"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Riptide of the Brownshirts
Power Grab in New Orleans

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

The New Orleans catastrophe is inexplicable.

FEMA's slow response is a mystery.

No it's not. Blanco failed to turn over authority to the Feds, as was
requested the Friday before the storm hit. That left the ball was in her
court, and she dropped it.


Never before has federal funding for work by the US Corps of
Engineers on the New Orleans levees and for the congressionally
authorized Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project
(SELA) been curtailed in the face of dire expert warnings of the
consequence.

Bush sent more funding to NO to sure up the levees than any of his
predecessors.


The Department of Homeland Security and FEMA knew days in
advance that Hurricane Katrina was threatening the Gulf coast of
the US.

Exactly. That's why Bush called Blanco five days in advance and asked her
to issue a mandatory evacuation, and to turn over authority to the Feds.


]
Yet, the normal advance preparations were not
undertaken.

Then maybe you should ask Blanco why.



At the request of the Louisiana governor, President Bush
declared a federal emergency for Louisiana on Saturday August 27
prior to Katrina's arrival in New Orleans on the following
Monday.

Hahaha. Nice spin...but wrong. Bush was in contact with Blanco on
Friday...and it was at his urging that NO was even evacuated.

The declaration specifically authorized FEMA "to
identify, mobilize, and provide at its discretion, equipment and
resources necessary to alleviate the impacts of the emergency."

It didn't give him power over local police and the National Guard...which is
exactly what was needed to quell the looting and ensure the safety of the
relief workers.

However, FEMA took no action until 3 days after the hurricane,
delaying the arrival of effective help until 5 days after 80% of
New Orleans was under water.

Compare this inexplicable delay with the rapid response to the
Florida hurricanes last year.

That's what a decent Governor can do for you.


Cynics note that Florida's governor is President Bush's brother,
a Republican being groomed for a run for president, while the
Louisiana governor and New Orleans mayor are expendable
Democrats. However, the New Orleans disaster is too great to be
attributed solely to crass party politics.


Yet the Dems are making every effort to do so.




Paul Craig Roberts has held a number of academic appointments...His
graduate economics education was at the
....the University of California at
Berkeley...


Berkeley, eh? Figures.

I really do NOT think there was any conspiracy, just massive local and
state incompetence. However, I bet I can spin this better than the
Dems can.

wrote in message
ps.com...
I really do NOT think there was any conspiracy, just massive local and
state incompetence. However, I bet I can spin this better than the
Dems can.

The conspiracy is in the coverup of what really happened in the 3 days prior
to the storm hitting the area. In a news conference, Blanco admitted that
the President called her and urged a mandatory evacuation.

Bush's critics are doing all they can to hide this *fact*.

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

Bush sent more funding to NO to sure up the levees than any of his
predecessors.

Doesn't matter much:

NY Times
September 13, 2005
Katrina's Message on the Corps

There has been much grumbling that Congress and the Bush administration
denied the Army Corps of Engineers the money that was required to fortify
New Orleans against a hurricane like Katrina. These complaints need to be
pursued. Flood control is mainly a federal obligation, and the agency most
responsible for it must have enough money to do the job right.

But there is another question worth asking: has the Army Corps made wise use
of the money it has? Louisiana has received about $1.9 billion over the past
four years for corps civil works projects, more than any other state.
Although much of this has been spent to protect New Orleans, a lot has also
been spent on unrelated water projects - a new and unnecessary lock in the
New Orleans Industrial Canal, for instance, and dredging little-used
waterways like the Red River - mainly to serve the barge industry and other
commercial interests.

The Louisiana delegation, second to none in bringing home the bacon, is as
much to blame for these skewed priorities as the corps is. Yet the reports
of wasted dollars in Louisiana are consistent with the corps's historical
profile. Studies by the Government Accountability Office, the National
Academy of Sciences and others have documented that the agency has long
inflated the economic payoffs of its projects to justify ever greater budget
outlays, while underestimating the environmental damage caused by turning
free-flowing rivers into lifeless canals and destroying millions of acres of
valuable wetlands. This satisfies the corps's appetite for money and
Congress's appetite for pork.

Katrina thus raises an even broader question: has the time not come,
finally, to impose some real discipline on the Army Corps and its paymasters
in Congress who regard it as their own cookie jar?

Both the present commander, Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, and his predecessor have
promised internal reforms. But the lead must come from Congress, where
enlightened reformers like Senators John McCain and Russell Feingold are
pushing independent peer review for individual projects and other changes
that might truly make a difference.

Unfortunately, many other senators - not just those from Louisiana - are
powerfully addicted to corps projects and the votes they attract, especially
Christopher Bond of Missouri, who controls the corps's budget and has
single-handedly kept alive a nonessential barge industry on the Missouri
River at great cost to the environment and taxpayers. To discipline the
corps, Congress must first discipline itself.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

Bush sent more funding to NO to sure up the levees than any of his
predecessors.

Doesn't matter much:

NY Times
September 13, 2005
Katrina's Message on the Corps

There has been much grumbling that Congress and the Bush administration
denied the Army Corps of Engineers the money that was required to fortify
New Orleans against a hurricane like Katrina. These complaints need to be
pursued. Flood control is mainly a federal obligation, and the agency most
responsible for it must have enough money to do the job right.

But there is another question worth asking: has the Army Corps made wise
use of the money it has? Louisiana has received about $1.9 billion over
the past four years for corps civil works projects, more than any other
state. Although much of this has been spent to protect New Orleans, a lot
has also been spent on unrelated water projects - a new and unnecessary
lock in the New Orleans Industrial Canal, for instance, and dredging
little-used waterways like the Red River - mainly to serve the barge
industry and other commercial interests.

The Louisiana delegation, second to none in bringing home the bacon, is as
much to blame for these skewed priorities as the corps is. Yet the reports
of wasted dollars in Louisiana are consistent with the corps's historical
profile. Studies by the Government Accountability Office, the National
Academy of Sciences and others have documented that the agency has long
inflated the economic payoffs of its projects to justify ever greater
budget outlays, while underestimating the environmental damage caused by
turning free-flowing rivers into lifeless canals and destroying millions
of acres of valuable wetlands. This satisfies the corps's appetite for
money and Congress's appetite for pork.

Katrina thus raises an even broader question: has the time not come,
finally, to impose some real discipline on the Army Corps and its
paymasters in Congress who regard it as their own cookie jar?

Both the present commander, Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, and his predecessor have
promised internal reforms. But the lead must come from Congress, where
enlightened reformers like Senators John McCain and Russell Feingold are
pushing independent peer review for individual projects and other changes
that might truly make a difference.

Unfortunately, many other senators - not just those from Louisiana - are
powerfully addicted to corps projects and the votes they attract,
especially Christopher Bond of Missouri, who controls the corps's budget
and has single-handedly kept alive a nonessential barge industry on the
Missouri River at great cost to the environment and taxpayers. To
discipline the corps, Congress must first discipline itself.

Good article. So the money was sent, but not used properly. Now the real
blame game can start. Since Bush wasn't the one to appropriate where the
money went, can we at least agree that it's ridiculous to keep arguing that
"Bush didn't spend the money to reinforce the levees"?

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

Bush sent more funding to NO to sure up the levees than any of his
predecessors.

Doesn't matter much:

NY Times
September 13, 2005
Katrina's Message on the Corps

There has been much grumbling that Congress and the Bush administration
denied the Army Corps of Engineers the money that was required to fortify
New Orleans against a hurricane like Katrina. These complaints need to be
pursued. Flood control is mainly a federal obligation, and the agency
most responsible for it must have enough money to do the job right.

But there is another question worth asking: has the Army Corps made wise
use of the money it has? Louisiana has received about $1.9 billion over
the past four years for corps civil works projects, more than any other
state. Although much of this has been spent to protect New Orleans, a lot
has also been spent on unrelated water projects - a new and unnecessary
lock in the New Orleans Industrial Canal, for instance, and dredging
little-used waterways like the Red River - mainly to serve the barge
industry and other commercial interests.

The Louisiana delegation, second to none in bringing home the bacon, is
as much to blame for these skewed priorities as the corps is. Yet the
reports of wasted dollars in Louisiana are consistent with the corps's
historical profile. Studies by the Government Accountability Office, the
National Academy of Sciences and others have documented that the agency
has long inflated the economic payoffs of its projects to justify ever
greater budget outlays, while underestimating the environmental damage
caused by turning free-flowing rivers into lifeless canals and destroying
millions of acres of valuable wetlands. This satisfies the corps's
appetite for money and Congress's appetite for pork.

Katrina thus raises an even broader question: has the time not come,
finally, to impose some real discipline on the Army Corps and its
paymasters in Congress who regard it as their own cookie jar?

Both the present commander, Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, and his predecessor
have promised internal reforms. But the lead must come from Congress,
where enlightened reformers like Senators John McCain and Russell
Feingold are pushing independent peer review for individual projects and
other changes that might truly make a difference.

Unfortunately, many other senators - not just those from Louisiana - are
powerfully addicted to corps projects and the votes they attract,
especially Christopher Bond of Missouri, who controls the corps's budget
and has single-handedly kept alive a nonessential barge industry on the
Missouri River at great cost to the environment and taxpayers. To
discipline the corps, Congress must first discipline itself.

Good article. So the money was sent, but not used properly. Now the real
blame game can start. Since Bush wasn't the one to appropriate where the
money went, can we at least agree that it's ridiculous to keep arguing
that "Bush didn't spend the money to reinforce the levees"?


I never said Bush had anything to do with the levees. I doubt anyone on his
staff has the patience to try explaining levees to him.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Bush is responsible for homeland security. He has spent billions of
dollars since 9-11 and we are no safer or better prepared than we were
four years ago.

He's failed us again.

It looks like it is time for the Feds to take over all local and state
governments. It is time to centralize all government agencies, under one
roof. Maybe we can set 5 year plans, that will make sure everyone agrees on
the goals and we can measure our success against those national 5 year
plans.

Heck, since we are getting rid of local and state governmental authority, we
might as well nationalize all businesses and give them 5 years plans. This
strong central government would have to be better than our current system of
a decentralized government and a marketplace managed by irrational buyers
and sellers.

Harry, stop spinning, you'r getting dizzy and sounding silly. There is
not a rational person on this planet who thinks Bush is responsible for
evacuating NO. If the Dems keep doing this blame thing for katrina,
you can see that it will be very easy to make them look like Genocidal
maniacs. The blame thing is kinda sleazy but I can easily imagine
campaign blogs in 2006 that show the flooded busses followed by pics of
corpses to illustrate the incompetence of the Dems. Maybe you'd like a
blog on Democratic Urban renewal showing Bush having to beg Blanco to
evacuate and then showing corpses. If this is the sort of thing the
Dems want , I can guarantee they will end up looking really bad. If
the Dems really want to campaign on this, they will just make
themselves into easy targets. Find some real political issues unless
you just want a sleaze campaign that you will lose.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

Bush sent more funding to NO to sure up the levees than any of his
predecessors.

Doesn't matter much:

NY Times
September 13, 2005
Katrina's Message on the Corps

There has been much grumbling that Congress and the Bush administration
denied the Army Corps of Engineers the money that was required to
fortify New Orleans against a hurricane like Katrina. These complaints
need to be pursued. Flood control is mainly a federal obligation, and
the agency most responsible for it must have enough money to do the job
right.

But there is another question worth asking: has the Army Corps made wise
use of the money it has? Louisiana has received about $1.9 billion over
the past four years for corps civil works projects, more than any other
state. Although much of this has been spent to protect New Orleans, a
lot has also been spent on unrelated water projects - a new and
unnecessary lock in the New Orleans Industrial Canal, for instance, and
dredging little-used waterways like the Red River - mainly to serve the
barge industry and other commercial interests.

The Louisiana delegation, second to none in bringing home the bacon, is
as much to blame for these skewed priorities as the corps is. Yet the
reports of wasted dollars in Louisiana are consistent with the corps's
historical profile. Studies by the Government Accountability Office, the
National Academy of Sciences and others have documented that the agency
has long inflated the economic payoffs of its projects to justify ever
greater budget outlays, while underestimating the environmental damage
caused by turning free-flowing rivers into lifeless canals and
destroying millions of acres of valuable wetlands. This satisfies the
corps's appetite for money and Congress's appetite for pork.

Katrina thus raises an even broader question: has the time not come,
finally, to impose some real discipline on the Army Corps and its
paymasters in Congress who regard it as their own cookie jar?

Both the present commander, Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, and his predecessor
have promised internal reforms. But the lead must come from Congress,
where enlightened reformers like Senators John McCain and Russell
Feingold are pushing independent peer review for individual projects and
other changes that might truly make a difference.

Unfortunately, many other senators - not just those from Louisiana - are
powerfully addicted to corps projects and the votes they attract,
especially Christopher Bond of Missouri, who controls the corps's budget
and has single-handedly kept alive a nonessential barge industry on the
Missouri River at great cost to the environment and taxpayers. To
discipline the corps, Congress must first discipline itself.

Good article. So the money was sent, but not used properly. Now the
real blame game can start. Since Bush wasn't the one to appropriate
where the money went, can we at least agree that it's ridiculous to keep
arguing that "Bush didn't spend the money to reinforce the levees"?


I never said Bush had anything to do with the levees.

Of course not. The environmental group "Save our Wetlands" put the kibosh
to the idea of flood gates back in 1970.
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Rea...e.asp?ID=19418

I read the quote from Blanco about Bush appealling to her to order a
mandatory evac in a copy of the Monday NO Times Picayune (the day of
the hurricane). Since then, I have seen two apocryphal statements that
she had decided to evacuate BEFORE Bush talked to her but no evidence
of this. The idea that she had decided to evac before she talked to
Bush is cantradicted by both her and Nagin being afraid to evac due to
buisiness and liability concerns the day before. Instead, she decided
to blame Bush by telling people (as quoted in the NO paper) just in
case an evac really was not needed. As it turns out, and evac really
was needed so Bush should get credit.