This has to be a crushing disappointment
If this poll has any accuracy, only 13% of Americans are willing to blame Bush for the Katrina debacle. Now 13% is not a negligible number, but you've got to realize that in today's climate, 13% of Americans would likely blame Bush for the crash of the Hindenburg.
I could even see polls such as this one culminating in the final mental breakdown of the hard left. After so many bitter disappointments, their hopes had been so high. You could almost envision the collective rubbing of hands, almost hear the collective mutterings of "We've got you now, you smirking Texas chimp!" through tightly clenched teeth.
It seems such reactions may have been premature. And the real irony here is that Bush does merit his fair share of criticism in this current disaster. At the very least, he displayed an appalling political tone-deafness in the early days of the crisis. And like it or not, symbolism, image and appearance are extremely important from our leaders at times like these.
In short, some of the left's complaints have some validity here. But guess what? Nobody's listening anymore. For four solid years, the blathering idiots of the lunatic left have been blaming Bush for everything from sunspots to the breakup of Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston. They've predicted looming fascism, complete with concentration camps, imminent theocracy, back-alley abortions and a return to legalized segregation. As with the boy who cried wolf, the country has become accustomed to filtering them out.
And when mouth-breathing imbeciles like Kanye West and Randi Rhodes start explaining natural disasters as racist conspiracies, it does nothing but reinforce the perception that their side has nothing of substance to say. Somewhere in the bowels of the White House, you just know Karl Rove is rubbing his hands together, saying, "Please, call us racists some more, pleasepleaseplease..."
It's sad. The whole damn thing is just incredibly effing sad. Once New Orleans is dry and cleaned up, the time will come for us to undertake a critical examination of exactly what went wrong and how to do it right the next time. But as highly politicized as the whole tragedy has already become, does anyone believe that such a dispassionate investigation can honestly take place?
Anyone?
Comments
Rocking good post, my friend!
Posted by: Mr. B | September 7, 2005 02:23 PM
How do you do it right the first time? What precedence did we have to base our response time on? Barring digging through old Egyptian and Hebrew scrolls talking about the other flood, something like this hasn't happened before. I'd put WAY more validity into complaints about budget cuts and levee impotence if every blogger and news team had been talking about them for the last few years, or hell, even months. But not one word about NO's succeptibility to a hurricane such as this was ever mentioned until after the fact. Basically, I'd put a lot more credence into complaints of the situation, if every single point being made wasn't from the comfort of HINDSIGHT!
Posted by: That Guy | September 7, 2005 03:37 PM
Thats an interesting post, but for a different reason. If you go and look at the actual poll (not only what is written in the front page of the Drudge report) you will realize that in that poll 42% OF THE RESPONDENTS THINK THAT BUSH HAS DONE "A TERRIBLE" OR "BAD" JOB. It is astonishing how things are misrepresented by people like Drudge to make a point. The 13% are the people who said that he was the MOST responsible. So in reality 42% and not 13% blame Bush one way or another.
I hope that you will go and look the poll yourself. I believe that you are fair and expect that after you look at the facts your will correct or retract what you say in this post :).
Posted by: Blue Wind | September 7, 2005 08:44 PM
Did you see the gallup poll that Reynolds linked to?
And I agree. At this point, I think 13% of the country would blame Bush for toothaches, if asked
Posted by: Adam | September 7, 2005 08:45 PM
Adam,
Thats exactly the same poll (Gallup) that Drudge misrepresented. If you add 24 (terrible) + 18 (bad)= 42% (and not 13%) who blame Bush. At least by my math :)
Posted by: Blue Wind | September 7, 2005 08:55 PM
THinking someone did a bad job is different from blaming someone, in case you hadn't noticed that little distinction :p
Posted by: Adam | September 7, 2005 09:11 PM
Adam,
Ah, ok I got it. In the case of Bush, when people think he did a bad job is a positive thing. Thanks for clarifying this :)
Posted by: Blue Wind | September 7, 2005 09:25 PM
Bah. THinking someone didn't do a good job managing a disastor is different from blaming someone for the disastor.
But you already know that, you're just being a jerk.
Ever thought of going into law?
Posted by: Adam | September 7, 2005 11:22 PM
Damn it, only the truly lunatic would BLAME someone for the actual disaster. Even I, a true Bush detractor, know that he can't cause a hurricane.
Do I think that he did a crappy job, both in preparing for it (we had at least a couple days notice that it was going to be BAD), and then dealing with the aftermath? Yes.
Posted by: OTTami | September 8, 2005 05:28 AM
Last poll (9/7) from Rasmussen (a known republican):
Bush Job Approval ratings:
"Fifty-four percent (54%) disapprove. Thirty-eight percent (38%) of Americans now Strongly Disapprove of the President's job performance while just 22% Strongly Approve".
Posted by: Blue Wind | September 8, 2005 07:19 AM
So those ugly rumors about Jen&Brad&Dubya are TRUE?!!!
That bastard!
Posted by: Paul Moore | September 8, 2005 07:25 AM