| President George W. Bush |
| Did a good job |
|
29% |
[ 7 ] |
| Did a fair job |
|
20% |
[ 5 ] |
| Did a bad job |
|
41% |
[ 10 ] |
| (No Comments) |
|
8% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 24 |
|
| Author |
Message |
magenta
Commander
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 404
Location: AUSTRALIA
|
 Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:18 am |
|
 New Orleans was completely devastated by the floods,help from the top[bush]should have been immediate.
B_llsh_t like this would not happen in australia.
We send help to overseas countrys faster than he could help his own people! 
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:22 am |
|
He started helping his people 2-3 days before Katrina hit in force...
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
teya
Commander
Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 423
|
| Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:18 am |
|
^ Could you please provide some *proof* of that via links?
Because all of the evidence so far indicates that the federal response was too late.
The governor requested federal help on Sunday.
There was absolute minimal response from Washington until Thursday. That's the Thursday *after* the hurricane, not before.
Again, I'm *not* putting the complete responsibility on the feds, but I still haven't seen any indication that they were doing much of anything until long after the disaster hit.
-------signature-------
Resume your disorder.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:21 am |
|
USA Today, Boston Herald, Boston Globe, NY Daily News, Portland Press Herald. Yesterday's issues, even. USA Today even had a timeline made out, showing how/when things happened at different levels.
Sorry, no link. I read the papers, not the sites. Feel free to google, though.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
teya
Commander
Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 423
|
| Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:31 am |
|
| Theresa wrote: | | Sorry, no link. I read the papers, not the sites. Feel free to google, though. |
Good for you. So do I. It's nice to see someone else supports the print media. However, sometimes--like when there's tons of news out there, it's nice to have the backup of the web.
But I will google later--and rebut--when I have time.
-------signature-------
Resume your disorder.
|
|
|
purple_kathryn
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 91
Location: Belfast
|
| Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:45 am |
|
My opinion is the same as it's ever been, and that's all Im going to say on the matter 
-------signature-------
"There's not much makeup in the army, is there? No. They only have that nighttime look, and that's a bit slapdash, isn't it?" - Eddie Izzard
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Fri Sep 09, 2005 2:26 pm |
|
I'm just going to copy and paste, to make sure everyone can see the incompetence of Louisiana and New Orleans' local governments.
Here's something interesting from Brit Hume's "Special Report"
| Quote: | Thursday, September 08, 2005
By Brit Hume
Now some fresh pickings from the Hurricane Grapevine:
Pork Barrel Projects
Democrats, and some former government engineers, blamed President Bush for cutting the budget for the Army Corps of Engineers (search), claiming the cuts left New Orleans unprepared for a major storm.
But The Washington Post(Registration Needed, article posted below) reports the Bush administration has granted the corps more funding than the previous administration over a similar period and that Louisiana has received far more money for civil works projects than any other state. The paper says much of the funding has been spent not on flood control, but on lawmakers' pet construction projects, including a brand new $750 million canal lock in New Orleans unrelated to flood control.
Environmentally Friendly?
Neither the administration or its critics are saying this, but one reason anti-flooding measures failed to stop Katrina from inundating New Orleans is that some environmental groups successfully resisted new flood control projects. The Sierra Club (search) and other groups sued the Army Corps of Engineers to stop a 1996 plan to raise and fortify Mississippi River levees because the plan would jeopardize Louisiana forests.
And the New Orleans Times-Picayune has reported that "Save our Wetlands" successfully sued the corps of engineers three decades ago to stop construction on floodgates to block storm surges from the Gulf of Mexico into Lake Pontchatrain (search), saying they were too damaging to the lake's eco-system. |
Source
From the afformentioned Washington Post article.
| Quote: | Money Flowed to Questionable Projects
State Leads in Army Corps Spending, but Millions Had Nothing to Do With Floods
By Michael Grunwald
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 8, 2005; Page A01
Before Hurricane Katrina breached a levee on the New Orleans Industrial Canal, the Army Corps of Engineers had already launched a $748 million construction project at that very location. But the project had nothing to do with flood control. The Corps was building a huge new lock for the canal, an effort to accommodate steadily increasing barge traffic.
Except that barge traffic on the canal has been steadily decreasing.
In Katrina's wake, Louisiana politicians and other critics have complained about paltry funding for the Army Corps in general and Louisiana projects in particular. But over the five years of President Bush's administration, Louisiana has received far more money for Corps civil works projects than any other state, about $1.9 billion; California was a distant second with less than $1.4 billion, even though its population is more than seven times as large.
Much of that Louisiana money was spent to try to keep low-lying New Orleans dry. But hundreds of millions of dollars have gone to unrelated water projects demanded by the state's congressional delegation and approved by the Corps, often after economic analyses that turned out to be inaccurate. Despite a series of independent investigations criticizing Army Corps construction projects as wasteful pork-barrel spending, Louisiana's representatives have kept bringing home the bacon.
For example, after a $194 million deepening project for the Port of Iberia flunked a Corps cost-benefit analysis, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) tucked language into an emergency Iraq spending bill ordering the agency to redo its calculations. The Corps also spends tens of millions of dollars a year dredging little-used waterways such as the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, the Atchafalaya River and the Red River -- now known as the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, in honor of the project's congressional godfather -- for barge traffic that is less than forecast.
The Industrial Canal lock is one of the agency's most controversial projects, sued by residents of a New Orleans low-income black neighborhood and cited by an alliance of environmentalists and taxpayer advocates as the fifth-worst current Corps boondoggle. In 1998, the Corps justified its plan to build a new lock -- rather than fix the old lock for a tiny fraction of the cost -- by predicting huge increases in use by barges traveling between the Port of New Orleans and the Mississippi River.
In fact, barge traffic on the canal had been plummeting since 1994, but the Corps left that data out of its study. And barges have continued to avoid the canal since the study was finished, even though they are visiting the port in increased numbers.
Pam Dashiell, president of the Holy Cross Neighborhood Association, remembers holding a protest against the lock four years ago -- right where the levee broke Aug. 30. Now she's holed up with her family in a St. Louis hotel, and her neighborhood is underwater. "Our politicians never cared half as much about protecting us as they cared about pork," Dashiell said.
Yesterday, congressional defenders of the Corps said they hoped the fallout from Hurricane Katrina would pave the way for billions of dollars of additional spending on water projects. Steve Ellis, a Corps critic with Taxpayers for Common Sense, called their push "the legislative equivalent of looting."
Louisiana's politicians have requested much more money for New Orleans hurricane protection than the Bush administration has proposed or Congress has provided. In the last budget bill, Louisiana's delegation requested $27.1 million for shoring up levees around Lake Pontchartrain, the full amount the Corps had declared as its "project capability." Bush suggested $3.9 million, and Congress agreed to spend $5.7 million.
Administration officials also dramatically scaled back a long-term project to restore Louisiana's disappearing coastal marshes, which once provided a measure of natural hurricane protection for New Orleans. They ordered the Corps to stop work on a $14 billion plan, and devise a $2 billion plan instead.
But overall, the Bush administration's funding requests for the key New Orleans flood-control projects for the past five years were slightly higher than the Clinton administration's for its past five years. Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, the chief of the Corps, has said that in any event, more money would not have prevented the drowning of the city, since its levees were designed to protect against a Category 3 storm, and the levees that failed were already completed projects. Strock has also said that the marsh-restoration project would not have done much to diminish Katrina's storm surge, which passed east of the coastal wetlands.
"The project manager for the Great Pyramids probably put in a request for 100 million shekels and only got 50 million," said John Paul Woodley Jr., the Bush administration official overseeing the Corps. "Flood protection is always a work in progress; on any given day, if you ask whether any community has all the protection it needs, the answer is almost always: Maybe, but maybe not."
The Corps had been studying the possibility of upgrading the New Orleans levees for a higher level of protection before Katrina hit, but Woodley said that study would not have been finished for years. Still, liberal bloggers, Democratic politicians and some GOP defenders of the Corps have linked the catastrophe to the underfunding of the agency.
"We've been hollering about funding for years, but everyone would say: There goes Louisiana again, asking for more money," said former Democratic senator John Breaux. "We've had some powerful people in powerful places, but we never got what we needed."
That may be true. But those powerful people -- including former senators Breaux, Johnston and Russell Long, as well as former House committee chairmen Robert Livingston and W.J. "Billy" Tauzin -- did get quite a bit of what they wanted. And the current delegation -- led by Landrieu and GOP Sen. David Vitter -- has continued that tradition.
The Senate's latest budget bill for the Corps included 107 Louisiana projects worth $596 million, including $15 million for the Industrial Canal lock, for which the Bush administration had proposed no funding. Landrieu said the bill would "accelerate our flood control, navigation and coastal protection programs." Vitter said he was "grateful that my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee were persuaded of the importance of these projects."
Louisiana not only leads the nation in overall Corps funding, it places second in new construction -- just behind Florida, home of an $8 billion project to restore the Everglades. Several controversial projects were improvements for the Port of New Orleans, an economic linchpin at the mouth of the Mississippi. There were also several efforts to deepen channel for oil and gas tankers, a priority for petroleum companies that drill in the Gulf of Mexico.
"We thought all the projects were important -- not just levees," Breaux said. "Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but navigation projects were critical to our economic survival."
Overall, Army Corps funding has remained relatively constant for decades, despite the "Program Growth Initiative" launched by agency generals in 1999 without telling their civilian bosses in the Clinton administration. The Bush administration has proposed cuts in the Corps budget, and has tried to shift the agency's emphasis from new construction to overdue maintenance. But most of those proposals have died quietly on Capitol Hill, and the administration has not fought too hard to revive them.
In fact, more than any other federal agency, the Corps is controlled by Congress; its $4.7 billion civil works budget consists almost entirely of "earmarks" inserted by individual legislators. The Corps must determine that the economic benefits of its projects exceed the costs, but marginal projects such as the Port of Iberia deepening -- which squeaked by with a 1.03 benefit-cost ratio -- are as eligible for funding as the New Orleans levees.
"It has been explicit national policy not to set priorities, but instead to build any flood control or barge project if the Corps decides the benefits exceed the costs by 1 cent," said Tim Searchinger, a senior attorney at Environmental Defense. "Saving New Orleans gets no more emphasis than draining wetlands to grow corn and soybeans." |
Source
Here's what it comes down to, Nagin is an incompetent mayor. You're talking about a guy who led the city with the highest crime rate in the nation, with nearly twenty times the national average. He's led a junk economy, a quarter of his populace was unemployed. I really don't get it. Why would he be re-electe? He ran a lot New Orleans down into a giant slum. Now he's complaning, because the Feds were a couple hours late cleaning his mess up. And the feds wouldn't have needed to be in there that few hours quicker, if Blanco would've had more than 6000 guardsmen ready.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
