It’s amazing how it takes nothing short of a disaster to wake some people up… and to get them to see just how bad this administration has been for the US.

Impeachment for Bush should have taken place a long time ago for his misdeeds in the ‘war on a concept’.  I don’t think any grounds for impeachment could be found in the Katrina aftermath as mother nature provides the President with ‘plausible deniability’.

Bush Sr’s motto: ‘Read my lips, no new taxes’.

Bush Jr’s: ‘Pay attention, nothing is ever my responsibility unless it’s good.’

So you’re saying that the fact that the Mayor of NO, Ray Nagin, did not follow NO’s own evacuation plan, had hundreds of buses at his disposal yet chose to not use them to evacuate his own city; simply declared a “manditory evacuation” yet did not provide any way to get those unable to travel on their own out of the city; and you’re going to say that the G.W. and the feds bear sole responsibility?

After the blatent ineptitude by both the Governor of LA and the Mayor of NO, Bush faced the daunting task of taking control and refitting thousands of troops at the ready from a recovery and rebuilding operation to the massive search and rescue operation that wouldn’t have been necessary had the mayor done his job.

Granted, there is plenty of blame to go around, all the way from the able bodied person who ignored a call for manditory evacuation to G.W. Bush but your call for impeachment is absurd.

The plan for reinforcing the levees has been in place since 1965. Since then the funding has fallen through in EVERY administration. Why do you ignore this fact? 

I know that your top priority is to bash Bush, that’s okay, but in this regard a little balance and intillectual honesty would be in order.

sigh.

Someone who has sided mostly with the left says “gee, maybe you guys have been right about Bush all along” and the first response, instead of reaching out basically calls him an idiot for not noticing sooner.

Thanks.

And people wonder why the country is so bitterly divided.

For the record, the death of possibly 10,000 US citizens in a disaster that would have been prevented by allocating the funds to strengthen the levees should be an impeachable offense, and if it’s not it fucking well should be.

So you’re saying that the fact that the Mayor of NO, Ray Nagin, did not follow NO’s own evacuation plan, had hundreds of buses at his disposal yet chose to not use them to evacuate his own city; simply declared a “manditory evacuation�? yet did not provide any way to get those unable to travel on their own out of the city; and you’re going to say that the G.W. and the feds bear sole responsibility?

Not at all. There’s plenty of people to blame for what has transpired since, doesn’t change the fact that it could have been prevented from happening in the first place by allocating those funds.

The plan for reinforcing the levees has been in place since 1965. Since then the funding has fallen through in EVERY administration. Why do you ignore this fact?

First, the proposal to strengthen the levees that came from the Army Corps of Engineers is six years old. I’m sure it’s been discussed by others before then, but the ACoE plan doesn’t go back to 65. It’s only been in recent years that storm activity in the Gulf has reached the threatening levels we’re dealing with now.

I know that your top priority is to bash Bush,

Nonsense. As I said, I’ve been a very strong supporter of Bush, as is evident throughout my postings on this blog.

KP - Why would you be so hell bent on impeaching the President over Katrina and not over the World Trade Centers?  In both instances the government had a certain degree of foreknowledge.

After the blatant ineptitude by both the Governor of LA and the Mayor of NO, Bush faced the daunting task of taking control and refitting thousands of troops at the ready from a recovery and rebuilding operation to the massive search and rescue operation that wouldn’t have been necessary had the mayor done his job.

Yes, there is plenty of blame to go around if your of the mindset that ‘the buck stops here’ actually stopped with Truman.

Could things have been handled better before the disaster?  Certainly.  The problem is that it didn’t and now state and federal government are scrambling around with their heads up their collective asses.

After 9/11, HSA and federal authorities wanted all disaster preparedness and funding placed under their control.  This was supposedly to give them the resources to respond to a crisis anywhere in the country regardless of the the local ability to deal with the situation.

So my question to you is, what if this had been a terrorist attack (sans the three-day warning)?  Fuck, the Sri Lanka government handled the Tsunami with relatively more efficiency than this.

KP - Why would you be so hell bent on impeaching the President over Katrina and not over the World Trade Centers?  In both instances the government had a certain degree of foreknowledge.

I don’t think it’s a fair comparison. While warnings that both disasters were presented to the administration, nobody laid a simple “here’s how to prevent this terrorist attack from ever happening” plan on the President’s desk and said “sign here and it’s all taken care of.”

I also think there’s a difference between “evil badguys are going to try to make this happen” and “this is going to happen eventually, the only question is when.”

the proposal to strengthen the levees that came from the Army Corps of Engineers is six years old.

Not entirely true.

Since 1965, when the first large federal project was started to bolster New Orleans’s levees and other defenses, there has been a tug of war over how sturdy, and expensive, to make a system that might, or might not, be needed.

Most aspects of the $732 million Lake Pontchartrain project have been completed, but the project remains behind schedule and underfinanced. Although Congress appropriated more than $4.7 billion for the Corps of Engineers this year, the spending on New Orleans levees was relatively small.

The Pontchartrain project drew about $5.7 million, almost $2 million more than what was earmarked for it in President Bush’s budget. For five years, Congress has repeatedly increased the sum for New Orleans levees over Mr. Bush’s requests . . .

Also, there is this

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.

Just to put things into perspective. I know, facts suck.

In 2001, FEMA warned that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the three most likely disasters in the U.S. But the Bush administration cut New Orleans flood control funding by 44 percent to pay for the Iraq war.

A year ago the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed to study how New Orleans could be protected from a catastrophic hurricane, but the Bush administration ordered that the research not be undertaken.

In 2004, the Bush administration cut the Corps of Engineers’ request for holding back the waters of New Orleans’ Lake Pontchartrain by more than 80 percent.

Source article at http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2005/08/31/disaster_preparation/index_np.html

You’re right,Daniel, facts do suck.

Impeachment ???
While this idea might feed American oft insatiable desire for another high-drama legislative year, some of us would rather Congress get back to business—and not be distracted (again) by such silliness.  It’s time Americans understand impeachment is a process best grounded in facts, not emotions.

After all…
The right to impeach public officials is secured by the U.S. Constitution Article II, Section 4discusses the grounds for impeachment: “the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Is this a “high crime” or misdemeanor ?
(here’s my own *sigh*)

I think many would agree, it’s wayyyyyyyy to early to start assigning blame.  We don’t even know all the facts yet.  Let’s first get the mess cleaned up, *then* we can establish an independent counsel to investigate the tragedy.

One of the biggest problems with American culture is this penchant for witch hunts.  Put down the pitchfork—and pick up a friggin shovel and get to work.

I see you’re quoting the long discredited Salon article. You, like the article in question, are “cherry picking�? facts so suit your anti-Bush agenda.

Granted, the Army Corps of Engineer debacle you describe is indeed factual but you ignore the relevance of the fact that the issue was already being addressed (or a plan of address was in place since 1965).  Plus, as per what the Army Corps of Engineers have said, the levee construction to which you refer as evidence of Bush’s needed impeachment was not relevant in regards to the breech as a result of Katrina. What this means is even if Bush hadn’t cut the funding it would’ve made ANY difference. On the other hand, if Mayor Nagin had simply followed NO’s evacuation plan most of this tragedy could’ve been avoided.

There’s also this from the LA disaster plan:

The primary means of hurricane evacuation will be personal vehicles. School and municipal buses, government-owned vehicles and vehicles provided by volunteer agencies may be used to provide transportation for individuals who lack transportation and require assistance in evacuating…

Yeah, let’s blame Bush.

Like I said, in regards to the disaster in NO, Bush is not blameless but to assign him sole responsibility is absurd. There is plenty of blame to go around and it is much, much too early to be using this tragedy as more fodder for “Bush is evil—Bush is to blame for everything—anti Bush, bla, bla”.

I’m not a huge Bush fan but I think it more important to get to the bottom of this disaster; it’s various causes and what can be done to prevent it in the future. I think that’s much more important than using it as a means to attack Bush.

You, like the article in question, are “cherry picking�? facts so suit your anti-Bush agenda.

I have no anti-Bush agenda. I have been a Bush supporter since 2000. Are you even paying attention?

Bush is not blameless but to assign him sole responsibility is absurd.

I haven’t tried to assign him sole responsibility. Once more, you simply aren’t paying attention. Yes, there are plenty of people to blame at various levels for various things, doesn’t change the fact that he cut those budgets. It was a bad decision and people died. Lots of people.

Going back to my original post, what bothers me most is the attempt to paint the man who should be standing up and taking responsibilty as the hero in the current situation.

What bothers me most in my discussion with you is your attempt to portray me as a Bush basher. I am anything but, as most of the regulars around here are certainly aware.

Regardless of what Nagin could have done, it was Bush’s responsibility was to do whatever was in his power to help those people.  If someone is choking and the person helping them doesn’t know CPR but you do, you don’t just stand around watching and say, “Oh well, they can’t do it.  Not my problem!” I don’t think Bush gave this situation the effort and consideration it deserved, before or after.  Once again he has failed us in that regard.

Does it mean he should be impeached for his behavior in this disaster?  I’m uncertain of that.  You’d have a much better case against his responses to 9/11 and the war on Iraq.

Once more, you simply aren’t paying attention. Yes, there are plenty of people to blame at various levels for various things, doesn’t change the fact that he cut those budgets. It was a bad decision and people died.

It appears as though you are blaming Bush’s lack of funding for the deaths. It’s absurd.

Speaking of paying attention, I’ll repeat:

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

With that in mind, how can you still be spewing the “Bush cut funding and people died” bs?

The fact still remains that the reason you have such a horrific level of death is because government at the local level failed to follow its own policies. To accuse Bush as being the reason so many died is absurd.

The fact that you are still beating this dead horse despite all logic and reason leads me to belieive that you aren’t the Bush supporter you claim to be.

With that in mind, how can you still be spewing the “Bush cut funding and people died�? bs?

Since you asked, here’s how:

Bush cut those budgets. That is a fact, documented and hard.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

That is an opinion, not a fact. The one does not discredit the other. Yes, it is an informed opinion from a source who should know, but it is also an opinion coming from a federal body and could be nothing more than spin. Neither you nor I have anyway of really knowing which it is, but I suspect that it lies somewhere in the middle.

Regardless, those budgets should not have been cut and common sense tells us that the more preperation that was made, the less severe the disaster would have been.

The fact that you are still beating this dead horse despite all logic and reason leads me to belieive that you aren’t the Bush supporter you claim to be.

That’s because you’ve made assumptions about me that better let you argue against your strawman. You’re the one motivated by a political agenda here, I’m simply looking for accountability and justice.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.[/quote

That may be partly true but you forgot to quote why the levees would not protect New Orleans, Daniel

In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.

However, they noted that the levees were designed for a Category 3 hurricane and could not handle the ferocious winds and raging waters from Hurricane Katrina, which was a Category 4 storm when it hit the coastline. The decision to build levees for a Category 3 hurricane was made decades ago based on a cost-benefit analysis.

Congress in 1999 authorized the corps to conduct a $12 million study to determine how much it would cost to protect New Orleans from a Category 5 hurricane, but the study is not scheduled to get under way until 2006. It was not clear why the study has taken so long to begin, though Congress has provided only in the range of $100,000 or $200,000 a year so far.

Al Naomi, senior project manager in the corps’ New Orleans District, said it would cost as much as $2.5 billion to build such a system, which likely would include a massive network of gates to block the Gulf of Mexico from Lake Pontchartrain and additional levees. If the project were fully funded and started immediately, Naomi said it could be completed in three to five years.

A project to build up the levees to withstand a Category 3 hurricane was launched in 1965 after Hurricane Betsy and was supposed to be completed in 10 years, but it remains incomplete because of a lack of funding.

Coastal restoration of the wetlands is the only solution to this mess. The levees added to the destruction of natural barriers.

We’ve spent nearly 200 billion to invade and control Iraq but but couldn’t be bothered to spend even 1% of that to help protect the nation’s 4th largest city from the certain tragic effects of a category 4 or category 5 hurricane.

Twice now the Bush administration has dropped the ball and allowed national tragedies to take place that did or will compromise the national economy and that isn’t even considering an unnecessary war to claim 10s of thousands more lives.

Plenty of doomsayers have warned of national disasters to come and Bush ignored them all except for the one to protect the oil supply. Our peacekeepers and reservists are mostly away in Iraq fighting a senseless war and we need them at home. The Department of Homeland Security was awarded billions only to fail at the first fair test of it’s effectiveness.

Impeachment at this point would be the kindest action. Fool me once: shame on you; fool me twice: shame on me. I refuse to claim the shame.

http://www.myantiwar.org/view/58144.html

What’s been bothering me the most is that Bush first acknowledged the federal response was pathetic, vowed to make it better, and is now deflecting all blame back on state and local officials.

This is not just New Orleans that’s been devastated here.  We’re talking parts of three states, countless local governments.  Am I expected to believe that three governors and a multitude of town mayors just randomly decided to say ‘fuck it’ and not act appropriately?  If Bush had been on top of things and FEMA had been prepared immediately to go into even one town as soon as the hurricane was over, I could maybe sorta kinda buy into it.  But FEMA didn’t show up for a few days and President Bush seems blissfully unfazed. 

For someone who claims to want to create an ‘ownership society’, he certainly doesn’t lead by example.

Yes, it is an informed opinion from a source who should know, but it is also an opinion coming from a federal body and could be nothing more than spin.

. . .could be? Yeah, and monkies could type a masterpiece if enough of them are given typewriters and an infinate amount of time to randomly peck away.

common sense tells us that the more preperation that was made, the less severe the disaster would have been.

Another example of you not paying attention. The preperations were made in the form of NO’s evacuation plan. All the preperation in the world doesn’t mean jack if those responsible don’t follow through. Something that Mayor Nagin failed to do thus resulting in the uneeded death of thousands.

Again, the responsibility for evacuating NO was with the local authorities not with the Feds. Bush declared a National Emergency before the hurricane and had the resources in que for a recovery and restoration process, not an evacuation. Why was that? Because the evacuation process is the duty of local government. When the local government failed to come through the Feds had to rework the whole process in order to bail out the locals.

You are spewing nothing more than rhetoric in claiming Bush is responsible and should be impeached. The facts and infomred opinion say otherwise.

I’ll take informed opinion over rhetoric any day.

I believe that Bush should not be impeached; he should be tried as a war criminal. But, if we can’t try him and we can’t impreach him, can’t we at least give him something cheaper to fuck up.

KPatrick, nice that you’re all aboard the anti-Bush train all of a sudden. Cryin’ shame it took so long, eh?

So you feel sick, huh? Oh, boo hoo.

I guess everybody should feel all warm and happy that you’ve finally woken up. But ... some of us knew Bush was a disaster more than five years ago.

In all that time, what? You were convinced by his smooth, deep, eloquent speeches that he was a good man, a great president? You weren’t paying attention? You only listen to Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson? You’re a devout Republican and you just know anything a Republican says and does must be good? You just had your happy little head up your ass?

Why give up on Bush now?? Hell, why not just stay a Bush supporter? Don’t desert your big “Mission Accomplished” / “We’re winning the war against terror!�? guy just because of a few dead people in New Orleans.

If you voted for Bush TWICE, I’m not sure I want you on my side.

I guess I’m glad you’ve learned something, and have the guts to say it out loud, but if it took you five friggin’ years to figure out Bush — Jesus Christ, don’t ever go on Jeopardy against flatworms.

Here’s my favorite quote-of-day:

You’re the one motivated by a political agenda here, I’m simply looking for accountability and justice.

This is a statement from KPatrickGlover who:
1) doesn’t know all the facts, yet, just like everybody else in the nation, sans perhaps the director of FEMA and DHS.
2) is already calling, knee-jerk, not for the resignation of Bush, but for *impeachment proceedings* to begin (again, without any substantive facts as to how the system and govt employees failed)

...  all this without knowing any established, researched facts regarding who failed, what part of the process failed, and why.

KPatrickGlover our new, local Kenneth W. Starr ??
(Starr wasn’t even this bad!)

Can you imagine impeachment proceedings without even an indepedent report on Who-How-and-Why ?  This is the exact mentality that has transformed America’s political process is a chaotic fight between rabid dogs.

Patience is a virtue, lest we squander what we have before us.

Wow!  When I first looked at this thread it was empty; now lots o’ stuff.  Wish we had a “subscribe to this thread” feature.  Is that possible, Les? (***Dave has it)

Anyway, NOLA and 9/11 are not comparable at all.  There’s plenty of doubt about foreknowledge of 9/11.  But NOLA was a dead certainty, if you’ll pardon the expression.

My test for government foreknowledge is: did I know about it?  ‘Cuz I’m just some idiot out there in newsland, and if I knew about it, the freaking government certainly did.  I pay a little more attention than the average idiot but I’m not exactly a one-man news agency.

The Bush administration said; “no one anticipated the kind of attack of 9/11” or words to that effect. 

Not true.  I anticipated it, and if I am not mistaken, so did a great number of fiction authors.  But I did not have foreknowledge - I just knew it was a possibility.

NOLA, on the other hand, I knew would happen for a long time.  The first article I remember reading about it was in the late ‘70’s - something about wetlands erosion.  It has popped up in environmental articles with increasing frequency since then, and there have been a number of cover stories in popular magazines in recent years.  Every one contained the phrase, “not a question of ‘if’, but ‘when’”

Even government reports have identified NOLA as a most likely scenario.  But I give more culpability to mayor Nagin than anybody, followed by Bush, followed by previous administrations.

I do wonder what you have to do to get fired in the Bush administration, though.

Guys, it’s gonna take a year to clean up this mess in the most optimistic of predictions, by which time Bush will only have less than two years left.  Really, what’s the point? 

Let’s clean it up rather than feeding the Drama Llama, God only knows that beauracratic bullshit doesn’t help starving and dying people.

Accountability and cleanup are not mutually exclusive, Slick.  I notice the Bush camp is the ones saying the loudest; “Let’s not politicize this” - hardly a surprise.

Speaking of bureaucratic bullshit, I read their evacuation plan.  Lots of admintalk and very, very little actual plan.

Saw a good quote over on Pharyngula:
“Any sufficiently advance incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.”

Whoops, I left out someone in my accountability list: the governor of Louisiana.  My bad.  She’d go between Nagin and Bush. 

And when I said; “their evacuation plan” I meant the NOLA plan. 

Sorry, I was awakened hours ago by malfunctioning tornado sirens that have continued to go off every few minutes since then.

Guys, it’s gonna take a year to clean up this mess in the most optimistic of predictions, by which time Bush will only have less than two years left.  Really, what’s the point?

As DOF said, anyone who silences valid criticism is just plaing to ‘their’ tune.

As someone (I believe on the NY Times op-ed page) recently said: it took Cindy Sheehan to make it possible to criticise Bushs War and NOT be called unpatriotic in the US.

Does it have to take the third major most likely disaster the FEMA warned about in early 2001 (an earthquake in California, the two others being: a terrorist attack in NY (check) and a Hurricane in Louisiana (check)) to enable someone to criticise Bushs interior policies?

Why do I care (as a foreigner)? Because unlike the policies of New Orleans mayors and state governors, Bushs policies have reverberations all over the world, whether its scuttling Kyoto or making war someplace.