Do you blame BUSH?

free2beme

I know BUSH is not a popular president. I am a registered Independent, used to be a Republican, and I am not a huge fan of BUSH. In many ways I wish I had another choice in the last election, other then Kerry. Yet, I have an issue with the fact that politics in general are nothing but a blame game. Blame often put on people, without people even understanding the law or government structure. As an example, this brings me to what I want to ask ...

"Do you blame BUSH for the mess that happened in Louisiana?" Personally, in the beginning, I did. I thought it was crazy that they could not do more when all the information was right there on the news. I was almost yelling at the television, "send in the national guard!" Yet I can honestly say that I am not someone who knows all the detail of the law in every situation, natural disasters, etc. I think in some cases, we have been misinformed from the Hollywood movies that show events that are not really possible. So in the aftermath, I have learned what the governors responsibilities were and what the mayor of New Orleans responsibilities were. In all honesty, I think now that the failure belongs partly on the federal government, but mostly on the local government. What shocks me, is that people actually think it is all BUSH. Which is done of course out of political games, which is to be expected. Yet, if you really want to know the answers, look and do not believe only the media. BUSH is often shown to be someone stepping on our rights, with the Patriot Act being the main reason. Yet if BUSH would have sent in the national guard, without following the law of how much power is given to the local and state government, he would have been doing that. I think many people forget that the name UNITED STATES is not just a title, but a description of how our government is run and organized. The PRESIDENT is not a king, dictator, etc. in the law and with that I have a hard time just throwing 100% blame on BUSH, like I hear so many people doing. There is plenty of blame to go around.

... What to you think, do you blame BUSH?

blondie

The governor in this state re-examined the disaster plans and found that many towns/cities/villages have none and the state's is pretty lax. The US hasn't really planned for disasters since the Cold War era, Civil Defense, etc.

OldSoul

I hold Bush accountable for the portion he could have mitigated, within the bounds of law, where he chose to take a course of inaction. And there were some legal options available to the President that were not acted on.

I further hold Bush accountable for the actions of Michael Brown, because Bush appointed a man to that position who had no qualifications for the job and who was fired from his previous job due to inadequate management skills. Michael Brown did as well as could be expected, given his incredibly poor suitability to the post.

I consider the State and Local officials entirely to blame, because they could have mitigated all loss of life and much loss of property but failed to do so due to inaction.

The shared blame here is not 100% blame divided by percentage. It is 100% potential capacity to mitigate harm, less exercised potential to mitigate harm. By this standard, several individuals are 100% to blame. I do not think Bush is one of them.

Respectfully,
OldSoul

Gopher

You're right to say there's plenty of blame to go around, and there's been way too much finger-pointing after the recent Gulf Coast hurricanes.

That being said, what ever happened to the attitude espoused by Harry Truman when he was president, "The buck stops here" ?? These days, those elected to high office seem to want to pass the buck. Truman was saying, "You may or may not like my policies, but I will take full responsibility."

One of Bush's problems with the public (aside from his very conservative supporters) is that he appears to be unwilling to take responsibility for his words and actions. His job-approval ratings are going down, and this unwillingness is a big part of the reason. He and the leaders in Washington dithered for days before he finally sent help to New Orleans. And it took even longer for him to finally admit that the federal response was way too slow.

If Bush seemed to care and acted more decisively on matters affecting his homeland now (like he commendably did following the 9/11/01 attacks), then he wouldn't seem to be such an easy target for criticism.

RevFrank

Hi Free2beme....Finally someone asked the question.."Is Bush to blame? Let's look at it from the state and federal law standards.

The feds can't do anything unless the state governor gives permission to do so. Since Louisiana did have a disaster of such magnitude the President, not the Louisiana governor, asked if they needed help. The Louisiana governor said yes, but she delayed the national guard to do ANYTHING FOR THE FIRST 24 TO 48 HOURS. Why?

She, Louisiana Governor halted any aid for the first 24 hours, because she feared that New Orleans would bring in more drifters then those already there.

Louisiana state governor is suppose to have, in hand, already the states guard, yet nothing happened. The President sent FEMA, yet he, the President, couldn't understand why nothing was happening. According to reports the governor froze the aid for the first 24 hours.

According to the guide lines of the state and federal the federals can't do anything without the states' say so. That's where the confusion started.

It was the Louisiana state who held the responablity. Any or all states are required by law to have any or all state guard at ready at such disaster. And basically the President can not move forward as long as each state takes care of their own government situation.

As for the U.S. Military the military can not move across the United States in domestic problems. That's why each state must have their own militia. Yet there was none coming. There were reports that some of the state militia was there, but not enough to regain control.

It wasn't real clear what happened that day. I have a favorite saying, "bureaucrates love their paper work." In other words, my opinion, the bureaucracy helt up the process.

Oh I'm not blaming Bush, at least not 100 %. It was the Louisiana Governor...she had no idea what to do.

It was the President's responablity to take care of Iraq. It was Louisana state governor's responablity to take care of Louisiana.

Now remember, that Sunday the President asked the Governor, if she needed help. this was before the flood. She said she might. The very next day, Monday, New Orleans was flooded.

tetrapod.sapien

do you blame BUSH?

no. i blame the 50+ % of the people he represents.

TS

free2beme

no. i blame the 50+ % of the people he represents.

You blame the people who voted for BUSH for what happened in New Orleans. Keep in mind, this is not a one man government.

minimus

I don't blame it.

tetrapod.sapien

he could have done better. but that's not the point as i see it. if the american people were different, then bush would have not been elected in the first place, and therefore it doesn't make much sense to me to blame him for much.

but if things are going to be blamed on bush or his admin, then the people who voted for the jackass should be blamed too.

Navigator

As Rev Frank pointed out, the first responders must be local, followed by the state. Apparently, the democratic politicos didn't want Bush to get any credit for helping out. When the federal government finally got involved, the response was slow. No one anticipated the levee failure, even though they should have. However, as has been pointed out before, the problems in New Orleans started many years ago when levee funds were diverted to build docks for the gambling casinos and for the marinas. The hurricane also laid bare some really irresponsible disaster planning for which local officials must accept responsibility. In addition, the majority of the population in New Orleans has been programmed for years to expect the government to wipe their ass for them. They don't seem to be able to do anything for themselves. The folks in Port Arthur, Beaumont, and Lake Charles seem to be of a different mind set.

Do you blame BUSH?

Share this