Cynical Nation

I'm just happy that the truth is finally out about the scapegoating of Michael "Heckuvajob" Brown! It just demonstrates once more how corrupt and dishonest the Bush regime really is -- praising Brown knowing full well that the media would interpret this as a cover-up thereby creating the impression that the White House knew all along that Brown had screwed up thus tricking the media into blaming former Arabian Horse Association president for incompetence in handling the NOLA disaster which led many ordinary citizens to believe that he was responsible for the harm and damage done which Karl Rove knew full well would deflect anger away from the President unfairly causing the media to look like a bunch of politically motivated propogandists out to destroy the Bushco regime by accusing them of cronyism in their choice of FEMA director.

If Brown hadn't been critical of his boss, Chertoff, and the administration in general at the recent congressional hearings, we might never have known that this brave and thoughtfull American (who loves horses, by the way) was, in fact, the one person in the administration who actually knew that Bush was responsible for Katrina and the aftermath and that the difference between "topping" and "breeching" means nothing when you have the President in your media sights.

Ok Barry,
I will finally agree that there is a distinction between between water sloshing over the top of an intact levee and water gushing from a hole or rift in the levee structure.

So, lets say the president did not TECHNICALLY lie. But he clearly misled the nation. He IMPLIED that there was no warning for a serious damage. But that was NOT true. There was clear-cut warning that water could top the levees. Think about it. That's not minor. We do not know what would had been the damage in such a case. Likely, it would not have been as bad as it was with the breaching of the levees. But there is no question that it would have been very very serious and it would have claimed lifes.

I know you are not trying to defend Bush and you simply want to have the facts presented as they are. I agree with that. In fact, there is some exaggeration by the democrats. However, thats nothing compared to the deliberate deceipt attempts by the Bush administration to cover up their incompetence. It is sort of a misdeamenor compared to a felony.

BTW, the video that is just now being "discovered" was actually released by the White House within days of Katrina. The media didn't think it warranted exposure at that time because it depicted the President informed and engaged from the beginning which was contrary to the story the media was promoting.

"Ok Barry,
I will finally agree that there is a distinction between between water sloshing over the top of an intact levee and water gushing from a hole or rift in the levee structure.

So, lets say the president did not TECHNICALLY lie. But he clearly misled the nation. He IMPLIED that there was no warning for a serious damage. ..." (BW)

The problem with that charge is that this briefing WAS made public and they acknowledged being warned about a far less severe possibility.

The levees around N.O. had been topped a number of times before, during other storms, with some flooding, and relatively minor structural damage to the city.

When the levess were breached and gave way, most of that city was submerged. No one foresaw that eventuality, even that possibility beforehand.

People have gone after Brown as if this were his first big test as FEMA Director, but he'd led the FEMA response to something like 160+ disasters previous to this one and without a hitch.

Hurricane Katrina hit Monday and the levees broke early Tuesday morning.

The 1st Response failure doomed the people unable to leave the city.

That 1st Response responsibility was the Local & State government's responsibility.

FEMA showed up, as usual, three days after impact. By then lawlessness and armed insurrection had taken hold over much of the city and FEMA Teams could not be deployed into those areas until order was restored by the Armed Forces, further delaying their operations.

That 1st Response failure is also directly responsible for that armed insurrection being able to take hold and thus for FEMA's inablity to deploy its Teams right away.

There were a lot of problems with Katrina, but the dim bulbs in the media would have us believe that; (1) Katrina was just another hurricane (IT WAS NOT. IT WAS THE FIRST TIME AN ENTIRE U.S. CITY WAS WIPED OFF THE MAP) and (2) FEMA failed to provide an adequate 1st Response (FEMA IS NOT A 1st RESPONDER. THE 1st RESPONDER RESPONSIBILITIES BELONGED TO N.O. & La).

There is lots to criticize Bush over - Border security, poor communication, non-security, domestic overspending and with your reflexive opposition to the Ports deal, I'd guess you could add, "failing to realize we're now at war with ALL of Islam and not moving to profile and expell all Arabic and Muslim citizens from the U.S., but even without those last two (if you've come to have modified your stance), there's still plenty of real things to criticize Bush over, just not the war on terrorism, nor a "failed 1st Response" to a disaster they didn't have 1st Responder status at.

Coming from the New Orleans area I have a few opinions concerning the media coverage of this story. To let you know, I am a former republican (not much for either side right now) and I am not angry with Bush on this at all. I feel like I knew it all along so it's not much of a shocker. I have friends that got all hot and bothered but I just ask them the same question I asked myself. On Sunday, when I was driving through Mississippi with my family, when a Category 5 storm was headed straight for the city – did I know the levee’s would top AND breach? Yes, I did and I expected government on all appropriate levels to be prepared accordingly. Obviously, Walmart was but FEMA was not.

The levee’s were only built to withstand Cat 3 forces so, listening to the forecast was all it took to know that there was a STRONG chance the levee’s would blow. Overnight on Sunday / Monday the storm dropped in intensity and changed it’s course slightly but Sunday is the only day they had to prepare and at that time we/they were looking at the worst case scenario. I don’t care what has been reported or bounced about. I have never had any doubt that the President (and Brown all the others) were full aware of what the potential for this catastrophe was.

FACT - Overtopping causes breaching. One thing leads to the other unless the levee’s are protected specifically against that (and outside of the river levee’s most of ours are not). Most of the levee’s that broke were taken out by topping - leading to scour on the backside of the levee - which weakens the structure and… causes a breach. Holes did not develop in the middle of the structures – they took place at the foundations, on the backside caused by the water “sloshing over the top”. In the case of the London Ave. and 17th St. Canal’s that is not the case – those were straight out structural failures and that’s a whole other subject. My point is - I have never had any doubt whatsoever that they knew that BREACHING was a strong possibility. Last year we had a scare from Hurricane Ivan – I would have expected them to be warned then as well. There is also the hypothetical “Pam” scenario, which indicated the same thing. If I knew what was coming I would certainly expect those charge of responding to be aware of the same thing. It would be as if they knew a volcano was going to erupt but being surprised that lava and ash could result.

No no wait, you guys, seriously--stop arguing for a moment. Didn't you notice?

I will finally agree that there is a distinction between between water sloshing over the top of an intact levee and water gushing from a hole or rift in the levee structure.

So, lets say the president did not TECHNICALLY lie.

Blue Wind just conceded something, for the sake of argument.

*sniff* I'm so proud...

Now Adam, I think you're being a little mean, there.

But I saw that too, and it was certainly something of note....of course, to be fair, I also added a list of things that G W Bush can be rightly criticized for.

I think it's obvious the Katrina debacle was a fiasco on a lot of levels, but to be fair, not to G W, but to Mike Brown - that storm was not only the most devastating one in American history, but it was also one of the largest and fastest relief efforts in U.S. history.

Over 100,000 emergency workers arrived in the Gulf Coast within three days of the storm's making landfall.

To blame FEMA and Mike Brown for the immediate response, which belongs entirely to the Local & State 1st Responders is unfair.

The armed insurrection that took hold in some parts of what was left of the City can't be blamed on FEMA either.

That, of course, does not leave the current administration blameless for a lot of other things.

I'm just a mean, angry, jaded person, JMK.

No, seriously though, I think Blue knows there's no weight to anything I say :D

I don't give a rats a** what AP says.

Breached, topped, it doesn't matter. Bush knew what could happen and then lied about it.

So there!

I'm right, you conservative know-nothings are wrong.

You guys can just eat my shorts.

Yeah, you heard me.

Blah, blah, blah...

Adam,
I am glad you are proud! So, I will repeat it so that you feel better:
The president did not TECHNICALLY lie (in that case, but he is a compulsive liar otherwise). Cheers.

Bob,
You are right, but I guess reprublicans have hard time with interpreting words like "lie", "liar" etc. They think is all evil liberal propaganda :)

"The president did not... lie..." - Blue Wind

How about that. :D

Blue, that's good! conceding something for the sake of argument isn't the same as agreeing. In fact, I think it's superior!