In recent days, there has been widespread concern about the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) response to the horrific destruction of Hurricane Katrina. In particular, FEMA Director, a guy named Michael Brown, has been gutted and ridiculed for his numerous comments indicating either a disregard for the truth or the intellectual cunning of a two year-old Golden Retriever. Most classic in this regard is his admission that FEMA (or at least he) didn't even know the NOLA Convention Center was being used by thousands of refugees in addition to the Superdome.
Since that day, everybody from Tim Russert to the late Che Guevara has questioned the abilities of Mr. Brown, including his previous work as Commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Association (a job one wouldn't think of as related to natural disaster relief management)...
In addition to the almost universal condemnation of FEMA's work (with the notable exception of Mississippi's Republican, Jimmy Swaggart at 60 hair-styled, Governor Haley Barbour), Mr. Brown has caused additional distress just from watching his sorry ass fumble TV interview after interview.
Now that it is apparent Mr. Brown's chief qualification for the job at FEMA, being a college roommate of a Bush Administration big-wig, has proven as useful for the job as tits on a boar hog, it's time to look for someone else to head the agency. Now. But who?
May I suggest Saddam Hussein? Think about it. FEMA needs a dramatic autocrat who can wade through the myriad local/state/federal bureaucracies and get things done. Whatever bad things you can say about Saddam, he certainly evidently cut through the Iraqi bureaucratic red tape. On top of that, he was obviously able to convince the coalition of the willing that Iraq had its act togethere, when in fact the Iraqi army consisted of nothing but a few Baathist good ole boys with some shotguns. Out of nothing, Saddam created a nation scary enough to have the U.S. spend $191 billion and counting to get rid of him. And needless to say, as fucked up as Iraq was before we started spending that money, it certainly wasn't as fucked up as it is now.
Saddam is the man for the job. And he's available, sitting around waiting for some show trial to begin. In a nation desperate for leadership from both sides of the political aisle, maybe we in the United States need to construct a new aisle. But you're saying to yourself, "Scot, wouldn't Saddam likely be a totalitarian madman?" And my response is, "Yes, yes he would." So some safeguards would need to be in order.
Namely, I'm thinking of a "Escape from New York" approach. You know, that movie with Kurt Russell as "Snake Pliskin", a Rambo-fied prisoner sent to save the United States, or New York, or Bernadette Peters, I can't remember exactly. Anyway, what the Gummint did with Snake was implant a little poison cartridge that would kill Snake in 24 hours, unless he accomplished the task and got back to the rather evil-looking Gummint doctors with an antidote.
So, we implant Saddam thusly, Geneva Convention be damned. I mean, who in the Bush Administration has been paying attention to that anyway? We implant Saddam with the poison cartridge, set it on 48 hours, and put him in charge. We'll even give him his own TV station, just like the Baghdad days, and he can run things "old school". No meddling Mayors or Governors: just Saddam calling the shots, and one evil-looking Doctor, played by Max Van Sydow or Donald Pleasance with his hand on a button that will burst the poison cartridge if Saddam can't get the job done.
I know this option may be extreme...that many might question the plan. But seriously, could it be any worse than what we've seen up to now?