I thinks something many of us have forgotten in all this -- and something that offers an unbelievable contrast -- is the response of this administration to Hurricane Charlie.
There, the administration responded immediately. Dubya hit the ground running. The Hurricane struck on August 13th. On the morning of the 15th, the president was IN FLORIDA, and federal aid was flowing BEFORE Charlie even struck.
The difference? There was an election to be won.
More ...
And what about Katrina? Well, for Katrina, which slammed Louisiana on the 29th of August. It took president Bush until the 2nd of September to grace the Gulf Coast with his presence. This would have been acceptable -- though regrettable -- had the federal response been fully mobilized as soon as the hurricane no longer endangered rescue efforts, but this was not the case. The federal response did not begin in earnest until that same 2nd of September.
I was sitting at my computer today trying to, like many of you, make sense of this disaster. I wanted to approach the problem rationally -- I saw all the anger at Bush, anger that had been growing inside me for the last few days. But I always believe that I should try to give the person I am angry at every benefit of the doubt, to be sure that it is a justified response and not just my emotions. Like most of us, I have had many reasons to think this President was an incompetent monkeyfuck, but I did not want to let this cloud my judgment. Some conservative friends of mine said I wasn't helping; I heard the conservative radio speak of "not blaming anyone now" (and then blaming local authorities in the same breath), and wanted to see if my blame was properly placed.
So I was sitting here today, and decided to look into the history of hurricane responses. I thought it would take me a long afternoon of poking around to come to a satisfactory conclusion. But it took about 15 minutes. I looked first at Andrew, and it seemed that the federal response there was quite inadequate. It took Bush Sr. 2 weeks to respond (something that, incidentally, was argued as a major contributor to his loss to Clinton). Then I stumbled on a piece about the recent Hurricane Charlie ...
Hurricane Charlie was apparently a category 4 storm, quite strong, but moving quickly. It caused major damage, but nothing like what's happening now in Louisiana (and the rest of the Gulf Coast). But in the case of Florida, timing was everything. Charlie arrived 2 and a half months before the presidential elections, and Bush had to act Presidential. The last thing he wanted was a bunch of pissed off Floridians voting for Kerry. So he got his ass down there, and took care of business. He even had some nice photo-ops giving ice to motorists (unfortunately I have no links, but I vividly recalled this image after reading about Charlie).
So what the hell was he doing with his thumb up his dumb ass for the last 4 days after a storm of inconceivably greater magnituded slammed into New Orleans? Was he frantically coordinating relief efforts from wherever he was at the time? Was he barking orders and taking care of business? NO! He was giving speeches in San Diego and clearing shrub in Crawford.
I listen to conservative radio frequently -- it is important, I think, to hear what everyone is saying. And the same crap is coming out like it always does, except this time, it is brazenly obvious that it is just that -- crap. They are blaming the local and state officials, and totally absolving the feds. The only problem is, Mayor Nagin (along with general Honore) is one of the few heroes to come out of this. The governor -- yes, her response does not seem perfect, but ultimately, it is the federal government that should be taking care of things. Like it did in Florida after Charlie.
With all the stories of prepositioned supplies, soldiers at the ready, people waiting on orders, this seems either insane negligence or deliberate evil. Either way, it is completely unacceptable. The contrast with Charlie completes the picture -- Charlie's the narrative of what should happen in any disaster, let alone one of the magnitude we face here. A horrible event, preceded by preparation and followed by fast response. Now that the feds are pouring into NOLA, it seems things are finally getting back to "normal" (perhaps survivable is a better term, but at least things are not totally insane). I have no doubt that this phase of the response will be robust and that, while it will take time, the remaining victims will be saved. But why could this not have happened three days earlier? The answer is it could have. Charlie is THE piece of empirical evidence to offer anyone who tells you that the delay was justified.