If I hadn’t been down to Crescent Con down in New Orleans a couple weeks ago, then I would simply feel badly for the folks down in the Big Easy and keep my fingers crossed for them.
But instead, for me, the Big Breezy has a very personal aspect to it now. I met hundreds of great folks down there, and now I’m worried about all of them. I find myself wondering which of them got out in plenty of time…which ones were sitting there stuck in the unmoving mass of traffic. I remember the chatty cab driver who jovially pointed out the Superdome as the place where the Saints go to lose every weekend (if I got the team wrong, cut me some slack, I’m not Mr. Football), and now I wonder if the cabbie was one of those who couldn’t afford to get out and is now huddling in that same structure for which he showed such disdain. There’s a shop in the French Quarter that sells toy soldiers that Harlan loves, and I didn’t get a chance to swing by there and buy him something while I was down there; now I wonder if it’ll still be there by morning.
Katrina has been downgraded from a category 5 to category 4 which, according to a spokesman for the National Weather Service, is like being downgraded from being hit by an 18 wheeler to being hit by a freight train.
If any of the great folks I met down there are able to, chime in here and let us know how you’re doing.
PAD
• 
“And yet, when I look at the suffering and devestation, I don’t really care. I could step back and analyze that, and it’s not wrong to ask the question. What’s wrong is to use it as a reason to not extend help and relief. Compassion should not have limits in these times.”
I absolutely agree. I don’t care why or how those people are there, all I care about is getting them out.
Which isn’t to say that, when Bush says something like “no one could have predicted that the levees would fail” at a press conference, and we can go back to last year when, in fact, FEMA did predict exactly that, and as recent as last week when new channels up and down the dial were predicting that such a failure could indeed occur, I have to ask why is our President so out of touch with what seems to be common knowledge? And what misfortune stems from having such poor leadership at the top? I don’t think asking such questions detracts from the efforts to provide relief, and if anything, maybe it will spur the people at the top to act just a little more swiftly.
From a friend of a friend…
From: Gregory S. Henderson MD, PhD
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:21:55 -0500
To:
Subject: Re: thoughts and prayers
Thanks to all of you who have sent your notes of concern and your prayers. I am writing this note on Tuesday at 2PM . I wanted to update all of you as to the situation here. I don’t know how much information you are getting but I am certain it is more than we are getting. Be advised that almost everything I am telling you is from direct observation or rumor from reasonable sources. They are allowing limited internet access, so I hope to send this dispatch today.
Personally, my family and I are fine. My family is safe in Jackson, MS, and I am now a temporary resident of the Ritz Carleton Hotel in New Orleans. I figured if it was my time to go, I wanted to go in a place with a good wine list. In addition, this hotel is in a very old building on Canal Street that could and did sustain little damage. Many of the other hotels sustained significant loss of windows, and we expect that many of the guests may be evacuated here.
Things were obviously bad yesterday, but they are much worse today. Overnight the water arrived. Now Canal Street (true to its origins) is indeed a canal. The first floor of all downtown buildings is underwater. I have heard that Charity Hospital and Tulane are limited in their ability to care for patients because of water. Ochsner is the only hospital that remains fully functional. However, I spoke with them today and they too are on generator and losing food and water fast. The city now has no clean water, no sewerage system, no electricity, and no real communications. Bodies are still being recovered floating in the floods. We are worried about a cholera epidemic. Even the police are without effective communications. We have a group of armed police here with us at the hotel that are admirably trying to exert some local law enforcement. This is tough because looting is now rampant. Most of it is not malicious looting. These are poor and desperate people with no housing and no medical care and no food or water trying to take care of themselves and their families. Unfortunately, the people are armed and dangerous. We hear gunshots frequently. Most of Canal street is occupied by armed looters who have a low threshold for discharging their weapons. We hear gunshots frequently. The looters are using makeshift boats made of pieces of styrofoam to access. We are still waiting for a significant national guard presence.
The health care situation here has dramatically worsened overnight. Many people in the hotel are elderly and small children. Many other guests have
Have unusual diseases. They are unfortunately . ‘We have better medical letter. There are ID physicians in at this hotel attending an HiV confection. We have commandered the world famous French Quarter Bar to turn into an makeshift clinic. There is a team of about 7 doctors and PA and pharmacists. We anticipate that this will be the major medical facility in the central business district and French Quarter.
Our biggest adventure today was raiding the Walgreens on Canal under police escort. The pharmacy was dark and full of water. We basically scooped the entire drug sets into garbage bags and removed them. All under police excort. The looters had to be held back at gun point. After a dose of prophylactic Cipro I hope to be fine.
In all we are faring well. We have set up a hospital in the the French Qarter bar in the hotel, and will start admitting patients today. Many with be from the hotel, but many with not. We are anticipating to dealing with multiple medical problems, medications and and acute injuries. Infection and perhaps even cholera are anticipated major problems. Food and water shortages are iminent.
The biggest question to all of us is where is the national guard. We hear jet fignters and helicopters, but no real armed presence, and hence the rampant looting. There is no Red Cross and no salvation army.
In a sort of cliché way, this is an edifying experience. Once is rapidly focused away from the transient and material to the bare necessities of life. It has been challenging to me to learn how to be a primary care phyisican. We are under martial law so return to our homes is impossible. I don’t know how long it will be and this is my greatest fear. Despite it all, this is a soul edify experience. The greatest pain is to think about the loss. And how long the rebuid will. And the horror of so many dead people .
PLEASE SEND THIS DISPATCH TO ALL YOU THING MA Y BE INTERSTED IN A DISPATCH From the front. I will send more according to your interest. Hopefully their collective prayers will be answered. By the way suture packs, sterile gloves and stethoscopes will be needed as the Ritz turns into a MASH
Greg Henderson
Another letter from a friend of a friend..
Friday, September 2nd, 2005
Dear Mr. Bush:
Any idea where all our helicopters are? It’s Day 5 of Hurricane Katrina and thousands remain stranded in New Orleans and need to be airlifted. Where on earth could you have misplaced all our military choppers? Do you need help finding them? I once lost my car in a Sears parking lot. Man, was that a drag.
Also, any idea where all our national guard soldiers are? We could really use them right now for the type of thing they signed up to do like helping with national disasters. How come they weren’t there to begin with?
Last Thursday I was in south Florida and sat outside while the eye of Hurricane Katrina passed over my head. It was only a Category 1 then but it was pretty nasty. Eleven people died and, as of today, there were still homes without power. That night the weatherman said this storm was on its way to New Orleans. That was Thursday! Did anybody tell you? I know you didn’t want to interrupt your vacation and I know how you don’t like to get bad news. Plus, you had fundraisers to go to and mothers of dead soldiers to ignore and smear. You sure showed her!
I especially like how, the day after the hurricane, instead of flying to Louisiana, you flew to San Diego to party with your business peeps. Don’t let people criticize you for this — after all, the hurricane was over and what the heck could you do, put your finger in the dike?
And don’t listen to those who, in the coming days, will reveal how you specifically reduced the Army Corps of Engineers’ budget for New Orleans this summer for the third year in a row. You just tell them that even if you hadn’t cut the money to fix those levees, there weren’t going to be any Army engineers to fix them anyway because you had a much more important construction job for them — BUILDING DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ!
On Day 3, when you finally left your vacation home, I have to say I was moved by how you had your Air Force One pilot descend from the clouds as you flew over New Orleans so you could catch a quick look of the disaster. Hey, I know you couldn’t stop and grab a bullhorn and stand on some rubble and act like a commander in chief. Been there done that.
There will be those who will try to politicize this tragedy and try to use it against you. Just have your people keep pointing that out. Respond to nothing. Even those pesky scientists who predicted this would happen because the water in the Gulf of Mexico is getting hotter and hotter making a storm like this inevitable. Ignore them and all their global warming Chicken Littles. There is nothing unusual about a hurricane that was so wide it would be like having one F-4 tornado that stretched from New York to Cleveland.
No, Mr. Bush, you just stay the course. It’s not your fault that 30 percent of New Orleans lives in poverty or that tens of thousands had no transportation to get out of town. C’mon, they’re black! I mean, it’s not like this happened to Kennebunkport. Can you imagine leaving white people on their roofs for five days? Don’t make me laugh! Race has nothing — NOTHING — to do with this!
You hang in there, Mr. Bush. Just try to find a few of our Army helicopters and send them there. Pretend the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast are near Tikrit.
Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
http://www.MichaelMoore.com
P.S. That annoying mother, Cindy Sheehan, is no longer at your ranch. She and dozens of other relatives of the Iraqi War dead are now driving across the country, stopping in many cities along the way. Maybe you can catch up with them before they get to DC on September 21st. Oh, don’t worry about the gas prices
One thing is certain – what little faith I had that my government was in any way shape or form able or prepared to defend or assist the American people in the event of a natural disaster or a terrorist attack is every bit as destroyed as New Orleans and the Twin Towers. It cannot serve or protect. It can only take our money and go on vacation after an intern gives it a BJ in the oval office and whine about how difficult we make things when things do go its way.
On the one hand, I agree with a lot of what you say–it seems to me that, given the reality that New Oleans was going to one day be flooded there should have been a lot more boats available for rescue attempts, among other obvious preperations.
On the other hand, consider what has been done; a city of 500,000 to 1,000,000 people was largely evacuated in 36 hours and what should have been the deaths of 100,000s has been kept to, at worst (I hope) a single digit percentage of that. Before we too quickly condemn the local and federal government for their obvious falings, consider what the death toll has been for comparable disasters in other parts of the world.
Now obviously we have higher standards–we’re American so we think that we are not as vulnerable to the crap that is common elsewhere. In the face of natural disasters, that comforting thought falls apart. But again, lets wait a bit before totally writing off the effectiveness of the relief efforts.
Let me also add my expression of admiration to PAD for his generosity.
“… I have to ask why is our President so out of touch with what seems to be common knowledge? And what misfortune stems from having such poor leadership at the top?”
He doesn’t read the paper or watch the news. He’s said as much himself any number of times now. He gets any information he “needs” in cliff note versions of reports and papers that his handlers feed him. Why so shocked that Bush doesn’t know the first thing about facts that were being reported all over the place for almost 48 hours before this happened?
But you know…pointing out how Bush was wrong about the levees-that it was common knowledge points back to the idea that this was forseeable to all of those in the area.
I think it is most definitely important to be pushing the beauricrats to move this forward. But I don’t think it solves this problem to try and lay blame at one person’s feet, either. This covers a lot of ground, and goes much farther around than Bush and the Republican Crew. It seems like a lot of the politicians are flailing at this time. Noone wants to bite the bullet and take some of the burden.
I know what some members of the Army Corps of Engineers said, and I absolutely positively believe what they’re saying. What I’m not sure about is the terminology that is being used. If you’re budgeted 100 million dollars one year, and the next year you ASK for 150 million, but only get 120 million, does that mean your budget is cut by 30 million, or increased by 20 million? In Government-Speak, it means you had a budget cut. And while I do believe that’s what they’re really trying to say (that they wanted X, only got Y, and called it a slash), I must admit that’s just speculation on my part. However, here are some numbers for you:
1998 ACE budget: 3.24 billion
1999 ACE budget: 3.96 billion
2000 ACE budget: 3.9 billion
http://www.house.gov/transportation/water/hearing/02-10-99/02-10-99memo.htm
2005 ACE discretionary budget: 4.0 billion
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2005/corps.html
That second website describes in detail the individual projects…with the vast majority of monies going to New York/New Jersey, interestingly enough.
So…while the ACE budget actually ROSE 100 million dollars in the period between 2000 and 2005, Louisiana’s cut of the pie did seem to shrink. So, if you’re going to blame someone, who do you blame? Do you want to change the story of “Bush cut funding” to “Bush should have funded more?” then go right ahead…it’s a valid sentiment if naive (little thing called Congress…and the Democratic-run Senate for a couple years there…also have some say). Do you believe that Congress and the ACE caved in to New York/New Jersey pressure after 9/11 and budgeted accordingly? Also valid although also more speculation than anything else. What you CAN’T say is, flat-out, “It’s George Bush’s fault.”
Is there any truth, incidentally, that even if New Orleans had got all the monies it requested that the project wasn’t scheduled to be completed until 2007? I had heard that, but I won’t state it as fact yet. If it’s true, then, well, jeez.
Is there any truth, incidentally, that even if New Orleans had got all the monies it requested that the project wasn’t scheduled to be completed until 2007? I had heard that, but I won’t state it as fact yet. If it’s true, then, well, jeez.
Yes and no.
Yes, there was a project to mitigate Cat 5 surges. It wasn’t to be completed until 2007. But it wasn’t funded.
However, from what I hear, the failure point was not in storm surges, but in strengthening a levy for flooding. THAT repair was scheduled for 2003, but was not funded.
from the pharybgula.org blog:
#38420: rrt – 09/02 at 10:18 AM
For what it’s worth, a my rambling comments on all this:
Without wasting too much time on detail (and I’m nobody important, heh), I’ve got a working relationship with FEMA, and in general, they’re very much my ally. We do good work together, primarily in the field of mitigation: preventing disaster damage. Most often, for us that means buying out floodprone properties, converting them to open-space forever, but other things as well. It depends on the state, the most threatening disasters, etc. There are several Federal programs, run by FEMA, that fund mitigation activities, the idea being that in the long-run, these programs pay for themselves in prevented expenses of taxpayer-funded assistance, hardship to individuals, economic damage, etc.
Early in this administration’s first term, one of their first actions was to cut Project Impact, a new-ish mitigation program that had been started under Clinton’s FEMA director, James Lee Witt. By most accounts this was a successful program. Project Impact was responsible for some significant earthquake-resistance work done in the Seattle area prior to the Nisqually earthquake. This almost certainly saved lives and damage. The President announced THAT DAY he was ending Project Impact.
The single largest mitigation funding program, the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, has also been in the administration’s sights from day one. The President’s budget has called for its elimination in every annual budget. It’s only been through the political sausage-making process that HMGP has been constantly reinstalled, and even then, the administration did succeed in cutting it’s funding in half. It’s been at that level ever since, and we definitely feel the pinch.
Partly as justification for slashing HMGP, the Administration announced a new program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation. PDM, however, worked entirely differently from HMGP. Again, sparing gory details, PDM requires much more work from FEMA to administer and implement, and was generally perceived as being set up to limit overall disaster mitigation spending, as well as possibly to enable political influence on the distribution of funds. PDM suffered badly from delays and poor implementation early on–FEMA was not given adequate time to prepare for it. Most recently, the Administration has now announced that PDM funding will also be slashed by more than half, and the rules that govern how it is distributed are being radically adjusted in ways that (again) seem to allow more wiggle room for political influence.
This does not even address general changes in attitude. Historically we have many active mitigation grants and projects with FEMA. Pressure has increased dramatically to close outstanding grants–so that unspent money can be returned. Every aspect of program management has become much more restrictive, slowly strangling our ability to run mitigation projects at all. In recent years, mitigation funds for one major disaster were delayed an entire YEAR after the disaster because the actual cash fund that supplies mitigation money was “raided” for the war on terror. And always, increasingly, the focus has drifted more towards terrorism in planning and funding, nevermind the “predictable” disasters we experience every year, costing us far more money.
In some ways I do not blame FEMA for what’s happening. Planning for these disasters is the responsibility of the State and local governments, not FEMA, despite the assistance they offer in planning. True, for a disaster of this scope that’s not entirely relevant–FEMA would have to have some advance planning of their own regardless of what the states and municipalities plan. And it’s clear now that the local and FEMA planning and response were inadequate. Even so, I still would temper that with the understanding that the nature of this disaster would greatly hinder the response, even with good planning.
There is one criticism of this administration that I cannot entirely support. It’s becoming clear that funds to reinforce New Orleans’ flood protection system were reallocated for the Iraq war, and that those funds may have helped prevent the worst of New Orleans’ problems. It certainly does indicate the administration’s priorities.
But levees and pumps are generally not the answer. That city should not be there. I cannot refute the historical significance of New Orleans, and the reasons it was originally located there. But especially given the immense cost of this disaster, I question the wisdom of rebuilding. I would very much like to see a study of the feasibility and costs of relocating as much as possible to safer ground. Unfortunately, I know this is not what will happen. The city will be rebuilt in-place, and billions will be spent on bigger levees and more pumping stations. But I would at least like to see a serious discussion of it.
Make of that what you will.
In agency terms, those are budget cuts. Agencies put together funding requests, which are slightly inflated estimates of what the Agency Honchos think will allow that agency to fulfill it’s critical mission goals. So anything less than that request is seen as a budget cut, because it means that something the agency planned to do will have to get cut.
In all reality, who knows what would have happened had the ACE been allowed to keep the funds it needed to complete the levee upgrade. The thing that angers me isn’t so much that funding was cut. It’s that Bush acted yesterday like the whole idea that the levees could fail was news to him. It displayed an ignorance that I consider embarrassingly niave in the man that’s supposed to be the leader of this country. Yet he’s unfamiliar with one of the top vulnerabilities we have? One that FEMA considers to be such a large risk that they ran drills on just this disaster last summer? One that Bush’s administration looked at, and decided that rather than fund the $20 billion it would take to upgrade the entire levee system, he’d just spend $2 billion for a few projects.
CNN has the before and after satellite shots up, and I’m guessing that even if the levees have been strengthened, they still would have broken.
Oh, a letter from Michael Moore. Ok, one at a time, one at a time:
“Even those pesky scientists who predicted this would happen because the water in the Gulf of Mexico is getting hotter and hotter making a storm like this inevitable. Ignore them and all their global warming Chicken Littles. There is nothing unusual about a hurricane that was so wide it would be like having one F-4 tornado that stretched from New York to Cleveland.”
OK, I’m not so far right as to say that there isn’t something called Global Warming, and in the long run it’s going to be a problem. (Of course, I was told in the 70s by scientists that Global Cooling was going to be a monstrous disaster and that anyone who didn’t believe another Ice Age was approaching was insane – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling), but no. No, no, no. Let’s look at the top ten strongest hurricanes that have hit American shores:
1. Florida Keys, 1935, 892 millibars, 26.35 inches
2. Camille, 1969
3. Andrew, 1992
4. Florida Keys and Texas, 1919
5. Lake Okeechobee, 1928
6. Donna, 1960
7. Galveston, 1900
7. Grand Isle, 1909
7. New Orleans, 1915
7. Carla, 1961
(7-10 all had the same strength)
http://www.sptimes.com/2004/06/06/Hurricaneguide2004/Strongest_hurricanes.shtml
Six of them occured on or before 1935. Hëll, three of them before 1915. Now, I may only be an unfrozen caveman lawyer, but can we seriously say with scientific fact that Katrina was influenced by Global Warming? Reputable meteoroligists say that the link is premature at best and that the entire thesis is faulty (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-warm30aug30,1,2676962.story?coll=la-headlines-nation), although I certainly will concede that it wouldn’t hurt to do some more research. And yes, I know that there will always be some scientists who claim that global warming is definitively causing harsher earthquakes, but they are certainly far from the credible majority.
But seriously, I wouldn’t expect Mr. Moore to bother doing any research into facts, not when there’s context to be skewed and rhetoric to be made!
While the Global Warming thing is up in the air, it cannot be disputed that, for whatever reason, ocean temps are overall warmer, resulting in stronger storms. And if Global Warming is contributing to that, then mabye we ought to do something to curb it. It’s like a Catch-22. We don’t have any proof, but if we’re right, and we don’t spend lots of money now to improve our air quality, we’re going to spend a ton of money later fixing damage from storms like this. But if we’re wrong, and we DO spend tons of money now to reduce emissions, then we STILL might end up spending tons of money later, too, to fix the damage that has nothing to do with emissions, but is really a natural cycle.
“It can only take our money and go on vacation after an intern gives it a BJ in the oval office and whine about how difficult we make things when things do go its way.”
Huge tragedy, and your bìŧçhìņg about Clinton? What planet do you live on man?
JAC
Jim, have you heard the Mayor’s radio interview from yesterday? Have you heard him describe the situation, and the appalling lack of response? You talk about not assigning blame, yet here’s what you said
“People who live there could have gotten out sooner, taken this more seriously, been more prepared.”
I’ve disagreed with you in the past, but here I’m just plain going to call you wrong. Don’t start defending the various failures at all levels of our elected leaders to respond to this crisis, while at the same time blaming the very people we should all be praying for.
Go back and read what I said. Right now is NOT the time to be blaming anyone but rather helping the victims. My point was VERY clear. I was NOT blaming the victims. I was simply saying that there were a lot of factors that led to this situation, and you cannot evaluate the government’s response without also evaluating the people who were there in New Orleans.
There is no question the response could have been better. In a few weeks, we MUST analyze this situation to make sure we respond better next time. But right now there are 3 facts:
1.) Some CHOSE not to leave. They could, but they refused to do so. Their choice has added to the burden of trying to help those who genuinely had no ability to leave in time. I do not wish anyone ill, but if you deliberately stand in the way of a hurricane, you do bear some responsibility.
2.) There is clearly a breakdown in government response on all levels: local, state, and federal. That said, we are again talking about a Category 4 hurricane (when it hit). By definition, you don’t know fully were it will hit until hours ahead of time. When you are talking about such a huge land area that was hit, complete with flooding that greatly hampered rescue efforts, you might begin to comprehend that it would take a very comprehensive plan and a very strong leader to pull off the work that needs to be done. Obviously neither is in place. (When you are talking about a local disaster, this person cannot be the president, whomever he or she might be. This takes someone more local, such as Rudy Guiliani after 9/11.) To say there was a “lack of response” is to ignore the enormous work that was done. It is to live in a fantasy land that says we could have instantly gotten vehicles, etc. into the area. Yes, there were many mistakes made, and they must be evaluated. But there was not a lack of response.
3.) The crime and looting after the hurricane is inexcusable and cost people their lives. That is why I earlier said shooting looters is a valid consideration. Because the looting both kept out rescuers (regardless of whether it should or not), and it took police away from rescuing people to keeping the peace. There is NO excuse for the looting and anarchy that has happened. I am very sympathetic to those without food, water, usable toilets, etc. I understand tempers may flare. But much of the looting began long before we reached that level of destitution.
Bottom line, my point was also clear: WE are the government. We are the people who must take responsibility. I know of 3 churches in the area who have mobilized their people to provide food, shelter, and comfort to those in need. My church is sending money we will collect this Sunday to help. I am sure many other faith groups and charities are doing the same thing. We must not sit back and just blame the government. It will never fully meet a need like this. It is our responsibility to do everything we can as individuals to help in any way possible.
As you can tell, your post really ticks me off. To even imply that I don’t care that people are dieing is beyond the pale. I am sickened by how many are turning this into an opportunity to gain political points rather than focusing on those who need aid NOW. And I would be saying this whether Bush, Gore, Clinton, Kerry, or Reagan was president. It does not matter. People are still dieing. Their lives have been totally shattered. And many people are trying to do something about it. Find some constructive way and go help.
Iowa Jim
Thank you for that post, Roger. It was truly fascinating. It seems to me from the timeline there that cutting Project Impact was a rather foolish bean-counting move, although if the intention was to fold it into a pre-existing program to save cost, that I can understand…they just f-ed it up. However, it happened before the war (if “early in the administration” is accurate), so one can’t really blame the war on that one. The changing attitude is something I’ve heard a lot and believe whole-heartedly. I think it’s also important to point out that the onus for the planning was supposed to be at the local level. That doesn’t forgive what seem to be çøçk-ups at the federal level, but I hope it slows down all the “Bush is to blame” stuff.
“Politicizing it is certainly not going to solve the problems”
I disagree, in fact I’m throwing in my hat with all the other idiots who feel this is so important! In fact I demand that all releif efforts in NO and the other afflicted areas stop until we can figure out who exactly is to blame. Since Clinton has already been bìŧçhëd about, I suggest one of the following is completely and wholely responsible, I just don’t know which. Jimmy Carter, Todd Mcfarlane, Steve Ditco, Richard Nixon, FDR, Hitler, Mother Teresa, Any one of the popes (you pick), Walt Disney, The entire pørņ industry. The person reading this post (yes you!), George Carlin, Hubert Farnsworth, Xena warrior princess (who inceidently was in NO before the disaster… huh,. seee) The entire cast and crew of Star Trek (all 5 shows and the movies, living and dead)and finally Bin Ladin.
sigh…. There I said it, urge to kill fading..fading…RISEING…fading…….gone.
JAC
Bobb:
“While the Global Warming thing is up in the air, it cannot be disputed that, for whatever reason, ocean temps are overall warmer, resulting in stronger storms. “
Heh. Actually, I’m exactly opposite. I think that global warming IS a fact, but I do dispute that it’s causing stronger storms. That was the gist of the article I cited earlier.
However, I reserve the right to be absolutely wrong!
Jim, in a way, I’m glad I ticked you off. In short, what I got out of your prior post was
1) Don’t be pointing fingers around and blaming people
2) But those people that stayed behind, they’re partly to blame for the problems.
You say you’re not blaming them, but you are. You say again “but if you deliberately stand in the way of a hurricane, you do bear some responsibility.”
If you don’t want to point fingers, then don’t. And why would you say that, when there’s still thousands that need help, when we’re not supposed to be assigning blame, unless you mean to say “they got what they deserved?”
“There is NO excuse for the looting and anarchy that has happened” I’m with you on the anarchy, to a degree. But as I sit here and sip my filtered water, relaxing in an air-conditioned building, and getting ready to go home to my fully stocked, not-flooded home, I’m not going to sit in judgement over people that in many cases were just trying to secure the necessities of life that they needed in order to surive the 5 or more days they were going to be on their own. And even those that took non-food items, I’m not really going to judge, because it is anarchy down there. If they think that by taking a case of Shrek 2 DVDs, they might be able to trade for a bottle of water, or can of coke, great!
Here’s something you can look up with ease.
Sen. Mary Landrew (D-La.) has been fighting to keep the funding at the needed levels to actually do the job for both ACE and the levees projects for about three years now. She has based everything that she has argued for on actual costs and on FEMA studies on the levees and its projections for a levee break. She kept being shot down. The work she was fighting for would have helped to strengthen the same areas that broke and caused the flooding.
Do you know how FEMA nailed the predictions for how and where the leeves would fail and where the flooding would be at its worste when it did its studies and its drill last year? Because those points were where the ACE projects stalled due to project fundings. Those points were the points left incomplete in the work meant to support and strengthen the levees.
Food for thought.
“In fact I demand that all releif efforts in NO and the other afflicted areas stop until we can figure out who exactly is to blame.”
Heh, that’s going to be rather lonely corner you’re sitting in Jeff, having that little chat by yourself.
All I can say…I want EVERYONE’s head on a platter.
*sigh* [and everyone will be blaming everybody else…., but the truth is, in my eyes, there was plenty of incomptency and political cronyism to go around, for both parties….]
bobb posted : “Heh, that’s going to be rather lonely corner you’re sitting in Jeff, having that little chat by yourself.”
Now, and I’m just checking, everyone else but this guy did get that my post was scarcasm right? Cause I tend to think the poeple who post here are quite intellegent normally and am rather shocked when proven wrong.
JAC
Sarcasim!?! Joking?!? On this site?
Jeff, what were you thinking? That’s it… No more wire coat hangers for you! Ever!!!!!!
….though it DOES occur to me…
If it had been a bomb from a terrorist planted on the levee, what was Homeland Security’s plan?
Clinton used to have me rolling my eyes at the way he would over act when at the scene of some emergency or another. He would bite his lower lip and look like you had just killed his puppy while having his voice break and catch at just the right moment fro dramatic effect. Hëll, he would look and act like that while talking about a good friend’s hangnail. He was so into showing his feelings on his sleeve that he often came off as fake even when he wasn’t. Used to drive me nuts.
Ten minutes ago I saw Bush on CNN talking from NO about what he saw and what he wants to do about it. The man was grinning, had a twinkle in his eye and was throwing out one liners out about how he had visited the city before and enjoyed himself maybe a bit too much while talking about the damage to the area.
God, how I miss Clinton.
Iowa Jim wrote:
Some CHOSE not to leave. They could, but they refused to do so. Their choice has added to the burden of trying to help those who genuinely had no ability to leave in time. I do not wish anyone ill, but if you deliberately stand in the way of a hurricane, you do bear some responsibility.
Yeah, but Jim, you’re painting with an enormously broad brush there. Because there was no way to distinguish between those who stayed because they had no way to leave (no money, no car, no FEMA/DHS facilitation of the evacuation) and those who chose to stay, the response should have been as concerted as if this struck with no warning. Regardless of whether they stayed because they wanted to or because they had to, these are Americans and they dámņëd well deserve better than this.
Iowa Jim wrote: To say there was a “lack of response” is to ignore the enormous work that was done. It is to live in a fantasy land that says we could have instantly gotten vehicles, etc. into the area. Yes, there were many mistakes made, and they must be evaluated. But there was not a lack of response.
Even President Bush has said that the response has been “not acceptable”. Obviously, the relief response has not been up to snuff. I don’t think that most people believe that nothing has been done. I do think that people have a hard time comprehending that this is the United States of America and we don’t seem to be able to respond adequately to a crisis that we’ve supposedly had measures in place to address. Instead it’s taken 5 days to get food and water to men, women and children slowly starving to death. This is not a village in Somalia; this is happening in our country and our government has been a bit too casual.
Iowa Jim wrote:
The crime and looting after the hurricane is inexcusable and cost people their lives. That is why I earlier said shooting looters is a valid consideration. Because the looting both kept out rescuers (regardless of whether it should or not), and it took police away from rescuing people to keeping the peace. There is NO excuse for the looting and anarchy that has happened. I am very sympathetic to those without food, water, usable toilets, etc. I understand tempers may flare. But much of the looting began long before we reached that level of destitution.
Iowa Jim wrote:
That is true. The opportunistic were looting immediately after the storm. But the situation deteriorated so quickly because 24 hours after the city flooded, there was still little or no relief effort; people began to understand that they were going to be on their own for a while. Jim, I get that you sympathize, but I’m guessing you’ve never been in such a desperate, destitute, and fearful situation. No one has said that the looting of electronics and other luxury items is acceptable. But food, water, diapers, shoes, other necessities in 95 degree heat … you know, Walmart has insurance. If I were there, I’d definitely do whatever I had to in order to keep my 20-month old daughter alive, especially when my government is sluggish to come and help me to save her.
Iowa Jim wrote:
My church is sending money we will collect this Sunday to help. I am sure many other faith groups and charities are doing the same thing. We must not sit back and just blame the government. It will never fully meet a need like this. It is our responsibility to do everything we can as individuals to help in any way possible.
Excellent. I’m glad you’re doing something. Except that we have to rely on the government to coordinate these efforts when they’ve declared martial law in the affected area. Therefore, yes, we can blame the government. Look, this is America and in times when America has a natural disaster it is the government’s responsibility to lead the relief effort. We as citizens can collect all of supplies and money in the world, but it’s the government that has to be up to the task of search and rescue.
I live in Los Angeles and all I can say is that this week’s events have certainly given me cause for concern about the preparedness of our government (on all levels) for a large scale natural disaster.
Monica
a mom in LA
Do you know how FEMA nailed the predictions for how and where the leeves would fail and where the flooding would be at its worste when it did its studies and its drill last year? Because those points were where the ACE projects stalled due to project fundings. Those points were the points left incomplete in the work meant to support and strengthen the levees.
But according tot the New York Times the levee that failed was one that HAD been strengthened:
No one expected that weak spot to be on a canal that, if anything, had received more attention and shoring up than many other spots in the region. It did not have broad berms, but it did have strong concrete walls.
Shea Penland, director of the Pontchartrain Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of New Orleans, said that was particularly surprising because the break was “along a section that was just upgraded.”
“It did not have an earthen levee,” Dr. Penland said. “It had a vertical concrete wall several feel thick.”
There’s also the Chicago Tribune:
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.
However, they noted that the levees were designed for a Category 3 hurricane and couldn’t 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.
Obviously the anti-Bush nuts will keep on claiming that anything bad that happens is Bush’s fault and I expectthe anti-Clinton nuts to dig up all sorts of stuff that will “prove” that no, actually, it was Clinton’s fault. Hopefully the rest of us will find better ways to deal with this.
Toward that end, Instapundit.com has TONS of blogger suggestions on charities to donate to. Salvation Army is a good one–I don’t agree on all of their politics but they have a great setup for disasters and most of the money goes to where it belongs. The Red Cross is an obvious choice and given the large Catholic population, Catholic Charities is an obvious choice.
My wife and I had to cancel a vacation this weekend due to the uncertain gas situation. It means missing a visit to some dear friends I haven’t seen in way too long but at least I can donate some of the money we would have used for a hotel to the rescue effort. Peter’s donation is above and beyond the call of decency. Not everyone is in a position to do that sort of thing but I wonder if anyone knows of any corporate deals that might be useful–you know, like if you buy something a portion goes to relief efforts. I know if something like that existed I might be doing my chistmas shopping early.
“There’s also the Chicago Tribune:
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.
However, they noted that the levees were designed for a Category 3 hurricane and couldn’t 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.
Obviously the anti-Bush nuts will keep on claiming that anything bad that happens is Bush’s fault and I expectthe anti-Clinton nuts to dig up all sorts of stuff that will “prove” that no, actually, it was Clinton’s fault. Hopefully the rest of us will find better ways to deal with this.”
Well, the last news report I saw on it said that both the spots that gave way were at incompleted upgrades areas on the levee work and focused on the funding issue. If I’m wrong I’m wrong and so was the reporter. Not the first time for either.
“Now, and I’m just checking, everyone else but this guy did get that my post was scarcasm right? Cause I tend to think the poeple who post here are quite intellegent normally and am rather shocked when proven wrong.”
Jeff, I got that it was sarcasm. Either that, or you’re a total nutjob. =) My attempt to convey my own sarcasm through a “heh” clearly failed.
From the AP:
NO could be facing a month or more before all the flood waters from Hurricane Katrina and ruptured levees can be pumped out.
Lowering the water level a foot per day was called an optimistic estimate depending on how much of the pumping capacity can be restored and whether any more storms complicate the work.
pumps could lower the water as much as a foot a day, but it is likely to start more slowly.
There are six pumping stations in the city and the corps could bring in auxiliary pumps, Flowers said.
Draining New Orleans is not like pulling the plug on a bathtub drain; much of the city is below sea level so the water will have to be pumped up and out.
Contamination by oil, chemicals and sewage also complicates the effort.
Removing the water would be slowed if it has to be treated before it can be discharged, though it might be possible to get some type of dispensation so it can be pumped quickly into the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain.
The corps is working on plans to create a city somewhere in the area to accommodate about 50,000 people — similar to what was done in the aftermath of Hurricane Andrew in Florida.
Joe V.
One of the first spinless write ups on the subject of the funding issues that I’ve seen hit my email a few minutes ago.
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=344
Also from the AP
Crude oil prices fell by $2 a barrel on Friday as Europe prepared to tap up to two million barrels a day of emergency reserves to help ease a fuel crisis threatening the United States.
Twenty-six countries in an international energy consortium will release more than 60 million barrels of crude oil and gasoline to relieve the energy crunch caused by Hurricane Katrina in the United States.
As part of that effort, the Bush administration will release 30 million barrels of crude oil from U.S. reserves.
Already there are 20 ships carrying gasoline from commercial foreign stocks to the United States, he said. The supplies from government stocks would be in addition.
Joe V.
Here’s a WTF for you.
Now, Fox News ain’t gonna paint this to make it look bad. Some of the in studio people have bent over to make strange sounding claims as to how great it’s all going today. But a few minutes ago, Shep Smith went on a rant and stated that the people in the dome aren’t being given food, water, etc in anything near what’s needed or what’s been reported today. Then he pointed out that the people could walk across a bridge and be on their way to a cleaner environment where they could also be treated and cared for with greater ease but the military has set up check points and is ordering people who are attempting to get out of the damaged areas to turn around and return to where they came from. And this has been going on for two days.
Now, I get the idea of containing some people for the fear of what they may have picked up or caught in the waters now that they’re toxic soups. I get the idea of controling the flow of a mass of people into another area and the worry of looting at a new location. But WTF can’t they let the people be moved to a location where they will be cleaner and safer and the rescue workers will be able to tend to them with greater ease if they can do it on foot by themselves? How can they keep saying that the greatest problem to helping these people is getting to them if it really is that easy for them to get out and find a better area to gather? Guide them and get them out of there.
Does anybody know enough about the area to know if they’re right or have Shep and Geraldo just gone and lost it?
WTF!?!
Sorry. Forgot to type that Geraldo is in the Dome and said mostly the same. Kinda made the end bit a “huh” kinda line.
“Jeff, I got that it was sarcasm. Either that, or you’re a total nutjob. =) My attempt to convey my own sarcasm through a “heh” clearly failed.”
oh good, all is forgiven then. I do have one question concerning the above post. Why can’t I be both?
JAC
CNN has the before and after satellite shots up, and I’m guessing that even if the levees have been strengthened, they still would have broken.
And yet, according to reports, the one leveee that was “strengthened” was still designed for only a Cat3.
So, since our government was so inept and unwilling to fix and expand the levees, we’ll never truly know whether an improved levee would have held up.
But, I’d give an improved levee, one designed for a Cat4 or Cat5 storm, better odds than those Cat3’s that gave way.
I’m sorry Craig, and I truly ask this with curiosity and not snarkiness, but why did you put quotation marks around the word strengthened there? It’s fact…though granted, you’re right, the bean-counters of the past forty years all contributed to that decision
For that matter, I don’t dispute what was in the factcheck.org report, because even though I believe people have been warning about it for years, I’m sure that every single project that requested funding has made similar claims, and you have to make decisions. Unfortunately, this is the one that came true. What I would like to know is why Congress felt the need to pour all the ACE money into New York and New Jersey.
I’m sorry Craig, and I truly ask this with curiosity and not snarkiness, but why did you put quotation marks around the word strengthened there?
I put the question marks around the word because, from what I’ve read, while improvements were made to that particular levee, it was not improved to actually deal with a bigger storm than it was originally designed for.
So, while they improved the levee designed for a Cat3 storm, when they were done, it was still only designed for a Cat3 storm.
I lived in the Quad Cities during the Flood of ’93, so I’ve seen what levees can do. Rock Island, IL, where I lived, had one. Davenport, across the Mississippi River, did not. Guess which city wasn’t flooded?
St. Louis’s levee system held up, and iirc, they had some of the highest flood stages in the entire Midwest.
They can work… if you build them to deal with a worst case scenario.
ArizonaTeach wrote:
OK, I’m not so far right as to say that there isn’t something called Global Warming, and in the long run it’s going to be a problem. (Of course, I was told in the 70s by scientists that Global Cooling was going to be a monstrous disaster and that anyone who didn’t believe another Ice Age was approaching was insane
This reminds me of the remarks I happened across George Will making on “This Week with George Stephanopolis” several weeks ago. Will was far more close-minded than ArizonaTeach, and openly scoffed at the idea of global warming (I guess he is “that” far right), citing the ’70’s global cooling warnings as proof that scientists are just alarmists who shouldn’t be believed. By the time he finished his tirade, though, it occurred to me: might the fact that scientists have gone from fearing a global cooling to declaring global WARMING in the span of thirty years – such a copmplete reversal in what the data is telling them over such a short period of time – not actually be a stong indicator that there IS global warming?
might the fact that scientists have gone from fearing a global cooling to declaring global WARMING in the span of thirty years – such a copmplete reversal in what the data is telling them over such a short period of time – not actually be a stong indicator that there IS global warming?
And let’s keep in mind that the two are not exactly mutually exclusive–that is, global warming could possibly lead to an ice age.
The problem is that we are woefully ignorant of all the factors that make up the global weather patterns. Some have eevn suggested that the last few decades of clean air standards have contributed to the overall problem–clean air lets in more sunlight. It would be idiotic though to therefore say that we could improve the situation by allowing more smoke into the atmosphere.
Agreed that that would be idiotic — but of course, when Reagan justified clear-cutting forests on the grounds that trees cause pollution, idiocy became ensconced as official policy.
TWL
Hmm…I don’t know exactly to which you’re refering, Tim (although one needs not say much more than “ketchup = vegetable” to remind me how ridiculous a number of Reagan-era initiatives were), but if you’re refering to an earlier version of the Healthy Forest Initiatives, there’s truth to that…and that’s coming from someone who was affected directly by the Arizona wildfires that have grown out of control these last few years in part because foresters were prevented from doing clear-cutting. It’s a policy endorsed by the Society of American Foresters (http://www.safnet.org/policyandpress/hfiupdate.cfm) but opposed by the Sierra Club (http://www.sierraclub.org/forests/fires/healthyforests_initiative.asp), so YMMV.
Luke, you make an excellent point. My only response (and not, mind you, that I disagree with you, necessarily; just I feel this point needs to be made), is that scientists didn’t exactly change their minds from cooling to warming…both theories were prominent in the ’70s; it’s just that the cooling faction was louder. All that’s happened is that it’s reversed, not altered, really. As an interesting point of reference, I would refer you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
In the news coverage the past week, there was a person in New Orleans who was able to get into his car after the hurricane had passed and drive himself to Baton Rouge. Granted, I don’t know the area he was in or how feasible it would have been for the military to follow his path back to the city.
But why, why, why couldn’t they have helicopters drop in food and water? I can understand how roads would be impassible and difficult. But the airport seems to be in working order. If they were worried about the supply drops being mobbed by people, why not drop some troops first? And then just keep dropping supplies until at least everyone has had food and water?
“Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do.” — Ronald Reagan, 1981
Later in his first term, Anne Gorsuch attempted to gut the Clean Air Act on various grounds, Reagan’s quote above among them. It wasn’t about clear-cutting, but it was an attempt to justify removing any sort of regulations about auto emissions — since, after all, trees were much worse offenders.
Sigh. On the other hand, at least his administration admitted up front when it was trying to rape the country…
TWL
The biggest problem with the global warming debate is that the press (either side) never checks the quality of its source materials. The only data that I will go by in the debate is something that came out of the highly reputable National Academy of Sciences. They don’t go out to prove or disprove scientific theories as much as they set about validating the facts that they have to work with. Their data shows that global warming is happening, that it is a natural cycle and that we may be increasing the speed of this cycle and the strength with which it will hit us. But the data as they lay it out isn’t really sexy enough for most news organizations.
We keep ending up with people picking up on some theory that isn’t that solid and running it as a headline because it has the type of data that makes a shocking front page or will spark huge debates. Problem is that it can be shot down easily and makes the real data/argument look bad.
And it’s not just with that topic. Bill posted two sources to dispute the levee case. I took it as solid as the only thing I had seen was a TV news bit that sited the stuff about the levee projects and the funding shortfalls. Since then I have seen news reports (not editorials or talking heads) that make the case both ways. I liked that factcheck.org did a piece on it so quickly. At least it clears it up a bit. Then there was the Fox News bit I posted about earlier that didn’t make any sense. I’ve been seeing stuff that backs that and stuff that would refute that. Hëll, there was still a news blip going a bit ago about Able Danger and what files Sandy Berger stole. Thing is with that one is that the agency that kept the records has said several times that no documents were removed. But we keep getting news stories reporting both versions of events.
That’s the thing that sucks the most about the “new” media. Once somebody gets a story out there it seems like it just gets grabbed and run with and spread throughout the echo chamber. It especially sucks when you have a major event and everybody is in competition to get that huge/shocker/major career making story out first. God knows we get some winning garbage outta those situations. Maybe history sets it straight and maybe it doesn’t but it sucks to have to sift through “news” with a fine comb just to figure out if it’s factual or not.
What you say is true, Jerry, but you know, when I remember how long it took the Watergate story to get told, it seems like things work a whole lot faster now.
The AA=ble Danger story has gone from Big Splash, to Debunked, to Suddenly Alive Again in about 2 weeks. I thought the whole thing was pretty unlikely but I guess we’ll see.
The drawback to all this is that stories don’t seem to have the same longevity they used to. The Tsunami seems like ancient news–will New Oleans be a subject people are tired of hearing about in just a month or two?
I’ll agree with that — stories break faster and die faster. Just as TV shows now have about twelve minutes to build a huge audience or be cancelled (as opposed to, say, NBC holding onto “Cheers” despite it being one of their worst-rated shows its first season), news stories have to reach an earth-shattering crescendo within about a week of hitting the mainstream media, or they’re forgotten.
I suspect that will in general serve to benefit whichever party is in power at the time. I sure as hëll think it’s benefitting the GOP now, but I think it’s more the nature of the beast as it currently exists than anything conspiratorial.
TWL
Thank you for the compliment, ArizonaTeach. Your reply raises an interesting point (and so does yours, Bill, about our lack of knowledge of long-term weather cycles). I haven’t found info on the 70’s opinions in that link yet, but I take your word for it. I will keep an open mind on the “certainty” and extent of global warming … but I’ll remain a little irked at those (obviously not you guys) who’ve taken the “ignore it, and it won’t exist” approach to the issue.
Hrm. Depending on the mass media for deep analysis is a lost cause by now. Their coverage of global warming is parallel to their coverage of intelligent design…they don’t know enough about the subject to know how empty headed it really is, so they take intelligent design proponents seriously and treat it like there is a scientific controversy (instead of the reality that dámņ near all biologists think it’s a pile of crap).
And if you consider that this is an area where things can be determined in a relatively objective matter, think of areas where things can be more subjective….
Anyway, far as I’m concerned, nothing I’ve seen has changed my desires for a collection of heads to be mounted on my pike (starting from the mayor of New Orleans, up to the governor of Louisiana and through the head of FEMA….)
Their coverage of global warming is parallel to their coverage of intelligent design…they don’t know enough about the subject to know how empty headed it really is, so they take intelligent design proponents seriously and treat it like there is a scientific controversy (instead of the reality that dámņ near all biologists think it’s a pile of crap).
That’s one of the best summations (and dámņáŧìøņš) of the media’s treatment of both topics that I’ve read lately. Very nice.
TWL