and the recently entrusted Dept. Of Homeland Security, to be New Orleans and the state of Louisiana’s safety net.

And finally Lisa, I take issue with your glib pronouncement that such management would be no better under ‘an equally poor Democratic President’. James Lee Witt is a perfect example, and if you haven’t noticed lately, the minority party now fills the role of deficit hawks.

Hurricane Katrina exposed the weakness and shortsightedness on all levels, not necessarily Brown’s incompetence. Yet, if we still had a budget surplus, those levees would’ve been reinforced.

sanger,
You said “Henry, that’s ridiculous. Saying that a single photograph of one tiny moment represents what a person did the rest of the day.

Am I now, in 2004 EVERY ONE OF THEM (Democrats & Republicans) and their “People” Knew that The Whitehouse & Congress was on the line. Do what was right and The Republican Party kept control. Screw it up and lose it all. Talk about a motivator. Now, one year later and no elections of national Importance (sorry Locals), we have watched over the last few weeks the Political Leaders laid back and totally no responsive in some cases.

2004 Hurricane Response
2005 Huricane Response

Pictures really do speak a thousand words. Get your hands dirty and kiss the working people’s butt when you need their vote. And screw them when there is 3 more years before their votes really matter. No, sanger it is not ridicules to thinl that our political parties would do such a thing It is however a Fact of Life that they will do almost anything to get elected.

Yes, management under the Democrats would most likely not have been any better, because it no longer matters much which party has majority, or who we vote for. They just take turns.

Yes, the cronyism is another perfect example of irresponsible, unaccountable, and arrogant government. Both parties do it all the time.

Government has:
(1) grown to nightmare proportions;
(2) while also growing the National Debt to nightmare proportions;
(3) and becoming more and more incompetent;
(4) and unwilling to tackle tough issues for fear of risking re-election;
(5) fiscally irresponsible and unaccountable;

Government is approaching the point of actually providing no net benefit to society. Especially if you consider incredible cost (lives and money) for all of that incompetency.

To the Brown critics:

Not a single voice was heard about his qualifications at the time of his appointment.

How easy it is to be the coach on the day after the game.

Views,
Nice try spinning my point regarding it is possible to have a good person in a job who is not experienced in a particular discipline. You took it completely out of context and used ridiculous examples of accountants going for chemotherapy, auto mechanics, etc.

Surely you can do better than that.

For some who may not be familiar with the chain of government responsibility for the protection of the citizens in New Orleans, it is as follows:

[1] The Mayor
[2] The New Orleans director of Homeland Security (a political appointee of the Governor who reports to the Governor)
[3] The Governor
[4] The Head of Homeland Security
[5] The President
___________________________________
What did each do?

[1] The mayor, with 5 days advance, waited until 2 days before he announced a mandatory evacuation (at the behest of the President). The he failed to provide transportation for those without transport even though he had hundreds of buses at his disposal.

[2] The New Orleans director of Homeland Security failed to have any plan for a contingency that has been talked about for 50 years. Then he blames the Feds for not doing what he should have done. (So much for political appointees)

[3] The Governor of Louisianna, despite a declaration of disaster by the President 2 DAYS BEFORE the storm hit, failed to take advantage of the offer of Federal troops and aid. Until 2 DAYS AFTER the storm hit.

[4] The Director of Homeland Security positioned assets in the area to be ready when the Governor called for them

[5] The President urged a mandatory evacuation, and even declared a disaster State of Emergency, freeing up millions of dollars of federal assistance, should the Governor decide to use it. However, the president’s biggest blunder was his cronyism that led him to appoint and unqualified Brown as director of FEMA.
__________________________________________
Also, the levees that broke were the responsibility of the local landowners and the local levee board to maintain, not the federal government (even though the federal government was somewhat ignoring an obvious disaster waiting to occur).

The disaster in New Orleans is what you get after decades of corrupt government (at all levels) going all the way back to Huey Long (mostly Democratic too, not that there’s really any difference between the Democractic or Republican parties).

Funds for disaster protection and relief have been flowing into this city for decades, and where has it gone, but into the pockets of the politicos and their friends.

Decades of crooked government in New Orleans has sapped all self reliance from the community, and made them dependent upon government for every thing (for which the people also bear some responsibility).

Political correctness and a lack of will to fight crime have created the single most corrupt police force in the country, and has permitted gang violence to flourish, and shooting at helicopters (the people trying to rescue them).

The sad thing is that there are many poor folks who have suffered and died needlessly because those that they voted into office failed them (at every level: federal, state, city, & local).
And, the people failed themselves for tolerating it. Really, we’re all responsible, but there are degrees of accountability.

Acknowledging that large numbers of people, many of them stranded tourists, would be unable to leave, the city set up 10 places of last resort for people to go, including the Superdome.

The mayor called the order unprecedented and said anyone who could leave the city should.

Governor Kathleen Blanco, standing beside the mayor at a news conference, said President Bush called and personally appealed for a mandatory evacuation for the low-lying city, which is prone to flooding.

The ball was placed in Mayor Nagin’s court to carry out the evacuation order. With a 5-day head start, Nagin had the authority to use any and all services to evacuate all residents from the city, as documented in a city emergency preparedness plan. By negligently waiting until the last minute, and failing (bordering on criminal) to make full use of resources available within city limits, Nagin and his incompetent administration endangered thousands unnecessarily.

Also, those that could have evacuated, and did not, foolishly endangered and threatened rescue for those that could not evacuate (i.e. in hospitals, etc.).

Mayor Nagin and his emergency sidekick Terry Ebbert have previously displayed lethal, mind boggling incompetence before, during and after Katrina.

Mayor Nagin and his pathetic police chief should both resign. Especially after demonstrating extreme incompetence (bordering on criminally negligent). The people of New Orleans can blame everybody else, but they too are fools if they continue to allow Nagin and his incompetent crowd of clowns continue to stay in office, and point blame at everyone else, but themselves.

Also, they negligently allowed 569 buses that could have carried 33,350 people out of New Orleans in one trip, to get ruined in the floods.

As for all the race-baiting rhetoric coming from prominent individuals, don’t expect Ray Nagin to be held responsible or accountable for being incompetent. It’s more convenient to blame everyone else for what went wrong than to hold themselves (the governor, mayor) and their own administration accountable for gross negligence and failing to fully carry out an established emergency preparedness plans.

It’s disgusting, but it’s standard operating procedure for the media and some racist leaders. You won’t hear a word of criticism from Jesse Jackson Sr., Randall Robinson, the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, or Kanye West being directed toward Clarence Ray Nagin Jr. Why is Nagin above accountability? After all, he’s supposedly the responsible elected official.

In time, New Orleans will be rebuilt.
But, guess who will get the biggest share of tax dollars to rebuild ? The wealthiest with vast wealth and power (and friends in high places), and they’ll do it with our tax dollars.

I see someones gotten his GOP Talking Points in the mail today. Or is it Talk Radio? Wonder how much the shills are getting now. Do they get bonuses for crises?

Lisa:
“I�d suggest that I seriously doubt there is anyone or anything that Bush could do that you would agree with.”

That’s true. I see no reason at this stage of Bush’s presidency to become a phony acting as though I’ll withold my opinion on the quality of his decisions or his judgement by waiting to the bitter end. I already realize he’s been one of the worst presidents in US history. Bad for the country in the way that Harding, Buchanan, Pierce, Hoover or Nixon was.

“You appear to believe that the Democrats are better equipped”

Judging by their track record thus far, I believe almost any group would be better equipped to lead than the Far Right Neocon Republican’s. I consider them a rash, witless, unintelligent and ineffective breed apart. They are Divider’s not Uniters.

“That said I have found that there have been times I agreed with what President Bush has done,”

What has he done that you approve of? I personally can not find anything either domestically or with foreign affairs that I might consider well thought out, or well done. Honestly.

“I do not give either side a free pass as I see the hypocrisy in both and I am so tired of the never ending game of �it�s different when it�s us�.”

Don’t assume that I go along with many of the decisions that Democrats have been making lately, because I often don’t. I am no longer a Democrat, and they’d have to do plenty to rectify that situation before I’d ever consider returning to their party.

“My father is dead, however his ashes probably could have done a better job in channeling spirit support than what has been done by many that were appointed by Bush.”

My father is alive (though lazily retired), but I think either he, or your fathers ashes could have done a better job than most who have been appointed by Bush! ;^)

“My issue is that this becomes a blame situation when a crisis happens rather than anyone in Washington bothering to make this an issue before something happens.”

These are executive branch appointments — no input is needed or asked for. And in Bush’s case, not even a major public outcry has the power to sway him. People who fail are never fired, although they may be promoted, or get awarded with a medal. It’s ridiculous — he’s ridiculous.

“The old boy network of appointing unqualified candidates is not something that only Republicans can be blamed for.”

That’s very true, but like I said in my earlier post, none have ever been as poorly or so idiotically chosen as now under this president. And when it comes to Homeland Security, that idiocy endangers all our lives and only makes us more vulnerable to more terrorist attacks.

“I continue as always to appreciate your input as you often bring some valid points into discussion but respectfully I�d be shocked if we did agree though I hope that does happen at some future point.”

Same here Lisa, but I feel I can gain as much by hearing differing opinions in WB as I do by finding those I agree with. Not necessarily to change my views (although believe it or not, that’s happened once or twice here) but to sharpen my wits, and for the sheer sport of debating the issues of the day!

“When we do find points we do agree on? I�d predict with both of our passion towards that belief we�d be unstoppable.”

Well, let’s look forward to that, then.
Cheers! :^)

Everybody,
If you are sick of the “Blame Game” than you might one to take a lokk at Louisina Federal Response Plan page 22, section 3 where it spells out in black and white the Authority of the Emergency Declaration.

Considering that NIMS compliance does noe take effect until 2006 and the Law clearly states that any conflicts between the two plans, the FRP supercedes the NRP, the fault sets squarely at The Federal Level. Unless, and this is a big one President Bush/ Mr. Chertoff demanded a second State of Emergency be signed because they want to argue that it wasn’t the hurricane that caused the Levees to break. Sorry Republicans, but this one belongs to the Democrats.

Now, can both sides tell us in the Middle how you plan to fix this mess?

Adrienne said: “I believe almost any group would be better equipped to lead than the Far Right Neocon Republican’s. I consider them a rash, witless, unintelligent and ineffective breed apart. They are Divider’s not Uniters.”

Adrienne, I think you grossly underestimate the Neo-Cons and mischaracterize who they are and what they stand for. That I believe, is dangerous. Failure to accurately assess the strengths of one’s adversaries does not lead to revoking their power, it can even increase it.

The Neo-Cons are are by no means witless and unintelligent. Afterall, they set out a plan to gain control of this country and much of the rest of the world they oppose, and they have been remarkably successful in developing and fulfilling that plan so far. This speaks of a very high degree of intelligence and wit since power in this country depends upon the ability to garner support of a majority of the voting country.

As for ineffective, nothing IMO could be further from the truth. They have been very effective in acquiring power, and projecting that power into the middle east, and the western hemisphere and even Asia with their economic Mutually Assured Destruction policy with China.

Underestimating and mischaracterizing the Neo-Cons weakens your position of opposition and favors their position, much the same way many on the right weaken their position arguing the left is full of hate. It is so patently false, reasonable people reject it out of hand.

Wresting control and power from the Neo-Cons requires highlighting the premises or assumptions underlying their agenda and use of power and the consequences of their exercise of power. This is becoming easier to do with each passing year.

Neo-Cons assume superiority over all others in the world. They believe the US is a superior nation, they believe US power is invincible, and they believe their vision of holding all other of the world’s peoples hostage to our economic might or failing that, our military might, is how America can maintain its strength, control, and security.

Pointing to the successes and superiority of other nations, and the growing hostility and mistrust against American leadership is one primary way of combatting the neo-cons. The truth of it is becoming ever more apparent with the growth of terrorism in the world instead of the defeat of it, a lie which the Neo-Cons must insist is the truth in the face of increasing evidence to the contrary.

Demonstrating the ever growing economic potential of Asian Pacific Rim against our own diminishing economic foundations brought on by increasing debt at all levels, is the means to combatting their rhetoric for smaller government, fiscal discipline, and prosperity for our children. Pointing to the lies, the fact that our government gets ever larger, more bureaucratic, and ever more expensive and never letting anyone escape the rising indebtedness turning our country into a potential 3rd world nation economically are the ways to combat the Neo-Con rhetoric of misrepresentation and lies.

And, pointing to an ever increasing imbalance between growth of military spending and secretive government vs. education, infrastructure, and peaceful accord in our nation and between our nation and others, is how to combat their promises for a brighter future for all Americans.

Also, attacking and never letting the public lose sight of the special interest influences and the corrupting effects of large special interest donations to both the major parties and their candidates is another hopeful way of wresting control away from the Neo-Cons, for that money base is truly the key to their ascent to power, and the most corrosive and undermining influence toward our Constitution and the values and cautions inherent within it.

David,
Very well stated; however, the noe-cons have allowed not only their weakness to be politically exposed, but their weakness in ideology. Katrina showed America and the World that. Today, 90,000 sq. miles now belongs to our Federal Troops along with an attachment of Mexican Troops because they failed to act promptly.

What is more impressive is that the Liberals have finally learned how to confront them. However, damaged by their own “Stupidity” over the last 40 years, The Democrats do not have a vision let alone a plan to deal with what is known has to be done.

Thus, for the first time in over a 100 years our society is ready for a political change. As President Lincoln took advantage to begin The Republican Party based on Society’s willingness to speak out about Slavery so can a Third Party take advantage of the “Economic Slavery” which has driven this debate about Katrina and New Orleans.

As you are aware of I do think out of the politic box and have advocated for allowing even “The Poorest Consumer” have the societal tools to become Economically Viable and Financially Independent. That being said and the fact that I do not believe I’m qualified to be President, I could with some assistance layout a Vision and Political Argument based on The Founding Fathers of America and The Law which would dwarft both The Left & Right. And while I think I would need a waiver from NSA to prove it beyond a doubt, the fact of the matter is we now have the knowledge & technology to build a world that as Children of the 70’s we could only dream about.

Cause the weakness of the neo-cons is that want to keep surpressing “Big Business” and the weakness of Democrats is that they want to give Hand Outs. No, The Founding Fathers of America realy did sole the Riddle of a Righteous Nation and given the Natural Course of Human Events over the last 5 years the Precedence has been established to exposed the Ignorance and Shallowness of the Ancient & Old World Aryan Thinking of Governing. So watch out Left & Right because a silent revolution is coming because as an American is it not being governed by your Equal Peer that matters most.

David:
“The Neo-Cons are are by no means witless and unintelligent. Afterall, they set out a plan to gain control of this country and much of the rest of the world they oppose, and they have been remarkably successful in developing and fulfilling that plan so far. This speaks of a very high degree of intelligence and wit since power in this country depends upon the ability to garner support of a majority of the voting country.”

But David, what you are describing is neither true intelligence nor wit.
I was not suggesting they aren’t capable of being clever, crafty or ruthless. Nor was I saying that they aren’t good at twisting words, or being politically adroit enough to build a propaganda machine which has clearly aided them in their quest for power and control.
When I say intelligence, I mean a superior capacity to reason and make good decisions — the ability to shrewdly study cause and effect. And when I say wit, I mean wisdom, mental soundness, and sanity.
As far as I can tell judging by their actions and decisions (and outside of their quest for power and control), the Neocon’s don’t possess any measure of what I consider intelligence or wit.
Indeed, they are far too rash for that. Intent on realizing their own fantasies, they continually put themselves in the position of having to break with reality — making them do extremely stupid sh*t. Perfect examples of this is the manner in which they’ve waged war, and dealt with the worst natural disaster in the nations history.

“As for ineffective, nothing IMO could be further from the truth. They have been very effective in acquiring power, and projecting that power into the middle east, and the western hemisphere and even Asia with their economic Mutually Assured Destruction policy with China.”

But how effective is that power if they create nothing but enemies on the path of acquisition? In my opinion, not very. Effective power would mean acquiring it with at least some measure of consent and accord with the rest of the world. That goal is what I feel a wise leaders tend to aim for — as it automatically negates constant opposition and greatly diminishes the chances for war.
The Neocon’s, on the other hand, quite obviously lack diplomacy, and intentionally invite war with their imperious and arrogant attitude. Constantly they seem intent on proving to America and the World how very unwise they are.

“Neo-Cons assume superiority over all others in the world. They believe the US is a superior nation, they believe US power is invincible, and they believe their vision of holding all other of the world�s peoples hostage to our economic might or failing that, our military might, is how America can maintain its strength, control, and security.”

Let’s face it, all grand visions of world domination are always doomed to failure from the start! Even with the world’s largest arsenal at their disposal a mere group of insurgents filled with nationalistic fervor and/or burning religious zealotry has been putting the lie to their distorted view of warfare and easy world control. The entire World sees this, and finally, America is waking up to these facts, as well.

“Pointing to the successes and superiority of other nations, and the growing hostility and mistrust against American leadership is one primary way of combatting the neo-cons.”

I agree.

“The truth of it is becoming ever more apparent with the growth of terrorism in the world instead of the defeat of it, a lie which the Neo-Cons must insist is the truth in the face of increasing evidence to the contrary.”

The Neocon Republican’s are finished. Kaput! This is another reason why they are unintelligent and witless — because despite their willfulness and ruthlessness, as well as that gigantic propaganda machine they’ve got at their disposal, it is painfully obvious that they have no idea how to combat terrorism.
The rest of the Republican’s (the true conservatives) however, I feel have a chance to change the course of their party — and perhaps even win future elections by putting the unrealistic Neocon vision where it belongs — well out to pasture.

“Demonstrating the ever growing economic potential of Asian Pacific Rim against our own diminishing economic foundations brought on by increasing debt at all levels, is the means to combatting their rhetoric for smaller government, fiscal discipline, and prosperity for our children. Pointing to the lies, the fact that our government gets ever larger, more bureaucratic, and ever more expensive and never letting anyone escape the rising indebtedness turning our country into a potential 3rd world nation economically are the ways to combat the Neo-Con rhetoric of misrepresentation and lies.”

Yup. Once again “it’s the economy, stupid”. They managed to get people to vote against their own self-interest - twice!- but all of us knew that was bound to change at some point.

“And, pointing to an ever increasing imbalance between growth of military spending and secretive government vs. education, infrastructure, and peaceful accord in our nation and between our nation and others, is how to combat their promises for a brighter future for all Americans.
“Also, attacking and never letting the public lose sight of the special interest influences and the corrupting effects of large special interest donations to both the major parties and their candidates is another hopeful way of wresting control away from the Neo-Cons, for that money base is truly the key to their ascent to power, and the most corrosive and undermining influence toward our Constitution and the values and cautions inherent within it.”

Yes, indeed. Very well said — and I couldn’t agree more.

“Neo-con” is a word which means different things to different people, so saying they are “kaput” kind of begs the question of who they even are and what their aims are.

“Neocons” in the US (as opposed to the neconservative movement in Canada, where the term and movement is somewhat better defined) are by no means “far right,” since to be one means that you were formally liberal. Hence the “neo” in neocon. A typical neocon in America would be pro-gay rights, pro-choice, and “progressive” on social issues while advocating a more activist American foreign policy.

In Europe, if you talk about American “Neocons” you quickly realize that it’s understood to mean Jewish conservatives in conservative think tanks and within the administration. The left seems to use “neocon” as a blanket description of the right, which is wildy innaccurate.

By and large, “neocon” positions in American politics have almost nothing to do with domestic positions and polices, so associating the neocons with the Katrina aftermath and response makes no sense whatsoever.

You meet hardly any rank-and-file Republican voters who call themselves “neocons.” They’re not really a voting bloc unless you include moderates and liberals who would normally vote Democrat but vote Republican because of foreign policy and security issues.

Looked at this way, you could say that a very big percentage of the American electorate is “neocon”—those who favor some or most of the Democratic social agenda but can’t bring themselves to vote Democrat because they don’t trust the Democrats on foreign policy and security.

These erstwhile liberals arguably delivered Bush his reelection. The same mindset was instrumental in electing Reagan during the Cold War—twice—so the preference of Republicans on foreign policy is not really a new phenomenon in American politics. It’s mostly an attitude which is an ongoing problem for Democrats.

Sanger,
Good comparision between Neo-Cons around the world. However, you said “By and large, “neocon” positions in American politics have almost nothing to do with domestic positions and polices, so associating the neocons with the Katrina aftermath and response makes no sense whatsoever.” and to that I have to disagree.

The neo-cons in America name could be changed to the word Rapitlists (Worship of The God Almighty Dollar). For while they show a strong knowledge about business and military power, their willingness to use “Oppressive” tatics against the “Masses” so that a “Few” can have thier Civil & Constitutional unalienable Right to “Have it All” is transparent.

True, President Carter did put a sticker on the Democratic Party back in 1979 about being “Weak on National Defense, but before that the Democrats enjoyed a very strong relationship with the Military Brass. And given the “Peaceniks” taking over the party during the 90’s, the political party has never been able to explain how “Peace” can win over “War.”

Yet, to say either political party holds the majority Point of View of the American People or even their party denies the fact that both form of leadership work to undermind “We the People” as apparent with “The Great Social Divide” they have placed upon our Society.

Meism vs. Weism has replaced the social fabric that makes up this country. Where 50 years ago, America enjoyed a reputation around the world as a Nation where every citizen just had to work hard to make a living and enjoy a good life. Today, the neo-cons and liberals have turned our Nation’s reputation into that of an Appeasement or Oppressive Government. Both are wrong and work to draw “The Middle” into a battle where they have to choice between the “Lesser of Two Evils.”

Do we need a strong Business Environment? Absolutely! Do we need a srtong Military? Absolutely! Do we need a strong Nation? Absolutely! Do we need a strong Society? Absolutely! But none of the above does any American any good unless we can find a way to break this Chain of Appeasement/Opressive toward “The Masses.”

The Founding Fathers of America began the Preamble of The Constitution with the woeds “We the People” for a very serious reason. As Ancient Aryan Thinking promotes oppressing “The Masses” freedom & knowledge, the Old World Aryan Thinking promotes appeasing “The Masses” to maintain control and civil order. Yet, replace the word “People” with “Consumer” and read The Preamble. Since every Human is endowed by their “Creator” to Breath, Drink, and Eat (i.e. Consume) it is reasonable and logical to say that every American is a consumer. Even in nature and since the begining of time there has existed a force (i.e. Beast) that consumes al that is deemed wrong.

Thus, since all teachings of man states that Man has Domain over everything on Earth and the common thread of everything that is known and unknown to exist. It is once again only reasonable and logical that as “We the Consumers” hold domain over “I the Consumer” not as an Appeasser or Opressor, but as their Equal Peer. And as you do not want to be told what you can and can not consume, it was the hope of The Founding Fathers of America that as “We the Consumers” our society would learn how to use our laws in a manner that would give The Individual their unalienable Right to do something, yet their “Common Sense” would tell them it was not worth the hassle.

A good example that I use to explain this point of view is the teenager that wants to go to the mall. If their parent really doesn’t want the child to go to the mall all they have to tell the child is sue you can go to the mall right after you clean your room, do the dishes, and take out the trash. Given Human Nature, almost half would quickly give up on the idea of going to the mall and for those teenagers that are willing to jump through the hoops haven’t they earned the right?

An American Eagle’s point of view I know; however, can you come up with one good sound reasonable & logical argument why every American and as far as that goes Every Citizen of Humanity can not have the societal tools, education, and ability to be Economically Viable and Financially Independent considering as a Society we work hard to insure to make all citizen financially secured in the first place?

Well, Sanger and Adrienne, like I said, if one can’t identify who the neocons are and what they stand for, which we three obviously can’t for each other, there will be no defeating their agenda or removing from power, since we can’t even agree on who they are. :-)

I rest my case.

If you looked up the definition in the dictionary of the word that has the most meanings and makes the least sense in the english language it would certainly be “neo-con”.

Yes, who are the neocons? Does it even matter ?

It’s really the system.
It’s diseased.
Elected officials are mysteriously stricken with the disease soon after being elected, which results in government that is dysfunctional.

The problem isn’t just neocons, or the liberals, conservatives, right-wingers, left-wingers, libertarians, socialists, federalists, constitutionalists, republicans, democrats, pacificts, reformists, elitists, religious zealots, secularists, etc. It’s everyone, and it’s the disease they all have.

We must be desparate, since there’s no end to the theorizing of who is to blame, even though it really doesn’t matter what their label is (or party).

It doesn’t matter what their label or party is because politicians are preoccupied with something other than providing responsible government. They are all busy: raising money for their re-election, sneakin’ pork-barrel into ten thousand page bills, graft, influence peddlin’, votin’ themselves raises & writin’ hot checks, spending $5 for gold embossed cards for Air Force One, borrowing & spending & taxing, printing more money to shrink debt, growin’ government & National Debt ever larger, ignoring pressing problems & tough issues, promisin’ more unfunded entitlements, bankrupting future generations, runnin’ all about appearin’ to do important hard work, fillin’ their own pockets, cleverly seducing voters into distracting and time-wasting petty partisan squabbling and finger pointing (designed to keep us from realizing what’s really goin’ on), reducing transparency where ever possible (designed to eliminate accountability), writin’ worthless books (not actually written by them even), speakin’ at engagements for ridiculous fees (as if they had anything of real importance to say), being irresponsible, unaccountable, and running the nation into the ground, decade after decade.

So, it’s really no wonder at all that our many pressing problems continue to grow in number and severity: home.comcast.net/~d.a.n/PressingProblemsFacingTheUS_NoBackLinks.htm
_________________________________
So, How do we it ?

Well, there’s two options:
[1] Fix the system.
[2] Let it continue to decline, and eventually (hopefully) fix itself (the hard way…but there’s a risk it could get worse and stay that way a long long time)

But, when 5% of the wealthiest have 59% of all wealth, how do the remaining 95% get an equal voice in government ? What do the remaining 95% have that the top 5% of the wealthiest have ? ANSWER: more votes

But, if government (the system) is broken and unaccountable, what difference does it matter who we vote for ? It doesn’t. And, since government won’t reform itself, it’s now up to the voters to force it to do so.

But, how can voters peacefully force government to be transparent, responsible, and accountable ? Vote better ? Yes.

But, not just for more main-party candidates. They’re part of the core problem. The main parties currently just take turns being irresponsible, greedy, and unaccountable, and each main party has an endless supply of candidates waiting for their turn. Thus, little (if anything) can ever be resolved without recognizing the core problem first. The system is broken because it has two main parties that have perverted the system, and perverted the laws to do the very things they’re supposed to prevent: legal plunder (which explains the problems with so many large systems such as Social Security, Medicare, pensions, illegal aliens & cheap labor, etc.)

So, when does legal punder end ?
Only when it becomes too painful.

How do we vote better to make it more painful for government to continue to be irresponsible and unaccountable?

What’s left that’s simple, easy to understand, easy to communicate, doesn’t need a lot of money, doesn’t really even need a party, and can peacefully force government to reform, and only needs the one thing we still have (at the moment, anyway) ? Our vote.

But, our vote has to be wisely used.
Our votes could peacefully balance power (not simply shift it, as often happens in civil war or a revolutionary war) between government and the people.

So, how do we make it painful for politicians?
Start voting only for non-incumbents (preferrably non-main-party) candidates, repeatedly, every election, until government
starts to adequately address the top ten problems facing the nation, institute transparency so voters can really see what’s happening (e.g. one purpose per bill, publicize voting records, trace big money, etc.).
This is the only way left to force term limits and remove irresponsible politicians, and make it difficult for vast wealth and power to influence government. Government shouldn’t be for sale.
Voters were supposed to be doing all along. But we haven’t. Currently, incumbents are hard to unseat, because they’ve fooled voters into thinking that their best interests are served by keeping the experienced politician in office. It’s not true.

By now, voters should be realizing that the system is broken, government is irresponsible and unaccountable, it doesn’t matter who we vote for, it doesn’t matter how much we demand reform.
Only the voters can change it now (peacefully), because government won’t reform itself.

Or, we can wait for option [2], in which the rich (and many are politicians), businesses, and commerce will simply move elsewhere, and the majority (80%) of the population will only have themselves to thank for their apathy, complacency, and laziness.

Steve, quite right. Therefore, the only logical approach is to go with what is known. Neo-cons, regardless of definition are represented by the Republican Party, and there is no question as to who the leadership and candidates of that party are.

Voila! Problem solved.

Yes, neo-cons are probably mostly Republicans, which is why Democrats will probably win the majority in the next elections.
But, will Democrats, once they have the majority, fix much ?
Probably not, because they’ll simply take their turn at abusing the system, and then give it back to the Republicans, and so on, content to wait their turn, while successfully keeping third parties and independents from having a voice in government.

David,

Thank you for solving my word identity dilemma.

David:
“Well, Sanger and Adrienne, like I said, if one can’t identify who the neocons are and what they stand for, which we three obviously can’t for each other, there will be no defeating their agenda or removing from power, since we can’t even agree on who they are. :-)”

David, the only difference I can see between my definition and yours is that I think you’re giving these clowns way too much credit. And that perhaps you’re giving the American people too little credit — if you actually believe they don’t yet see at this point in the Neocon’s reign of power that their “grand vision” of everything has done nothing but fail the country miserably.

Adrienne, I expected the voters to reelect Bush despite all that has been learned about 9/11 and published prior to October of 2004. And look who got reelected. I don’t think I underestimate the American voters. They have met my expectations far more often than not since the 1980’s, when I railed that Reagan did not understand Gorbachev and failed to recognize the USSR was in fact undergoing a revolution due to internal conditions.

To this day, a substantial number of voters believe Reagan was responsible for the fall of Communism in the USSR. No, I don’t underestimate the American voters at all, IMO.

David,
Your wry cynicism reminds me a lot of my husbands. I’m rather cynical too, but I always try to keep my optimism going for fear that if I don’t, I’ll turn into a real Crabapple Annie on wheels! :^)

Hey, let’s look on the bright side of these recent polls, shall we?

Zogby Poll
CBS Poll
Pew Research Poll

There are two areas related to Katrina that haven’t yet received much play in the U.S., which is still focused on FEMA and Bush, though they have in other parts of the world, according to the national public radio show “On the Media.”

In Europe, there’s a great deal of talk about how shabbily the poor are treated in the U.S. In this case, the European media is astonished that the poor seemed to be literally being left to die in New Orleans. With poverty rates rising in four consecutive years, it seems as if this should be a bigger issue in the U.S. as well.

In Asia, there’s been quite a bit of dismay over the intensity and destruction of the hurricane itself and criticism of the U.S. policy of ignoring the Kyoto Protocol. The idea is that global warming played some sort of role in this particular hurricane, which is seen as God’s or Nature’s rebuke to Prez. Bush’s environmental policies.

I don’t know if these subjects will catch on the U.S. media - or even if they deserve to - but it’s interesting that they do move well past the FEMA-screwed-up idea to the the-U.S.-is-short-sighted-greedy-and-callous idea. Some of this is just schadenfreude, but maybe we should be looking a little harder at the big picture in our own nation in regard to Katrina.

Hmmmmm

Let’s see,

George W. Bush,, President of the United States, six days after repeated warnings from experts about the scope of damage expected from Hurricane Katrina:

“I don’t think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees.”

Some other Bush quotes in the last 5 years:

no one could have anticipated planes would be used as missles and crash into buildings

no one could have anticipated there would be no weapons of mass destruction

no one could have anticipated an east-coast blackout

no one could have anticipated there would be a prolonged insurgency in Iraq

As a PROUD liberal and one who is NEITHER repub or dem, I gotta ask you HOW can people be so blind to to what has happened here in America in the last 5 years? How can we accept the actions of this administration so smugly? How can we not DEMAND change? I am sure that this is not how most republicans wanted things to turn out. I just don’t get the continued, unconditional support of this wolf in sheep’s clothing.

But he is trying to fix what is broken, right?

Bush to conduct investigation into Katrina crisis 06/09/2005 - 18:40:20

George Bush has announced that he will lead an investigation into how the Hurricane Katrina disaster was handled.

It follows worldwide criticism of the slow response to the crisis

HUH??? Bush leading the investigation into his own administration’s failure???? Now why didn’t Bill Clinton think of that?

Oh, but not to worry, Bush is well on the way toward rebuilding America:

President Bush Reassures America and the Gulf Coast: Republican Senator Trent Lott’s Oceanfront House in Pascagoula, Mississippi Will Be Rebuilt. Bush says “It’s going to be a fantastic house. I’m looking forward to sitting on the porch.”

sassyliberal

Upcoming elections…

Gubernatorial elections
2005- NJ[D] Corzine v [R] Forrester
VA[D] Kaine v [R] Kilgore

2006- Republicans hold 22 seats [7] ineligible
to run again
Democrats hold 14 seats [1] ineligible
to run again

2007- KY [D] N/A v [R] Fletcher
LA [D] N/A v [R] N/A
MS [D] N/A v [R] N/A

Source : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/us_gubernatorial_elections

Reed,
Re: Poverty in America and Global Warming
“I don�t know if these subjects will catch on the U.S. media”

No, they probably won’t be discussed openly, because the media for the most part really no longer serves the public interest. However, I do think that both of these issues are going to be quietly percolating in the public’s collective mind after the images we saw on television after the hurricane. Eventually that may lead to change — though how long that will take is anyones guess.

”- or even if they deserve to -”

Well, I certainly think both deserve to be looked at. But no doubt the real discussion will happen on the internet rather than in the media.

“but it�s interesting that they do move well past the FEMA-screwed-up idea to the the-U.S.-is-short-sighted-greedy-and-callous idea.”

IMO, all three are equally important.

PS. Sassy — you are so right!