The "city" of Louisiana

[Bronco_Beerslug]

OP - ED
Excellent article from Olbermann!

----------------------------------------------------------
• September 5, 2005 | 8:58 p.m. ET
The "city" of Louisiana (Keith Olbermann)
SECAUCUS — Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff said it all, starting his news briefing Saturday afternoon: "Louisiana is a city that is largely underwater..."

Well there's your problem right there.

If ever a slip-of-the-tongue defined a government's response to a crisis, this was it.

The seeming definition of our time and our leaders had been their insistence on slashing federal budgets for projects that might’ve saved New Orleans. The seeming characterization of our government that it was on vacation when the city was lost, and could barely tear itself away from commemorating V.J. Day and watching Monty Python's Flying Circus, to at least pretend to get back to work. The seeming identification of these hapless bureaucrats: their pathetic use of the future tense in terms of relief they could’ve brought last Monday and Tuesday — like the President, whose statements have looked like they’re being transmitted to us by some kind of four-day tape-delay.




But no. The incompetence and the ludicrous prioritization will forever be symbolized by one gaffe by of the head of what is ironically called “The Department of Homeland Security”: “Louisiana is a city…”

Politician after politician — Republican and Democrat alike — has paraded before us, unwilling or unable to shut off the "I-Me" switch in their heads, condescendingly telling us about how moved they were or how devastated they were — congenitally incapable of telling the difference between the destruction of a city and the opening of a supermarket.

And as that sorry recital of self-absorption dragged on, I have resisted editorial comment. The focus needed to be on the efforts to save the stranded — even the internet's meager powers were correctly devoted to telling the stories of the twin disasters, natural... and government-made.

But now, at least, it is has stopped getting exponentially worse in Mississippi and Alabama and New Orleans and Louisiana (the state, not the city). And, having given our leaders what we know now is the week or so they need to get their act together, that period of editorial silence I mentioned, should come to an end.

No one is suggesting that mayors or governors in the afflicted areas, nor the federal government, should be able to stop hurricanes. Lord knows, no one is suggesting that we should ever prioritize levee improvement for a below-sea-level city, ahead of $454 million worth of trophy bridges for the politicians of Alaska.

But, nationally, these are leaders who won re-election last year largely by portraying their opponents as incapable of keeping the country safe. These are leaders who regularly pressure the news media in this country to report the reopening of a school or a power station in Iraq, and defies its citizens not to stand up and cheer. Yet they couldn't even keep one school or power station from being devastated by infrastructure collapse in New Orleans — even though the government had heard all the "chatter" from the scientists and city planners and hurricane centers and some group whose purposes the government couldn't quite discern... a group called The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

And most chillingly of all, this is the Law and Order and Terror government. It promised protection — or at least amelioration — against all threats: conventional, radiological, or biological.

It has just proved that it cannot save its citizens from a biological weapon called standing water.

Mr. Bush has now twice insisted that, "we are not satisfied," with the response to the manifold tragedies along the Gulf Coast. I wonder which "we" he thinks he's speaking for on this point. Perhaps it's the administration, although we still don't know where some of them are. Anybody seen the Vice President lately? The man whose message this time last year was, 'I'll Protect You, The Other Guy Will Let You Die'?

I don't know which 'we' Mr. Bush meant.

For many of this country's citizens, the mantra has been — as we were taught in Social Studies it should always be — whether or not I voted for this President — he is still my President. I suspect anybody who had to give him that benefit of the doubt stopped doing so last week. I suspect a lot of his supporters, looking ahead to '08, are wondering how they can distance themselves from the two words which will define his government — our government — "New Orleans."

For him, it is a shame — in all senses of the word. A few changes of pronouns in there, and he might not have looked so much like a 21st Century Marie Antoinette. All that was needed was just a quick "I'm not satisfied with my government's response." Instead of hiding behind phrases like "no one could have foreseen," had he only remembered Winston Churchill's quote from the 1930's. "The responsibility," of government, Churchill told the British Parliament "for the public safety is absolute and requires no mandate. It is in fact, the prime object for which governments come into existence."

In forgetting that, the current administration did not merely damage itself — it damaged our confidence in our ability to rely on whoever is in the White House.

As we emphasized to you here all last week, the realities of the region are such that New Orleans is going to be largely uninhabitable for a lot longer than anybody is yet willing to recognize. Lord knows when the last body will be found, or the last artifact of the levee break, dug up. Could be next March. Could be 2100. By then, in the muck and toxic mire of New Orleans, they may even find our government's credibility.

Somewhere, in the City of Louisiana.
http://tinyurl.com/4sv9q

[Spider]

Olberman .....

[gunns]

I love that guy and he said it perfectly.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Here is the tape.................

http://media.putfile.com/OlbermannSwings

[enjolras]

The key: "Democrat and Republican alike". The whole damn government has let that region down at basically every level. Right from the city on up.

Just shows how important choosing competent leaders really is.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Wow - Olbermann with the WWF smackdown!

Lord knows, no one is suggesting that we should ever prioritize levee improvement for a below-sea-level city, ahead of $454 million worth of trophy bridges for the politicians of Alaska.

And because Team Thug chose not to make such improvements to one of America's most strategic ports a priority, the American taxpayer (and his great-great grandchildren) will once again get stuck with a bill that dwarfs whatever the cost of those improvements might have been.

But hey - at least Halliburton is already getting reconstruction contracts, and Bush's oil industry cronies are going to make even more of a killing, right?

And that's all that matters.

[Play2win]

Yeah, that seems to be what BUSH likes to do, Make a Killing off of the KILLINGS...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Play2Win

Yeah, that seems to be what BUSH likes to do, Make a Killing off of the KILLINGS...

Bingo.

His administration should be called "Death, Inc."

[Rohirrim]

I don't care what you guys say (BTW, way to go, Keith!), I feel safer. Don't you? I will take a grim, absurdist pleasure in watching Rove Inc. guide Bush out of this, and blame it all on somebody else. After all, don't forget the Bush motto: "The buck stops anywhere but here" (that's been his motto his entire life).

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by enjolras

The key: "Democrat and Republican alike". The whole damn government has let that region down at basically every level. Right from the city on up.

Just shows how important choosing competent leaders really is.

Yep...of course it's also a stunning example of why states should have more control over their funding and exactly why the Federal government should be downsized.

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Wow - Olbermann with the WWF smackdown!



And because Team Thug chose not to make such improvements to one of America's most strategic ports a priority, the American taxpayer (and his great-great grandchildren) will once again get stuck with a bill that dwarfs whatever the cost of those improvements might have been.

.

Or Clinton...or Bush Dnior...or Reagan....or Carter...and so on. I mean really....the city of New Orleans was livning on borrowed time. But like I said...states should have more control over their money and Federal government needs to be downsized...less government federally...more government locally.

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by enjolras

The key: "Democrat and Republican alike". The whole damn government has let that region down at basically every level. Right from the city on up.

Just shows how important choosing competent leaders really is.

To add to the let down part.

I think the people of the region let themselves down. I've been thinking about this...and I knew that if I hurricane hit anywhere near there that this sort of thing would happen...why didn't the people that live there know it?

[bendog]

Well, most, the vast majority DID evacuate. The ones who didn't were generally too poor to insure and/or drive out with their most valuable **** or the predators who planned to stay around and steal stuff. But the sad fact is there is no way they could totally evacuate the city.

Maestri says that the public knows and understands the threat they face if a major hurricane was to strike near New Orleans. For instance, when Hurricane Georges threatened the Gulf Coast in 1998, an estimated 60 percent of the New Orleans population evacuated the city, Maestri says. It was the largest evacuation in U.S. history at the time, according to the National Weather Service. Even then, not everyone could get out, and the Louisiana Superdome in New Orleans was used as a shelter for the first time. Fortunately for the city, Hurricane Georges, a Category 2 hurricane with winds near 110 mph, landed to the east in Biloxi, Miss.

Despite the difficulty in getting everyone out, Maestri says evacuation is the best policy for a city under sea level and not fully protected from storm surge and flooding. But he is concerned that he still might not have enough advance warning to evacuate all of New Orleans. Improvements in hurricane predictions during the last 30 years have made it possible for the National Hurricane Center to issue hurricane warnings 24 hours ahead of when a storm hits. But, Maestri says it takes nearly 72 hours to fully evacuate New Orleans. This means that an evacuation order must be issued using a forecast that could have an error of 150 miles. While Maestri and his team are busy evacuating the city, the storm could be heading for Alabama and Mississippi to the east or the bayous of western Louisiana instead of New Orleans.

An evacuation could create a ghost town unnecessarily and make people more complacent when the next hurricane nears the Gulf Coast. Maestri is also concerned that he could be placing evacuees in the path of danger if a storm struck along the evacuation routes instead of New Orleans.
ht tp://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2000/wnoflood.htm

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco

Or Clinton...or Bush Dnior...or Reagan....or Carter...and so on.

No - it was GeeDubya who was warned that a category five hurricane was inevitable and who responded by slashing hurricane and flood funding and by dismantling FEMA - not those other presidents.

How much higher will the body count have to get before you can admit to yourself that the guy for whom you are making excuses is incompetent, corrupt, and dangerous?