Bare in mind that, at the time of Katrina, FEMA had been used by the administration as a patronage reward for the president's buddies. The director had no qualifications to run the organization. That doesn't mean that we don't need FEMA, just that it shouldn't be run that way.
Yup .. friends of the administration is no way to run an emergency agency. The report is interesting to read .. church and charitable organizations ranked higher than the Fed govt did.
Yes, but the point is that it was deliberately disabled when Bush decided to use its directorate as a patronage position for one of his buddies. That doesn't mean we should do away with it.
This is what America wants .. a PR president .. Obama takes charge at hurricane command center;
Nice bit of news propaganda if you ask me. How do you like this news story sheeple?
Funny, yet again you slam Obama for doing something you lightely defended Bush from not doing.
The buck stops at the presidency. He is ultimately responsible for the care of the nation. There is no one except God that could have made a difference in the devastation that was dealt out by Katrina once the storm barreled down on the coastline .. but where would it hit .. Houston, NO, Biloxi .. by the time the forcasters knew there was little time to do much of anything but scramble. Alerts were sent out a coulple days in advance. The local govt and agencies could have done a heck of a lot better job of getting folks out of harms way and of peparing for the big one. I'm not sure what people think Bush should have done prior to Katrina, evacuate La and Texas and Miss? I think there can be some fault in how the quiclky the federal reponse was after the storm, but before the storm, no one really knew what would happen, we were in uncharted waters. Bush is not repsonsible for the levees breaking .. even the hurricane expert in the video said there is uncertainty as to whether the levees would hold. At what point does the responsiblity of local and federal govt end and the other begin? They must work hand in hand and to infer that the devastation brought about by Katrina was Bush's fault is just wrong. Those that don't learn from past mistakes are doomed to repeat them and the same can be said for the devastation that befell NO I am sorry to say.
Bush is certainly not the best president we've had, some could easily arge one of the worst .. he probably could have done much more in the effort to clean up after Katrina .. would he have done the same kind of relief effort if this was Houston instead'?? But to say Bush was warned about Katrina like he should have thrown a blanket over the entire gulf coast and protect it from natures wrath is rather simple minded at best. Don't think that the federal govt can protect you from everything under the sun .. you will be sorely dissappointed if you do.
Or maybe.
What about the national guard from Tx, Miss, Fl, Ga should they all be exempt from middle east duty because it is hurricane season?
The buck should stop at the white house ... it hasn't done that in several decades .. I think that is typical of our modern society and the people we elect. So many people 'expect' some one else to do it .. to take care of business and not enough people take resonsilbity for thie own actions.
I will disagree with you on the this Whitehouse not stopping the buck .. for right or wrong, Bush has made a stand against terrorism in the middle east and has prety much stood his ground, even as his political career is on the rocks and publci opinion of him haw waned to new lows .... he has not bowed down to pressure. I'm not saying he is right or wrong here .. only that the guy has determination to see the thing thorugh .. many are of the opinion that he is too durn stupid to do anything else. That takes Stones .. of course he is risking other peoples lives for his stubborness.
Not to equate Lincoln and Bush .. but what would be the state of this union if Lincoln had bowed down to public pressure during the on set of the civil war?
Strange way we 180 at times.
http://madville.com/news/128964_bush_was_warned_about_katrina#comments
There's nothing funny about it .. if you don't think this was PR move then I don't know what to say.
Katrina was a CAT 5 hurricane .. they don't come any bigger, they had been forecasting it for a week in advance.
So its ok for Bush to ignore it, when very well aware of the situation at hand, people die.. And you will stand up for that..
Obama watches over a situation, which you call a PR stunt and you think its good to bash him for it? If he didnt watch it, would you bash him for that or stand for him like you did Bush? I dont care about the PR thing, just attempting to figure out the logic in that..
Other then you hate Obama and are doing a bit of PR yourself?
Ron Paul is nothing if not consistent. He believes that the government needs to get out of almost everything it does, and he walks the walk while talking the talk, something rare and admirable about him.
I try to imagine the USA as it would be after being re-engineered by someone like Ron Paul and it is not a pretty sight. The enormous disparity in income between rich and poor would get unimaginable greater, at least up until a point. Pollution would be much worse, product quality much worse, health care much worse, and it is hard to imagine who would have a job under those conditions, even at sub-subsistence wages. No air traffic control, no trains, no Port Authority, whatever infrastucture is left will go further on its way to hell. No taxpayer paid teachers, cops, firefighters, social workers, etc.
It is a nightmare scenario for sure. I can't imagine why this has any popular appeal at all.
Gramps .. I think we've established that you've never voted for anyone other than a main stream democrat for president, I don't think that you would change your mind and vote for anyone else other than your usual vote .. besides- the democrats are depending upon your vote next election. You can't let them down, even if they have let you down.
With ROn Paul, It would be like a step back towards the 60's .... with less govt involvement.
FEMA didn't exist until 1979. Funny - Our family went through two major hurricanes in the 70's with house damage and we dealt with the Insurance companies just fine.
I look at the idiots who build their homes right up to the beach and I'm thinking that tax payers shouldn't have to repay for those guys houses to be rebuilt .. but we do .. and will.
Kids actually did better in school than they do now, the dollar was worth a lot more, I'm pretty sure they had trains, planes and automobiles and there would be no reason why they would disappear .. WTF have you been readin .. too much Huffpo and Raw Story?
We do know with Obama, who promised transparency, there is less transparency now than under GW, the man who promised to be out of Gitmo .. we're still there now.
When Helen Thomas said: Obama worse than Nixon when it came to controlling the press ... I believe her, the rich .. still getting filthier rich, more folks on food stamps than ever before, unemployment - still way too high - if they gave the actual unemployment numbers they would be higher, that's OK though cuz Obama is going to come out with a plan to help with unemployment - just perhaps a tad too long into his administration, drone bombings, unconstitutional war in Libya, Fast and Furious .. you could go on for some time on the things why Obama should not be re-elected ... And you say that pollution would be worse and trains would go away with Ron Paul 
Big_T
I did a google on Ron Paul FEMA .. lot's of articles from MSNBC, CNN, ABC, RAW Story, HuuffPo, Maddow blog - the main stream media says they have him now .. let's all pounce on this story.
He's been against FEMA for quite some time. What he believed in last year is what he believes now - not like many politicians .. a hack interview in May of this year with pretty boy Snuffalofogus.
I suppose the efficiency of FEMA and Katrina are two words that go together ... the federal govt and FEMA was bashed constantly.
Only 25 percent of the respondents to a survey conducted in Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina identified government as their most important source of aid. Government relief to disaster victims is often less effective than aid provided by volunteers, non-profit organizations, and commercial enterprises, and it often facilitates corruption, encourages growth in disaster-prone areas, and crowds out self-help. (PDF Some interesting figures in the back of the report.
Ron Paul comes in a very close second int he Iowa straw poll .. the main stream press doesn't even recognize him .. Ron Paul says something about FEMA the day before ( and many times before) a hurricane hits the east coast and all the main stream news jumps all over it like crazy. Media manipulation of the news for those that what to influence the way that people vote.