I know it may appear to be "old news," but in fact the Frank Rich "Katrina moment" issue continues to be relevant. Thus this diary is part recap, part defense, and particularly a genuine inquiry (in the poll below) about where Kossacks stand on this and related issues.
First, for those who've been following the very "spirited" debate, this a defense of Frank Rich's "Katrina moment" analogy (and similar administration policy critiques). Yes, this defense has already been ably met in part by a number of folks like Dallasdoc and others.
But I believe the issue deserves a followup, and a poll, below, given the continued often bitter back and forth, and what I believe are lingering misunderstandings and distortions we continue to see in diaries and comments since then. And because I wanted to toss out a straw (non-scientific) poll on what the prevailing opinion is among the DKos community. As stressful and uncertain as the times are right now, I believe we CAN all get along on this, especially if we avoid confusing legitimate policy disagreements with opinions worthy of personal attacks
And for what it's worth, I support Rich as someone who remains utterly furious about what happened in NOLA, LA, MS, etc., post-Katrina, and the criminal neglect and disrespect (and often racism) directed at the victims to this day.
But I, as a good many of you, firmly believe a lot of the diaries and comments over the last 2 days (here, here, here, and of course here, e.g) have been giving Frank Rich, a widely respected progressive voice, a lot of misdirected, flaming shots that are undeserved. This was mostly out of inadvertent (and let's assume not disingenuous by anyone) misinterpretation of the difference between "Hurricane Katrina" and a "Katrina moment," the latter analogy used in Rich's March 22 column.
All other reasons aside, given his history as a rare voice of reason and progressive advocacy among the traditional press, Rich is unworthy of many of the cheap ad hominem shots he's gotten since that column came out.
But while I may question his tactical choice of using the "Katrina moment" comparison -- though primarily because I might have guessed ahead of time that LOTS of people would miss the point and hate the reference, as has clearly happened -- the fact is that he was NOT saying Obama's economic stance is like the Hurricane Katrina disaster, or that Obama is anything remotely resembling the heinous George W. Bush and Co.!
The analogy was to a "Katrina moment" -- which as originally coined specifically refers to Bush's failure to properly gauge the anger the country felt about the Katrina disaster response (which anger, ironically, is fueling the ire about Rich's analogy), and thus was a turning point for Dubya's administration in terms of lost public trust and good will. The analogy has been used generically the way Rich used it -- to describe a missed public opinion turning point -- many times since the actual Hurricane Katrina, such as here and here.
Rich:
Six weeks ago I wrote in this space that the country’s surge of populist rage could devour the president’s best-laid plans, including the essential Act II of the bank rescue, if he didn’t get in front of it. The occasion then was the Tom Daschle firestorm. The White House seemed utterly blindsided by the public’s revulsion at the moneyed insiders’ culture illuminated by Daschle’s post-Senate career. Yet last week’s events suggest that the administration learned nothing from that brush with disaster.
Now it might turn out all for the best, of course, but Rich is rightly concerned that President Obama might be missing the depth of anger and dismay at the administration's conventional Wall St. approach to the banking/finance crisis, and thus suffer a deterioration in public trust that will weaken his administration (yes, despite poll number that are still high -- we're talking over the next 2-3 years, not tomorrow), and our progressive political agenda (health care, energy, etc.) in the next few years.
This again is posited in the long run -- say by around 2012? -- if the "cash for trash" approach fails.
What made Jon Stewart’s takedown of Jim Cramer resonate was less his specific brief against CNBC’s cheerleading for bad stocks than his larger indictment of the gaping economic inequality that defined the bubble. As Stewart said, there were "two markets" — the long-term market that Americans earnestly thought would sustain their 401(k)’s, and the fast-moving, short-term "real market" in the back room where high-rolling insiders wagered "giant piles of money" and brought down everyone with them.
... As the nation’s anger rose last week, the president took responsibility for what’s happening on his watch — more than he needed to, given the disaster he inherited. But in the credit mess, action must match words. To fall short would be to deliver us into the catastrophic hands of a Republican opposition whose only known economic program is to reject job-creating stimulus spending and root for Obama and, by extension, the country to fail. With all due deference to Ponzi schemers from Madoff to A.I.G., this would be the biggest outrage of them all.
Some of you may disagree with Rich's analogy/observation, but one should at least recognize that he is most certainly not comparing this moment to what happened in New Orleans/etc., or specifically what happened after in Monkey Boy/GW's White House bubble as they #&%@'d over the poor souls in New Orleans and the surrounding region.
SO bottom line: Obama could never be the plutocratic malevolent figure that his predecessors were -- and Rich is most certainly NOT implying that. But as a human being in a tough, almost historically unprecedented situation, our rightfully-esteemed president cannot be expected to be perfect. Rich's analogy as implying nothing other than concern that Obama may be hastening a turning point, fueled by administration misapprehension about public sentiment over the bank bailout response, and in the context of a nation sorely hurting and a plan that appears to be, yes, rewarding failure and insuring the wealth of the many who got us into this mess.
Rich and all of us (except for the dittoheads and morons in the Ghastly Other Party) are hoping that ALL Obama bailout plans succeed. But there may not be another crack at this next year or the year after. It's more legitimate than concern trollery to say that this is not business as usual, like it or not.
Flame on.