Third Party & Independents Archives

Bush's Lack of Anticipation

Compounding Bush’s recent problems, the Associated Press has obtained video footage of President Bush receiving notification that New Orleans levees were in danger before the hurricane had arrived. This would not be such startling news if it were not for Bush’s reassurances after the hurricane had destroyed New Orleans:

“I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees” -G.W. Bush

With his approval ratings already at their lowest point ever, this release couldn't have happened at a more inopportune time. Not only was the president warned of the possible dangers to the levees, he was also warned that the refugees in the Superdome couldn't receive the assistance they would need. It also bears repeating that this flies in direct opposition to Bush's claims post-Katrina, that the hurricane's devastation caught everyone by surprise.

The point here is not to re-hash the past, and point out all of the mistakes of FEMA and all the bureaucratic interference in the relief effort. The point is that Bush clearly has a problem with honesty and transparency. Here we have experts telling Bush that they're concerned about the potential for the hurricane to overwhelm their support system, and a vacationing Bush responds with an attempt to be reassuring:

"I want to assure the folks at the state level that we are fully prepared to not only help you during the storm, but we will move in whatever resources and assets we have at our disposal after the storm,"

Watch the video here.

Then four days later, with thousands still locked in the Superdome without assistance, we get to hear Bush in a television interview claiming that no one anticipated the levees failing. Not only that, but from the other transcripts received by the AP, we come to find that there was already discussion of dispatching the National Guard prior to the hurricane, and yet none were deployed for several days.

Let's see what's coming from the White House in response:

"I hope people don't draw conclusions from the president getting a single briefing," -Trent Duffy

We can certainly draw a conclusion when that briefing gives direct evidence to contradict the president's claims of obliviousness.

""I'm not sure what is shocking about this video. There's really nothing new or insightful from it," -Russ Knocke, spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security

Mr. Knocke's argument is based upon the fact that these transcripts were already released to Congress. And his uncertainty as to why the video might be shocking says everything as to how he got his job. This revelation that Congress knew about these conferences does little to assure me. The result of the Congressional investigation was that "the response to Katrina at all levels of government was dismal, poorly planned and badly coordinated." However, what these conferences seem to say to me is that this administration isn't all that concerned about the people they represent. Bush's response to the concerns that were raised is essentially, "Don't worry, we'll get everything cleaned up eventually. And meanwhile, take comfort, we're praying that there will be no loss of life." Then, when the country gets mad enough about the apparent lack of effort, Bush goes on TV to say that everyone was surprised by the amount of damage, essentially "We couldn't have known that things would be this bad, so we didn't bother preparing for the worst. After all, I was on vacation at the time."

It is becoming increasingly apparent that this administration is unconcerned with any sort of accountability to anyone. In addition, their penchant for secrecy should have the entire public in an uproar. We must not forget to keep these things in mind as we hear what spills from the mouth of the White House. If we weren't there already, we should be at the place where we don't take anything from the White House without investigating it for ourselves. It is too bad that this form of true patriotism is rarely perceived as such.

Posted by Andrew Parker at March 2, 2006 12:50 PM
Comment #130798


“The point is that Bush clearly has a problem with honesty and transparency.”

This is the very behavior that makes everyone of us nervous about this administrations and the Republican controlled Congress’s policies.
From invented inteligence to justify war in Iraq,secret meetings to sell ports, back-door politics and last minute additions and subtractions to bills. Closed door defense contract awards. Secret spying program. Rampant corruption and cronyism. Secret prisons, torture. Direct connections to “Big Oil”, Military Industrial Complex and Pharmaceutical companies and the record profits in these industries. 37 lobbyists for every member of congress, steady increase since 2000. Disregarding the environment and Americans health in favor of industry. Does anyone believe any of them any more?

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at March 2, 2006 1:34 PM
Comment #130809

The actual comment on the tape was that there was danger of the levees being “topped.” That’s quite different from saying they might be “breached” which is generally defined as an opening or gap in a dike or fortification.

Bush was correct in saying that nobody anticipated that the levees would be breached. Only the BBC report, and the repeating of it around the world, was false.

If you want to nail Bush for being an enabler for out-of-control spending, I’m in your corner. But this particular item is a non-issue from what I’ve seen.

Posted by: Owl Creek Observer at March 2, 2006 2:07 PM
Comment #130811

Speaking as someone who lived in New Orleans, everyone that I knew was aware that there was a danger of the levees being breached. The Mayor called for an evacuation. Many left. Some stayed, including me.

It was general knowledge that if a hurricane hit the city with a certain force and at a certain angle in relation to the Missisippi River that massive flooding could occur.

The only way to ‘fix’ this problem was to start pumping money into the construction of a modern levee system that consists of more than hills of dirt. The construction will take, by conservative estimates, ten years. What do you suggest that Bush should have done when the storm forecasters predicted that the city could be hit a week prior to the storm?

Anti-Bush forces are jumping on this issue like fresh meat in a dog pit, but it’s an unfair tactic. Using the same logic, the government should be constructing giant walls shielding Florida from the impending waves that will surely come out of the ocean in one of the upcoming hurricane seasons.

Posted by: goodkingned at March 2, 2006 2:10 PM
Comment #130820
The actual comment on the tape was that there was danger of the levees being ‘topped.’ That’s quite different from saying they might be ‘breached’ which is generally defined as an opening or gap in a dike or fortification.

Oh, good. Thanks for clearing that up. For a moment there I actually thought Bush might have realized this was a big problem and not done anything about it!

Posted by: bobo at March 2, 2006 2:25 PM
Comment #130821

Observer & ned-

As I said in the article, this is not about what could have been done, or what wasn’t done, etc. This is about Bush and his tendency to give the impression that things are going one way, when the truth is quite different. Does it matter whether they feared the levees being ‘topped’ or ‘breached’? The point is that they feared severe flooding. Bush may not be lying by a mere technicality, but we, as a public ought to hold a higher standard than that.

Posted by: AParker at March 2, 2006 2:29 PM
Comment #130825

Andrew, great article. I’m glad you posted this info (I was hoping someone here would bring it up) and the video. Americans need to be made aware of yet another wretched instance of Bush’s negligence, dishonesty and no-account nature.

Andre, I think only the most fervent of Bush Cultists are still able to make up excuses at this point.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 2, 2006 2:41 PM
Comment #130829

What if Bush really is a stupid brain-dead talking head with no concept of what’s going on around him?
What if he is simply repeating what his staff tells him is the truth with no consideration of a reality other than what his sycophantic handlers tell him?
Could it be he’s not actually evil? or even a liar?

“8 more months, 8 more months…”

Posted by: Dave at March 2, 2006 2:50 PM
Comment #130836

Of course, everybody knew the levies were dangerous. And everybody knows that there was nothing Bush could have done about it between the time this conversation took place and the time the hurricane hit.

Years ago representatives from all levels, state local and federal, should have came up with a plan for modernizing the levies. It never happened. This was the administration’s mistake and they are only partially responsible for it.

Posted by: TheTraveler at March 2, 2006 3:08 PM
Comment #130838


No one (here) is claiming that the levy break is Bush’s fault. We’re not assessing blame for the details. The point is that we have yet another example of Bush painting an inaccurate picture of reality.

Posted by: AParker at March 2, 2006 3:16 PM
Comment #130839

I watched this video on the news and couldn’t believe it. Not only was Bush told one on one there was a very good chance the levees could break, he promised local officials in New Orleans they would have whatever assistance was needed from the Federal Government. Clearly Bush thought the Federal government was going to handle it all.

Does this mean I have to re-evaluate all the other things Bush said he didn’t know anything about: terrorist plans for attack, no weapons of mass destruction, torture in Abu Ghraib, Cheney outing Plame, the Dubai ports deal? What does this guy remember from the last six years, or from his life for that matter. Where was he again during Vietnam?

Posted by: Max at March 2, 2006 3:21 PM
Comment #130843

The point is that we have yet another example of Bush painting an inaccurate picture of reality.

I don’t see where that happened. I can see where some mistakes were made, but I don’t understand your “inaccurate picture” arguement.

Posted by: TheTraveler at March 2, 2006 3:33 PM
Comment #130850
What do you suggest that Bush should have done when the storm forecasters predicted that the city could be hit a week prior to the storm?

Been ready? Had supplies, a worst-case plan, resources mobilized, etc.? Issued a very strong federal evacuation alert?

Stop bending over backwards to say there was nothing Bush could have done when the most commonsense actions weren’t taken. A full week might have even been enough time to reinforce the levees somehow.

Posted by: Max at March 2, 2006 4:19 PM
Comment #130853


Years ago representatives from all levels, state local and federal, should have came up with a plan for modernizing the levies. It never happened. This was the administration’s mistake and they are only partially responsible for it.

You don’t know what you are talking about. There was a plan and money allocated to fix the levees, but Bush spent it on Iraq.

It appears that the money has been moved in the president’s budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that’s the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can’t be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us.

— Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; New Orleans Times-Picayune, June 8, 2004.

More —>

He spent the money for fixing the levees on a nice fat tax cut for the rich that everybody will pay for for generations.

Traveler: News flash! There never were any Al Qaeda in Iraq. Iraq has noting to do with Al Qaeda.

Posted by: Max at March 2, 2006 4:34 PM
Comment #130941
The actual comment on the tape was that there was danger of the levees being “topped.” That’s quite different from saying they might be “breached” which is generally defined as an opening or gap in a dike or fortification.
And this is supposed to let Bush off the hook? Maybe some Bush Leaguer can explain to us all what the word “is” means. Posted by: ElliottBay at March 2, 2006 10:59 PM
Comment #130969

Unbelievable, the lengths to which the media deranged on Bush-hatred will actuall go in order to tell absolute lies to the public.

And to think that this comes right on the heels of the BS story about America “selling” its ports to UAE.

The BBC article in the orginal link says one thing which is obviously not said in the video.

“Topped levees” would have resulted in an influx of water that or may not have even reached NO.
This is NOT a minor difference.

“Breeched levees” means that the whole system has failed and that you have a massive flood of water instead of a trickle over the top of a wall. Again, no minor distinction.

But of course, the Democratic party whores in the media just keeps saying what is totally contradicted by the video they keep pimping: that the a breech of the levies was what was discussed instead of a topping of the levies.

It’s almost as though these jokers think it’s still October of 2004 and that lying will hurt Bush’s electoral prospects more than their own credibility. Honestly, it’s time for the Democratic party and the media to JUST GET A ROOM.

Welcome to Orwell’s 1984, folks. Where a fake reality is constructed by the unelected fascist state of the mainstream media. This constant stream of lies would truly piss me off if there were any point to their lying, but there isn’t.

They have not succeeded and are not going to succed in pushing their totalitarian agenda of mind-control on this country.

Posted by: sanger at March 3, 2006 12:24 AM
Comment #130978


I suggest you read “1984” again then look in the mirror. That’s YOU Orwell was writing about.

Posted by: Aldous at March 3, 2006 12:57 AM
Comment #130984


The leftist, liberal media plot to dismember this noble administration and spread filthy lies from Bangor to Bakersfield will continue. Until and unless you, Rush, Pat, Bill, the WSJ and PNAC combine forces and stomp out this incredible evil, we and this great country hang by a thread.
It makes me weep to see this heinous conspiracy rot the foundations of this great Republic, and I can only hope that…well, you know…oh, never mind!

Posted by: Tim Crow at March 3, 2006 1:22 AM
Comment #130986

Aldous, as usual you enjoy the special exemption the so-called Watchblog Manager has carved out around here for you and you alone when it comes to critiquing the messenger. I attack the media. You attack me.

If you were a conservative making these attacks, you’d have been banned ages ago for your juvenile antics and everybody knows it.

Posted by: sanger at March 3, 2006 1:29 AM
Comment #131001
Fascism. The term is often used to describe individuals or political groups who are perceived to behave in an authoritarian or totalitarian manner; by silencing opposition, judging personal behavior, promoting racism, or otherwise attempting to concentrate power and create hate towards the “enemies of the state”.
Nazi thugs, known as Brownshirts in imitation of Mussolini’s Blackshirts, started riots with opposing groups, especially Communists, while blaming them for the disorder, embarrassing the government for failing to keep order and portraying themselves as the defenders of the peace. Second, they bolstered their popularity with free food and festivals, making them look like nice concerned Germans, and by staging huge mass rallies to display their popular support.

I wonder if many of our “under 25” crowd would know what a brownshirt is! Would your daughter recognize this behavior if it prevailed in the local bar? What choice would her children have if she didn’t? What else could be lost if this manipulative and dangerous behavour were to flourish because our children couldn’t recognize it?

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 3, 2006 3:53 AM
Comment #131011

Eliminate Property Tax and you won’t need an assessor.
RESPONSE: I’m totally against property tax. It is a form of legal theft (legal plunder).

Documented survailence of local areas (ie. parking lots, property lines.) would reduce law enforcement and judicial costs.
RESPONSE: I am completely for surveillance of all public areas. It is a good before-the-crime deterrent.
I’m also very much for biometrics for identification. That would solve many problems and prevent many crimes.
We’ve got illegal aliens voting in our elections, for cryin’ out loud!

Government can’t do what it is suppose to do. Why should we eliminate something as basic as the township trustee and add it’s responsibilities to the already overburdened beurocracy of the State Government?
RESPONSE: The federal government has definitely grown much too big.
Washington D.C. needs a good flush.
It also needs some major cut backs and reductions in size and scope.

I want to see the power of money stay with the individual making the money.
That means $1.00 earned is $1.00 in his pocket.
In this system the employee pays taxes, and the employer pays taxes for the same money earned. And when the employee retires and collects his return it is taxed again as income. Not fair!
RESPONSE: I’m against taxing corporations, because they just pass the cost along,
but also make us less competetive in the world market. I propose the following tax system:

A person buys a house and they are taxed for the rest of their life. Unfair!
RESPONSE: Yes, it is unfair. It is legal plunder.
It doesn’t tax income. It taxes what you already own.

A person buys a car and must pay a licence fee and exise tax every year to avoid confiscation! UNFAIR!!!
RESPONSE: I agree. The only fees required should be for
guaranteeing the vehicle passes emissions and safety tests,
and drivers must pass a drivers test. And, drivers after
age 70 should be required to pass a driver test each year.
Too many people are dying because of old people that are
dangerous to other people. We don’t need drivers’ licenses,
because with biometrics, you yourself are your only needed
form of identification.

If you want to save money in government you should start by going local. Eliminate State Government beurocracy, not local beurocracy.
RESPONSE: We definitely need less government at all levels.

Exit your home. Turn either left or right, cross no roads, rivers, or railroad tracks, and you will eventually return to your home. You will have defined the boundries of your “Block Government”.

If you live in a building, exit your space, turn left or right, enter no doors, stairs, elevators, or fire escapes, and you will eventually return to your door. That is your sphere of influence. Use it, take advantage of it, don’t abuse it.

Get together with others in your sphere and buy a dog.
RESPONSE: Not everyone should own a dog.
They don’t take care of them. And, I’m tired of my neighbor’s
dog that barks 100% of the time.

Go to Wallmart and get a wireless camera.
RESPONSE: I have a security system, but I am seriously considering
a surveillance system (cameras and motion detectors) to catch
vandals and find out who keeps running over my mail box.

Get grandma to knit a cap for the dog that has the camera knitted into it.
RESPONSE: That’s a good idea, if you have a dog, and the
dog doesn’t mind wearing it. But, cameras are easy to hide
these days, since they are so small. They can be just about
anywhere now.

The dog looks at everyone and everything that happens in his little “Block Government”. The camera is looking and recording whatever the little pooch is looking at. If Mr. INtruder does anything wrong, poochie will have it on tape and we save $35,000 in law inforcement costs.

A dog will see and hear anyone in his territory much easier than a human will. They don’t cost much to feed and they’re role is instinctive. What better public servant can you have other than man’s best friend.

No one has the ability to see everything your dog sees. But, it’s not hard to record 24 hours of continous live feed on your vcr. We’ve been doing it for years. We’ve also been installing cameras on posts for those same years.

But, those posts don’t have the ability to move, see, hear, smell, or have an instinct to protect it’s territory the way a dog does.

Make your dog’s camera a testimony admissable in a court of law and you will eliminate alot of juvenial deliquent behaviour. You will eliminate the abusive behavior. You will be able to document everything your dog sees and does and you will be able to eliminate the crime in your “Block Government”.

Keep the Township structure alive. It’s more valueable than the state or federal structure.
RESPONSE: More local and less state and federal government is better.
They are all important as long as they can tax and control us.
We can not ignore government at any level, because that invites abuse.
The biggest problem in this nation is not mostly federal government,
because it taxes the most, controls the most, and meddles the most
in all facets of our lives. It has grown to nightmare proportions, along
with the cost, the national debt, and legal plunder.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 3, 2006 4:40 AM
Comment #131040

For once, I think it is a little unfair to attack Bush directly for the entire Katrina debacle. In reality, its his cabinet that truly dropped the ball. Bush did appoint these people, so it is ultimately his fault, but this is definately more of his newspeech, something I think we have all come to expect.

Those of you who are defending the Katrina response, I recomend you take a look at the report the REPUBLICAN committee reviewing response put out last week, because it doesnt paint a good picture. The failure was, in fact, the fault of the Federal government, because DHS and FEMA people didn’t understand the mechanics of the response plan THEY authored.

Its kind of sad, really.

Posted by: iandanger at March 3, 2006 10:02 AM
Comment #131048

When Fox news and the entire Republican administration says the Federal government screwed up and you’re still defending Bush I suggest you look in a mirror and ask yourself if you are not blindly devoted to a demogogue.

It was everyones fault, but it sure seems to me like a lot of it was directly Bush’s from pulling money out of the levees, to dismantling FEMA, to saying he would provide support and then going on vacation I am not impressed with this man.

Bush spent hundreds of millions of dollars on Homeland Security, and we are obviously less capable to deal with disaster now than on 9/11. I really have to wonder about Bushies that don’t seem to care about that.

Posted by: Max at March 3, 2006 10:31 AM
Comment #131082

“Bush spent hundreds of millions of dollars on Homeland Security, and we are obviously less capable to deal with disaster now than on 9/11. I really have to wonder about Bushies that don’t seem to care about that.”

More like hundreds of billions of dollars. And the big problem is that money isnt being spent wisely, it is all going to inefficient contractors that dont have to bid on their contracts. They beg steal and borrow their way to the top, they bribe coerce and lobby, and in the end they wind up sucking our budget dry. A better approach to making our nation safer would be to turn the GAO and other investigavtive arms of the government lose on the major wasters, let actual competition for contracts happen, and when something is really costing too much, drop it or wait until technology makes it realistically possible.
bloated defense spending is a political and economic maneuver, and because we all want America to be safe, we put entirely too much emphasis on it without considering efficacy.

A real change will happen when the government actually looks at how they spend our money, instead of just borrowing excessively.

Posted by: iandanger at March 3, 2006 12:07 PM
Comment #131160

To all of you folks who are piling onto Bush from yet another mainstream media attempt to inflame the public against him:

What exactly would have had Bush do in that situation? Go into New Orleans with the National Guard behind him and forcibly gather everyone into the center of town so that he could make a speech to further emphasize what was already known about Katrina’s direction and intensity?

GW: “Ladies and Gentlemen of this doomed city, I have been informed by my advisors that a massive hurricane is bearing down on this city, and I’ve also been informed that there is a strong possiility that when it hits, it will overwhelm every defense that currently exists in this centuries-old town. Therefore, I am here to take you all away from here… whether you like it or not. So, if you’ll all just follow these nice guardsmen here, we’ll transport all 3 million or so of you to sites further inland. No, no… I don’t want to hear any arguments. This is what’s best for everyone…”

Geez… the people and the state government of New Orleans KNEW, knew for years, that the city’s hurricane defenses were inadequate and that the right storm would knock that city flat. There was a week’s worth of warning for people to get out of there. People stayed. They chose to stay. And if Bush HAD taken steps to remove people for their own good, THEN we’d have people screaming that he’d violated their civil right to stay holed up in a death trap.

So Bush was warned that New Orleans would get flattened by Katrina. Yippee! No big surprise there…to anyone. But perhaps Bush felt like, since there wasn’t anything that could be done to stop this impending disaster, perhaps he’d try to do something presidential, like, oh, I don’t know, re-assure the people that their government would be there to support them when the disaster finally arrived.

As it turns out, Katrina did more damage than anyone foresaw. And yes, there is a difference between “topped” and “breached”. The levees being “topped” was anticipated and warned about; the levees bring “breached” was something else.

If the liberals want to point a finger and assign some blame, how’s about slinging some crap in the direction of the Lousiana governor’s office, which didn’t do squat, despite being warned for years, to update and upgrade New Orleans storm-defense system…

Posted by: Lee at March 3, 2006 4:52 PM
Comment #131166

FROM: d.a.n (Daniel Summars)

To whom it may concern.

The post above by Weary Willie is not me (d.a.n) posing to be somebody else (i.e. Weary Willie), or conspiring with anyone else, to promote VOID or One-Simple-Idea.

Weary Willie’s post (above) is a legitimate post. It does quote some things I have written in the past (which is OK by me), but I had absolutely nothing to do with it, knew nothing about the post above until seeing it here now.

Posted by: d.a.n at March 3, 2006 5:26 PM
Comment #131167

oh, and ummm…. how exactly did Bush “take money out of the levees,” or “dismantle FEMA”? I’m not quite sure how he has that kind of power, even though you libs like to ascribe it to him. The levees aren’t under any kind of direct control of the federal gov’t, and FEMA was still there, although they most assuredly DID handle that whole situation rather shoddily.

Posted by: Lee at March 3, 2006 5:29 PM
Comment #131168

The criticism of Bush regarding the levies and not reacting quickly enough in 48 hours are somewhat unrealistic—yes, the problem of NO and a category four or five hurricane was realized by all for years. The finger-pointing and blaming is what pols do when their inaction kills people—that includes the city, county and state officials as well as the feds.

It’s what didn’t happen in the critical hours and days after the hurricane hit that is really up for discussion. I remember distinctly one of the first concerns was not about rescuing people or getting people out—it was about those looters and lawless ne’re-do-wells. Nobody seems worried about the looting going on now in the name of ‘reconstruction’.

And I’m still waiting for some federal prosecution of the Gretna police who turned back desperate people trying to escape the horror and flood waters.

I can’t help but wonder how a country like Cuba, with all its limitations and lack of resources can evacuate hundreds of thousands of people out of harm’s way, without loss of life. I still think the price tag of Katrina is the automobile—it’s what makes large cities ‘doable’, and lets the country ignore mass transit and real evacutation plans and real home security.

New Orleans was a tragedy waiting to happen—but it was made alot worse by overdevelopment of vital watershed areas that blunts hurricane flooding, by passing around the responsibility of reinforcing the levies like political musical chairs (much like the way insurance companies handle medical bills anymore—how can we defer this responsibility to someone else?), and an absolutely criminal incompetence in disaster responsiveness.

Many of the local people down there are Democrats, and they share in the blame. But a project as big and as important as the levy system cried out for federal dollars and supervision and expertise. The loss of life was frankly inexcusable.

Posted by: Tim Crow at March 3, 2006 5:31 PM
Comment #131288

Thank you, Tim Crow. And I mean that very sincerely.

You statements were unbiased and illuminating, and it’s nice to see comments like that. There was more than enough blame to go around for everyone involved in the New Orleans tragedy, and the peril was there long prior to Bush. His Administration cannot be held without fault in the resulting situation, but it can’t be laid solely, or even primarily, at his feet.

The Fed could have and should have made efforts to improve the levee and relief system for New Orleans long ago, and it could have been attacked by either a Democrat OR a Republican administration. But it wasn’t. Or who knows? Perhaps some of the funding that has gone to Lousiana over the years is money that SHOULD have gone into New Orleans for that very purpose, and was simply re-appropriated for other uses. After all, Lousiana’s state government has a rather long history of inefficiency and/or corruption.

Posted by: Lee at March 4, 2006 10:44 AM
Comment #131315
It is becoming increasingly apparent that this administration is unconcerned with any sort of accountability to anyone.

No doubt about it.
And, when they are no longer the In-Party,
and the Out-Party (i.e. Democrats) get their turn (again) to be the In-Party, the cycle will start all over.

But, the problem is not with parties.
Parties are not that different.

The problem is corrupt government, and voters that are not quite fed-up enough, not quite feeling enough pain yet, to do anything about it.

Unfortunately, what the voters fail to realize is that the consequences of irresponsible and unaccountable government are in the pipe-line already. It is just a matter of time. Recessions in the U.S. have been occurring between 2 to 11 years for the last 46 years. Is what we are doing now going to make recovery from the next recession easier, or more painful? Painful for who? Painful For politicians with golden parachutes? Or painful for complacent voters?

Since the last recession was about 2002, the next recession (based on 2 to 11 year extremes) will occur by 2012. I doubt we will make it past 2009 or 2010, and the recession could possibly turn into a depression, based on these 34+ factors.

Bush is guilty of cronism (Michael Brown, Harriet Miers, etc.). There is no doubt that the federal government, Louisianna governor, and New Orleans mayor all failed miserably. One again, it seems like a failure to connect the dots, even though each adjacent dot is screaming “Look! Here I am!”. Why do so many seem surprised by any of this? When has the federal government ever connected the dots? Look at the blunder at Pearl Harbor. There were rumors of such a thing before it happened. The federal government is the tomb-stone agency. They rarely do anything, until after the tragedy. Then, they make excuses “Who would have thought that would ever happen”. Then, they say “I take complete responsibility.”, when we all know they will likely never suffer the consequences of their negligence.

Since we have a government Of/By/For the People, government and The People are essentially one in the same. That is because The People still have the right to vote. But, if The People keep voting for irresponsible incumbents, then The People only have themselves to thank for it.

So, it’s not just a lack of Bush’s Anticipation.
It is a lack of Voters’ Anticipation.

It is laziness and negligence all the way around.

Unfortunately, it is human nature to seek security and prosperity with the least effort and pain. Work is effort. Hard work can be painful (in a sense). Most people neglect or put off the hard things as long as they can.
And, sometimes, unethical (even illegal) methods are preferred by some. Especially where there is power and increased opportunity (i.e. lack of transparency). That is why any government is always trying to grow more and more corrupt. It is as certain as any law of phyisics.

Responsibility = Power + Education + Transparency + Accountability

Corruption = Power - Education - Transparency - Accountability

Therefore, the situation in this nation will not change until the pain level is sufficient to create an incentive for voters to protest and vote out irresponsible incumbents, instead of empowering them every election to continue to use and abuse the voters.

So, the cycle continues …
,-(1) Corruption, oppression,
| (2) courage, Responsibility, rebellion,
| (3) liberty, growth, abundance,
| (4) selfishness, complacency, fiscal irresponsibility
| (5) apathy, dependency, fiscal & moral bankruptcy,
` - - return to step (1)
… until we, someday, understand what we are doing that perpetuates it, and learn to stop doing it.

The problem is insufficient Education, Transparency, and Accountability, but no lack of Power. There is rarely a lack of Power.

So, the solution must start with Education, which lead to Transparency, which leads to more Accontability, and finally yields Responsibility.

Posted by: d.a.n at March 4, 2006 2:45 PM
Comment #131363

All these government officials are idiots.we should send them to Iraq and let the soldiers come. And the idiot president ha ha president is the worst.

Posted by: bob at March 5, 2006 1:59 AM
Comment #131593

Wow… nice, educated comment there, Bob. Watch much TV news, do ya?

Posted by: Lee at March 6, 2006 12:25 PM
Post a comment