Comments on: The President’s New Orleans Speech http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/ Refunds Cheerfully Given To All Who Disagree Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:53:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: ryanVOX Blog -- RyanJames.tv http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-6626 ryanVOX Blog -- RyanJames.tv Sun, 09 Oct 2005 23:14:30 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-6626 [...] As my good friend Mark Coffey said on his blog, the lead was buried in rhetorical set-up. The speechwriters need to know this wasn’t the State of the Union. “Federal funds will cover the great majority of the costs of repairing public infrastructure in the disaster zone, from roads and bridges to schools and water systems. Our goal is to get the work done quickly. And taxpayers expect this work to be done honestly and wisely — so we’ll have a team of inspectors general reviewing all expenditures.” This is going to cost money folks, and the money will be accounted for. I know of several conservatives who are cringing at the propect of the modern-day equivalent of the Marshall Plan, but the fact of the matter is this: Three whole states were basically decimated. [...] [...] As my good friend Mark Coffey said on his blog, the lead was buried in rhetorical set-up. The speechwriters need to know this wasn’t the State of the Union. “Federal funds will cover the great majority of the costs of repairing public infrastructure in the disaster zone, from roads and bridges to schools and water systems. Our goal is to get the work done quickly. And taxpayers expect this work to be done honestly and wisely — so we’ll have a team of inspectors general reviewing all expenditures.” This is going to cost money folks, and the money will be accounted for. I know of several conservatives who are cringing at the propect of the modern-day equivalent of the Marshall Plan, but the fact of the matter is this: Three whole states were basically decimated. [...]

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5675 Mark Sun, 18 Sep 2005 03:11:13 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5675 Twain Marks (if that is your real name), I certainly won't defend the pork from Senator Stevens, and I think the bridge you speak of would be an excellent place to start. I think your criticism of Bush on this score is misguided; of course Bush is saying that Katrina overwhelmed the organization beneath him...isn't that clear to everyone by now? Isn't that why Michael Brown no longer heads FEMA? Isn't that, in fact, what the liberals who politicized Katrina while people were still dying screamed at the top of their lungs? I'm sorry, but I fail to see your point...Bush isn't directly, personally responsible for Katrina, but as the 'CEO' of America, so to speak, the ultimate responsibility is his...as for what price he will pay, surely you don't think the Katrina response is an impeachable offense. Since he doesn't face another election, I suppose we'll find out the political consequences in the 2006 mid-terms... Twain Marks (if that is your real name), I certainly won’t defend the pork from Senator Stevens, and I think the bridge you speak of would be an excellent place to start. I think your criticism of Bush on this score is misguided; of course Bush is saying that Katrina overwhelmed the organization beneath him…isn’t that clear to everyone by now? Isn’t that why Michael Brown no longer heads FEMA? Isn’t that, in fact, what the liberals who politicized Katrina while people were still dying screamed at the top of their lungs?

I’m sorry, but I fail to see your point…Bush isn’t directly, personally responsible for Katrina, but as the ‘CEO’ of America, so to speak, the ultimate responsibility is his…as for what price he will pay, surely you don’t think the Katrina response is an impeachable offense. Since he doesn’t face another election, I suppose we’ll find out the political consequences in the 2006 mid-terms…

]]> By: Twain Marks http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5671 Twain Marks Sun, 18 Sep 2005 01:47:54 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5671 It's worth noting the sentence from <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/09/20050915-8.html" rel="nofollow">Bush's speech</a> that the <a>New York Times</a> interprets as "forthrightly acknowledg[ing] his responsibility for the egregious mishandling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina:" <blockquote> When the federal government fails to meet such an obligation, I, as President, am responsible for the problem, and for the solution. </blockquote> But is the President actually admitting his own failure, or, is he saying that a hard-to-ancipate natural disaster ("not a normal hurricane") overwhelmed the organization beneath him and created a problem that he, the competent leader, will now solve? It reminds me of the commedian David Frye's routine about Richard Nixon and Watergate. Fry as Nixon says "Let me explain the difference: People who are to blame lose their jobs; people who are responsible, keep them." What substansive penalty does the President Bush, the admitted responsible party, pay for his poor performance? How does that change his behavior? And how does that his recent statement that the federal government's now going to take on reconstruction of New Orleans (to the tune of $200 billion) by cutting other spending, rather than raising taxes. What is he going to cut then, the $231 million bridge for a handful of people that Senator Stevens of Alaska, a member of his owned party, plastered into the recent highway bill with any threat of his veto? It’s worth noting the sentence from Bush’s speech that the New York Times interprets as “forthrightly acknowledg[ing] his responsibility for the egregious mishandling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina:”

When the federal government fails to meet such an obligation, I, as President, am responsible for the problem, and for the solution.

But is the President actually admitting his own failure, or, is he saying that a hard-to-ancipate natural disaster (“not a normal hurricane”) overwhelmed the organization beneath him and created a problem that he, the competent leader, will now solve?

It reminds me of the commedian David Frye’s routine about Richard Nixon and Watergate. Fry as Nixon says “Let me explain the difference: People who are to blame lose their jobs; people who are responsible, keep them.”

What substansive penalty does the President Bush, the admitted responsible party, pay for his poor performance? How does that change his behavior? And how does that his recent statement that the federal government’s now going to take on reconstruction of New Orleans (to the tune of $200 billion) by cutting other spending, rather than raising taxes.

What is he going to cut then, the $231 million bridge for a handful of people that Senator Stevens of Alaska, a member of his owned party, plastered into the recent highway bill with any threat of his veto?

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5625 Mark Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:04:23 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5625 People actually called in, eh? That's classic... People actually called in, eh? That’s classic…

]]> By: Ryan James http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5606 Ryan James Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:12:13 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5606 The Dean Reynolds interviews of the Astrodome "town meeting" on ABC was hilarious. After the first interviewee didn't bash Bush, he was going nuts digging for other answers. We actually had phone calls from viewers complaining about the one-sided nature of the debrief. The Dean Reynolds interviews of the Astrodome “town meeting” on ABC was hilarious. After the first interviewee didn’t bash Bush, he was going nuts digging for other answers.

We actually had phone calls from viewers complaining about the one-sided nature of the debrief.

]]> By: Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Not The Expected Reaction http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5602 Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Not The Expected Reaction Fri, 16 Sep 2005 13:35:38 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5602 [...] You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your ownsite. [...] [...] You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your ownsite. [...]

]]> By: Greg Bullock http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5597 Greg Bullock Fri, 16 Sep 2005 04:26:54 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5597 That first Astrodome interviewee, quoted at length by Lorie Byrd, was great! So great, in fact, that I'll wager it will not be long before a certain faction will be claiming it was all a set up, further evidence of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. The minions of Karl Rove are <i>still</i> everywhere! ;-) That first Astrodome interviewee, quoted at length by Lorie Byrd, was great!

So great, in fact, that I’ll wager it will not be long before a certain faction will be claiming it was all a set up, further evidence of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

The minions of Karl Rove are still everywhere! ;-)

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5596 Mark Fri, 16 Sep 2005 03:58:27 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5596 Clint, here's <a href="http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Like_Senate_House_Committee_rejects_independent_Katrina_commis_0915.html" rel="nofollow">a link</a>...you're right, it's a commission... Clint, here’s a link…you’re right, it’s a commission…

]]> By: Clint http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5594 Clint Fri, 16 Sep 2005 03:34:36 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5594 I may have been mistaken about the referrent of the Congressional hearings remark -- I'm now hearing that Congressional Republicans have set up a "special committee" to investigate the response, which all but seven democrats voted <i>against</i> and which minority leader Pelosi labelled as "partisan"... I may have been mistaken about the referrent of the Congressional hearings remark — I’m now hearing that Congressional Republicans have set up a “special committee” to investigate the response, which all but seven democrats voted against and which minority leader Pelosi labelled as “partisan”…

]]> By: Clint http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-5593 Clint Fri, 16 Sep 2005 02:57:01 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/15/the-presidents-new-orleans-speech/#comment-5593 Only indirectly related to the speech, but related to Decision '08 -- Gov. Haley Barbour appeared on FoxNews to comment afterward (after a great panel, including Charles Krauthammer). Most notably, he was wearing a black tee shirt -- did not look even a little bit presidential. Looked very much like a hands-on governor, but I don't think he's thinking about an '08 run for Pres. or VP. (Whereas in a few shots of him during Bush's tours of the Gulf I've thought he did look well put together, as I'd expect of a candidate.) Re: the President's speech... My immediate reaction when he talked about Congressional hearings was that he'd made a mistake to bring them up. Hillary was calling for these, and was rebuffed. She looks pretty good with him promising cooperation on this. Then again, that's not his worry... His three proposals -- I like them. Very much the conservative plan for dealing with poverty -- entrepreneurship, home ownership and funds to individuals. I was surprised to hear his "homstead" proposal, selling off federal land in New Orleans. How much land does the federal government actually own in New Orleans? Did he just auction off the 5th circuit's courthouse? Only indirectly related to the speech, but related to Decision ’08 — Gov. Haley Barbour appeared on FoxNews to comment afterward (after a great panel, including Charles Krauthammer). Most notably, he was wearing a black tee shirt — did not look even a little bit presidential. Looked very much like a hands-on governor, but I don’t think he’s thinking about an ’08 run for Pres. or VP. (Whereas in a few shots of him during Bush’s tours of the Gulf I’ve thought he did look well put together, as I’d expect of a candidate.)

Re: the President’s speech…

My immediate reaction when he talked about Congressional hearings was that he’d made a mistake to bring them up. Hillary was calling for these, and was rebuffed. She looks pretty good with him promising cooperation on this. Then again, that’s not his worry…

His three proposals — I like them. Very much the conservative plan for dealing with poverty — entrepreneurship, home ownership and funds to individuals. I was surprised to hear his “homstead” proposal, selling off federal land in New Orleans. How much land does the federal government actually own in New Orleans? Did he just auction off the 5th circuit’s courthouse?

]]>