President needs to clean house

wildbill59

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
May 14, 2005
Messages
395
Re: President needs to clean house

This is not a George bashing
1st sign that there's a troll coming <br /><br />
I believe he's taking heat now that he wouldn't be taking had he gone down there on Tuesday.
Da sucka punch<br />And did you expect him to put on waders and pose for pics like the carpet bagging Jesse and AL team. Snipers shooting at rescuers, that's a real safe enviroment for our commander in chief, he's smart enough to remember Dallas 1963.<br /> <br />
one less thing for the Prez to supervise, no need to cut vacations short,
And then the slam:<br />Frankly in this day and age of newfangled electronics gizmos the prez can be anywhere in the world and have the capabilities to be in command anytime,anywhwere. To keep imploring that he was only thinking about enjoying his vacation is deplorable. There are advantages to being out of D.C.
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: President needs to clean house

51ts9d
<br /><br /><br />Democrats' anti-Bush petition also seeks political contributions<br /> <br />By DEVLIN BARRETT<br />Associated Press Writer<br /><br />September 8, 2005, 4:13 PM EDT<br /><br />WASHINGTON -- A new Democratic effort to whip up indignation about the Bush administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina also tried to raise money for Democratic candidates. <br /><br />Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat and the head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, issued an appeal Thursday urging people to sign an online petition to fire the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency over his handling of the Katrina response. <br /><br />After an inquiry from the Associated Press, the DSCC quickly pulled down the page and said they would donate to charity any money raised by the anti-FEMA petition. <br /><br />When recipients clicked on a link to the petition, the top center of the screen _ above the call to "Fire the FEMA director" _ had asked for a donation to the DSCC. <br /><br />Other DSCC Web pages have the same appeal for contributions, but several do not. <br /><br />Since Katrina, Democrats have charged Republicans badly botched the response, and some have called for the firing of FEMA chief Michael Brown. <br /><br />In recent days, Republicans hit back by accusing Democrats of trying to use the human tragedy for political gain. The letter, the GOP said Thursday, was proof. <br /><br />"It's a disgrace to exploit Hurricane Katrina to raise political funds," said Brian Nick, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. <br /><br />"They should halt this activity because it's way over the line," he said. <br /><br />DSCC spokesman Phil Singer said: "While the content of the letter is totally valid, it should have never been linked to a Web site that asks people to contribute to political campaigns. We regret it, have removed the letter from our site and will donate any contributions raised as a result of this petition to the Red Cross." <br /><br />The letter is the latest sign that more than a week after Hurricane Katrina struck, the political fight over what went wrong in the response continues to grow. <br /><br />Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has called for an independent commission to probe government failures before and after Katrina, while House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi called Bush "oblivious, in denial, dangerous" in his approach to relief efforts. <br /><br />Rep. Thomas Reynolds, head of the House Republicans' fund-raising efforts, described Democratic criticism as "reprehensible," saying "this is a tragedy, not an opportunity." <br /><br />The administration and Republican leaders in Congress are scrambling to launch a number of initiatives to help hurricane refugees and victims, including a new $51 billion aid package. <br /><br />During the 2004 presidential campaign, some Democrats attacked President Bush for using an image of Sept. 11 devastation in a re-election campaign ad, accusing him of exploiting the tragedy. At the time, Schumer did not join in the criticism.
 

BoatBuoy

Rear Admiral
Joined
May 29, 2004
Messages
4,856
Re: President needs to clean house

Originally posted by wildbill59:<br /><br />And did you expect him to put on waders and pose for pics like the carpet bagging Jesse and AL team.
I expected him to do exactly what he did. Not show up or send military assistance until he could be there on Friday to lead em in for the photo op.<br /><br />
Originally posted by wildbill59:<br /><br />Frankly in this day and age of newfangled electronics gizmos the prez can be anywhere in the world and have the capabilities to be in command anytime,anywhwere.
I'm sure glad he's in command. We'd have a catastrophe if he wasn't.
 

txswinner

Banned
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
2,326
Re: President needs to clean house

I had no problem with the President staying away. His appearance only helped by showing his own personal remorse and support of the people. I would not have put him in harms way.<br /><br />My thread was to show what duties belong to the Homeland Security. Yes FEMA is part of it but they are more of the rebuilders.<br /><br />If indeed, it is the duty of Homeland Security and it does appear to be then 6 days is way too long. Remember Federal rules trump State rules. So if Homeland has the authority then they also have the responsibility.<br /><br />What if next it is a terrorist attack on refiners in port of Houston, do we wait 6 days to react and try to stop the destruction, I hope not.<br /><br />This is not a George Bush mistake, as I said. He can not micromanage ever part of the Federal Gov. But it now his job to see the problem is corrected and my opinion is he start at the top, Remember the Democrat said "The Buck Stops Here."<br /><br />I hope he takes action before it is too late.
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: President needs to clean house

Who's to Blame for Delayed Response to Katrina?<br />New Orleans' Emergency Plan Not Followed, Federal Government Slow to Take Lead<br />Sep. 6, 2005 - In New Orleans, those in peril and those in power have pointed the finger squarely at the federal government for the delayed relief effort. <br /><br />But experts say when natural disasters strike, it is the primary responsibility of state and local governments -- not the federal government -- to respond. <br /><br />New Orleans' own comprehensive emergency plan raises the specter of "having large numbers of people ... stranded" and promises "the city ... will utilize all available resources to quickly and safely evacuate threatened areas." <br /><br />"Special arrangements will be made to evacuate persons unable to transport themselves," the plan states. <br /><br />When Hurricane Katrina hit, however, that plan was not followed completely. <br /><br />Instead of sending city buses to evacuate those who could not make it out on their own, people in New Orleans were told to go to the Superdome and the Convention Center, where no one provided sufficient sustenance or security. <br /><br /><br />'Lives Would Have Been Saved'<br />New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin said "80 percent" of the city was evacuated before the storm hit, but Bob Williams says that's not good enough. <br /><br />Williams dealt with emergency response issues as a state representative in Washington when his district was forced to deal with the eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1980. <br /><br />"If the plan were implemented, lives would have been saved," Williams said. <br /><br />There's no question the federal government plays a major role in disaster relief. But federal officials say in order to get involved, they must first be asked to do so by state officials. <br /><br />As one FEMA official told ABC News, Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco failed to submit a request for help in a timely manner. <br /><br />Shortly before Katrina hit, she sent President Bush a request asking for shelter and provisions, but didn't specifically ask for help with evacuations. One aide to the governor told ABC News today Blanco thought city officials were taking care of the evacuation. <br /><br />Nonetheless, some experts argue that the federal government should have been more proactive. <br /><br />"If the city and the state are stumbling or in over their head, then it's FEMA's [Federal Emergency Management Agency's] responsibility to show some leadership," said Jerry Hauer, director of public health preparedness at the Department of Health and Human Services. <br /><br />Both the president and Congress have vowed to investigate questions of blame. It may already be safe to conclude that there will be plenty of it to go around. <br /><br />ABC News' Dan Harris filed this report for "World News Tonight."
 

jtexas

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Messages
8,646
Re: President needs to clean house

wildbill, you've mixed quotations from different posters there, bud, if txs says it's not Bushbashing then it's not fair to taunt him if I bash Bush...and it wasn't me who said it wasn't bushbashing. Unless you suspect some kind of cunning left-wing conspirancy, rising up from where Bush would least expect it...sorry, got a little carried away... :) <br /><br />You lifted that first quote of mine out of context...I don't consider it "bashing" to say he could've saved himself some media grief by doing a better job of managing perceptions. The thread is about whether Bush will "clean house," I criticized his advisors.<br /><br />The "vacation" thing, I didn't really intend as "bashing"...I was just tryin to be clever. I understand there's good reasons to put FEMA within DHS and reducing presidential span of control is just a by-product. But you know it's going to get mentioned. I do apologize to any who were offended that wasn't my intent.<br /><br />You may think perceptions don't matter and I'll respect that opinion, but my opinion is that the Republican party needs Bush to maintain a high approval rating, and this is sort of thing that can make the margin for some candidates.<br /><br />just my 2¢
 

jtexas

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Messages
8,646
Re: President needs to clean house

[sarcasm]<br /><br />well, Ralph, isn't that what was decided by the Civil War?<br /><br />[/sarcasm]
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: President needs to clean house

<br />Amendment X (the Tenth Amendment) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, states:<br /><br />The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.<br /><br />the Amendment makes explicit the idea that the federal government is limited only to the powers it is granted in the Constitution.<br /><br /><br />
 

BoatBuoy

Rear Admiral
Joined
May 29, 2004
Messages
4,856
Re: President needs to clean house

Oh boy, now we're gonna argue about state's rights.
 

txswinner

Banned
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
2,326
Re: President needs to clean house

Sorry, my bad, I take it back that is really one of my big peeves and am sure others will want to kill me over it. Course it is what you would expect from a southern boy.
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: President needs to clean house

Look by the time this is over, there better be some people on trial for manslaughter... Anything less is a whitewash.
 

PW2

Commander
Joined
Apr 21, 2004
Messages
2,719
Re: President needs to clean house

Well, there is one thing that I can't imagine anyone arguing with:<br /><br />That it is very clear that this country is not prepared to deal with a major catastophe.<br /><br />HSC was supposed to change that. It didn't work.
 

TELMANMN

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
465
Re: President needs to clean house

Ralph, what the H are you trying to say?
 

pjc

Lieutenant Commander
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
1,856
Re: President needs to clean house

IMO investigations, focus groups, after action reviews, all these "tools" to establish blame are a plague. the afore mentioned actions have become a HUGE waste of resources. And friggen monies best used to pay for reconstruction of housing and facilities that will be costing real monies. Stop the foolish waste.<br /><br />Were the above mentioned actions, or "tools of corrective review" used appropriately, errors and shortcomings would be discovered. And at that point solutions could be implemented. The process should be unbiased, expedient, and thorough. And at a financial cost that is value added.<br /><br /> But we the citizenry allow this behavior to continue as well as escalate ever more without any accountability of our elected officials as well as the media who proportionately provide us with the "information" that we base our opinions on.
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: President needs to clean house

It appears that there was criminal neglect here. When you have a reckless disregard for human life and people die, you go to jail. Now, I can show you what things I think constitute that if you'd like... but I'm not a lawyer. I only play one on the Internet :)
 

pjc

Lieutenant Commander
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
1,856
Re: President needs to clean house

and oh yea, "the President should Clean House"...dude, it is yours and mine responsibility to clean the house by electing people both locally as well as higher offices who will have appointees who are qualified. The typical BS position of many is that the FED or GOV the MAN should do this and that. BS my friend....and the ramble goes on.......
 

wildbill59

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
May 14, 2005
Messages
395
Re: President needs to clean house

pjc, Amen bro<br />Since this thread was a troll to begin with here goes, and I'm not some southen boy<br />
But we the citizenry allow this behavior to continue as well as escalate ever more without any accountability of our elected officials as well as the media who proportionately provide us with the "information" that we base our opinions on.<br />
Well said. Here in the "progressive" state of WI we have 4 legislators coming to trial on Felony charges while in office. One was cocky enough to have run for re-election last year and the sad part is people voted for this idiot. We have a sitting Gov. who took in 2 million in campaign contributions from a sovereign nation and a bribe of 10,000 for a state contract. But when pressed sheeple will still vote because somebody will only ask them,"Are you a Repub or Dem"? <br /><br /><br />jtexas, I will agree with you on the civil war.<br />The south refused to come to Congress in 1860 and Lincoln(Repub)declared martial law, which by the way has never been recinded by any president since. This allowed him in 1863 to march 20,000 Federal troops into New York city and slaughter the citizenery at will for resisting the unlawful draft.<br />This is always on the minds of states govenors when the feds come in, the loss of complete control of "states rights". I have a feeling Gov.Blanco didn't go to public skool or else she had a smart granpa.<br /><br />The idea of a "Republic" no longer exists and the idea that we have a constitution in effect is garbage. How can anybody explain how we, citizens with rights guaranteeded by a const. give up those rights via "the Patriot Act 1 and 2"? When we give up our const. rights doesn't this require a 2/3 votes of the states? Notice how us as citizens are subject now to a tribunial, not a jury of our peers?<br /><br />As for the "states militia", they sold out in the early 1900's because of lack of funding. The Feds promised money but in exchange ****ed the "militia" to do anything the Feds want. Hence the La Guard and their equipment are thousands of miles away. The idea that the "guard" was to protect the state no longer exists. Look at Arizona and the illegal problem. Who do we blame? The Feds? The "guard" could do a bang up job with the problem but who's holding em back? Your bros the Feds. Remember all the government appointments put on hold because of illegal nannies?<br /><br />We as citizens have sold our souls and our hard earned cash to a god that will dump us in a heart beat. This god is big gubbermint.The thought of personel responsibility no longer exists. "Even though I missed da bus somebody will come back for my butt, feed me and give me debit cards. We as a nation are unprepared period for what's coming, a suitcase nuke bomb in say Chicago.<br /><br />This hurricance and the recent massive power outage in the northeast are just rehearsals of what to expect in the future. Are you ready?<br />As others have said in other posts, I want to see the bodies. Maybe that will wake up the sheeple into realizing that they've been sold out.<br /><br />Do we want the Feds to come in and say "you must rebuild public housing" to perpetuate the "welfare state"? I think not but then we've already sold our souls to lies and corruption long ago.<br /><br />We sheeple are more concerned as to who's playing on Monday night football/Nascar on Sunday and having a 12'r in the fridge than what our gubbermint is doing to them. Playcated and sedated, just where they want you. Next week Katrina will be a passing thought to all but a few.<br /><br />Cynical? no I see it as being a realist
 

ErikDC

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
306
Re: President needs to clean house

Sorry, WildBill. I don't buy your pessimism. Go dig a bomb shelter, I have faith in the folks down there.
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: President needs to clean house

Some Urge Greater Use of Troops in Major Disasters<br /><br />By Bradley Graham<br />Washington Post Staff Writer<br />Friday, September 9, 2005; A15<br /><br />The breakdown of local and state agencies that tried to respond to Hurricane Katrina has spurred fresh debate about whether disasters of such magnitude ought to be turned over to the U.S. military and other federal authorities to manage at the outset.<br /><br />National plans developed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks rest on the notion that police, fire and other emergency groups are best positioned to serve as first responders. Federal agencies are supposed to function as backup to state and local ones, and military forces are meant to play a largely supporting role to civilian authorities.<br /><br />But Katrina showed what can happen when the foundation of this organizational structure is quickly overwhelmed and disintegrates, according to government officials and independent analysts.<br /><br />"The would-be first responders at the state and local level were themselves victims in very large numbers," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said at a news conference this week. As a result, "we had a situation that was distinctly different than in past events of this type."<br /><br />Rumsfeld and other senior administration officials this week have resisted entering a public discussion of alternative approaches, insisting that the focus stay for now on cleaning up after Katrina. President Bush and congressional leaders have promised investigations into what went wrong in the response to the hurricane's devastation.<br /><br />But Rumsfeld said the government will likely address again the question of "lead responsibility" for the Defense Department in disaster response. He noted that the issue is critical not only in responding to a natural catastrophe but also to a terrorist attack, because reliance on local authorities has been the basis of emergency planning in both cases.<br /><br />Some homeland defense specialists have argued since Katrina struck that national plans must be revised to provide for a bigger and faster federalized effort, particularly in large-scale disasters.<br /><br />"Only the federal government can mobilize a national response to catastrophic disasters," said James Carafano of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. "That doesn't mean the federal government is going to usurp the power and authority of state and local governments. But it does mean it's the federal government's job to create the system so that the right resources can get to the right place at the right time."<br /><br />There is no guarantee a greater federal role would improve response. Both the Pentagon and the Federal Emergency Management Agency have been widely faulted for not grasping quickly enough the scope of Katrina's damage and not committing sufficient people, supplies and equipment early on.<br /><br />Historically, practical as well as legal considerations have favored relying on leadership at the grass-roots level.<br /><br />"The police and fire departments and local emergency-service people are, by definition, the first ones on the scene," said H.K. Park, a former defense official who worked on homeland security issues during the Clinton administration. "And they have the advantage of knowing their communities.<br /><br />"There's also a legal dimension," he added, "involving states' rights versus federal rights."<br /><br />Further, military forces remain constrained from a domestic law enforcement role by the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. Though the Pentagon has committed more than 8,000 active-duty Army and Marine troops and about 10,000 sailors, it has made it clear that these forces will not perform police functions.<br /><br />National Guard troops, now numbering more than 46,000, constitute a far larger share of the military presence in the disaster area. They bring two main advantages. First, they possess medical, engineering, communication and logistical skills required in relief work. Second, Guard units, when operating under the command of state governors, are not limited by Posse Comitatus.<br /><br />Any move to assign greater responsibility to the Pentagon for domestic emergency management is likely to face resistance, particularly since the armed forces are already strained by the conflict in Iraq. Commanders remain sensitive to the notion of U.S. troops becoming an occupying force in their own country.<br /><br />When Guard forces arrived in New Orleans late last week, Lt. Gen. Russel Honore, who is overseeing military operations in the region, ordered them to point their rifles down to reinforce the message they had come to provide assistance, not occupy the city.<br /><br />Politically, too, the idea of an enhanced federal role may be a hard sell to some local and state officials if it means diminishing their authority. Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco resisted a Bush administration effort last week to exert federal control over all local police and state National Guard units.<br /><br />Some experts also contend that an attempt to federalize a relief effort could backfire, resulting in less flexibility rather than more.<br /><br />"You don't want to federalize the Guard," Park warned. "When Guard forces are controlled by the governor, they can engage in law enforcement duties. When federalized, they are subject to Posse Comitatus."<br /><br />But Carafano and others argue that major disasters require a different approach, with only the federal government able to provide the resources and coordination necessary to manage a catastrophic event.<br /><br />The problem, Carafano said, is that officials at all levels of government have appeared more inclined to focus on preparing for smaller disasters. As a result, much of the increased funding for emergency-response activities in recent years has gone toward equipment useful to local agencies, such as new fire trucks or protective fencing, that are of little value when overwhelming disasters strike.<br /><br />"The money should have gone towards the things that enable local and state authorities to plug into a national system -- things like communications, emergency operations centers, training," he said. "All of these would have enabled the mayor of New Orleans to better communicate his needs."<br /><br /> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/08/AR2005090801862_pf.html
 
Top