The Issue of "Blame"
I'd like to respond to the many emails I've received that (a) suggest my recent column and blog postings are an effort to score "political points"; (b) that we must "support our president" in this time of crisis; (c) that everything is the fault of the mayor of New Orleans and governor of Louisiana; (d) that the massive death toll of poor and black people in New Orleans is a result of the "failed welfare state" (actually, I'll let the absurdity of that argument crush it without my help); (e) that this is no time for satire critical of the government; (f) etc.
First, the irony of knee-jerk Bush apologists demanding the mayor and governor be excoriated NOW -- while they work on the ground on relief efforts -- while the president and his slow and incompetent response be "supported" is quite phenomenal. The notion that the president should be immune from comment and criticism is a byproduct of the years-long effort, as the horror and tragedy of the Iraq War continues, to challenge the "patriotism" (a topic for another time) of many Americans while shutting down debate.
If you want to defend the actions of your favorite politicians, fine. Go ahead. Anyone who's read my work, including years of satirical commentary on President Clinton, knows that for me, this is not about politics or partisanship or parties. I don't care if the president is George W. Bush or Bill Clinton or Howdy Freaking Doody (Is he available? Hmmm). I make no apologies for my progressive -- quite progressive -- point of view on many issues, one that runs contrary on many issues to the opinions of both mainstream Democrats and Republicans. And I don't pull punches because of the party affiliation of a public official.
When a massive, multi-state catastrophe unfolds, I want my federal government to bring all its resources and (cough, cough!) expertise to bear as rapidly as possible. If you read the governor's letter to the president ON AUGUST 27 calling for federal help, which includes reference to the state of emergency declared ON AUGUST 26, you'll see language that makes plain that response to the hurricane would be beyond the capabilities and resources of state and local government. (And puts to rest this oft-repeated lie -- which was spun out of the White House on Saturday night -- that local officials failed to cross some t's and dot some i's, and that led to the slow response of the feds.)
Again, that's the whole point of the federal government. If states, or cities, or each of us could do everything on our own, we wouldn't need it. In this case, we did, in a big way. And the federal government, led by this president and his sub-standard appointees, failed us. Not a Republican president or Republican appointees, but rather, simply the President of the United States of America and the United States government.
If the mayor and governor and other local officials made mistakes, which they surely did, by all means we will take them to task and demand accountability. But to suggest the same is not required for presidential leadership in a national disaster makes a mockery of democracy and reveals the raw, ugly partisanship of the "support the president no matter what" crowd for all to see.
Like so many other Americans, I simply can't wrap my mind or heart around the level of human suffering. I can't walk down my road without imagining where a 20-foot waterline would fall on the homes of my friends and neighbors. I feel strange filling a glass with clean water from my tap. I get instantly sad while walking my dogs and remembering all of the people and children forced to leave their pets behind (in one emotionally crushing story reported by AP and CNN.com, a police officer pulled a dog away from a child who was being evacuated. The child wailed, screaming the dog's name over and over until he vomited). I feel helpless and am powerfully aware of the inadequacy of words.
As I have for years, I'm glad to receive emails and do my best to respond thoughtfully to them all. I want to read and hear other opinions. But I make no apologies for my anger and outrage, and you can be damn sure I will continue to express it.
<*/end of rant*>
First, the irony of knee-jerk Bush apologists demanding the mayor and governor be excoriated NOW -- while they work on the ground on relief efforts -- while the president and his slow and incompetent response be "supported" is quite phenomenal. The notion that the president should be immune from comment and criticism is a byproduct of the years-long effort, as the horror and tragedy of the Iraq War continues, to challenge the "patriotism" (a topic for another time) of many Americans while shutting down debate.
If you want to defend the actions of your favorite politicians, fine. Go ahead. Anyone who's read my work, including years of satirical commentary on President Clinton, knows that for me, this is not about politics or partisanship or parties. I don't care if the president is George W. Bush or Bill Clinton or Howdy Freaking Doody (Is he available? Hmmm). I make no apologies for my progressive -- quite progressive -- point of view on many issues, one that runs contrary on many issues to the opinions of both mainstream Democrats and Republicans. And I don't pull punches because of the party affiliation of a public official.
When a massive, multi-state catastrophe unfolds, I want my federal government to bring all its resources and (cough, cough!) expertise to bear as rapidly as possible. If you read the governor's letter to the president ON AUGUST 27 calling for federal help, which includes reference to the state of emergency declared ON AUGUST 26, you'll see language that makes plain that response to the hurricane would be beyond the capabilities and resources of state and local government. (And puts to rest this oft-repeated lie -- which was spun out of the White House on Saturday night -- that local officials failed to cross some t's and dot some i's, and that led to the slow response of the feds.)
Again, that's the whole point of the federal government. If states, or cities, or each of us could do everything on our own, we wouldn't need it. In this case, we did, in a big way. And the federal government, led by this president and his sub-standard appointees, failed us. Not a Republican president or Republican appointees, but rather, simply the President of the United States of America and the United States government.
If the mayor and governor and other local officials made mistakes, which they surely did, by all means we will take them to task and demand accountability. But to suggest the same is not required for presidential leadership in a national disaster makes a mockery of democracy and reveals the raw, ugly partisanship of the "support the president no matter what" crowd for all to see.
Like so many other Americans, I simply can't wrap my mind or heart around the level of human suffering. I can't walk down my road without imagining where a 20-foot waterline would fall on the homes of my friends and neighbors. I feel strange filling a glass with clean water from my tap. I get instantly sad while walking my dogs and remembering all of the people and children forced to leave their pets behind (in one emotionally crushing story reported by AP and CNN.com, a police officer pulled a dog away from a child who was being evacuated. The child wailed, screaming the dog's name over and over until he vomited). I feel helpless and am powerfully aware of the inadequacy of words.
As I have for years, I'm glad to receive emails and do my best to respond thoughtfully to them all. I want to read and hear other opinions. But I make no apologies for my anger and outrage, and you can be damn sure I will continue to express it.
<*/end of rant*>
posted by Bill at 6:25 AM
2 Comments:
I don't have a problem agreeing that the federal government might have gotten there earlier, and I understand the frustration expressed in your anger, but to place the blame with the President and the federal agencies is shortsighted. I watched what happened just like you. The footage I saw showed a Mayor who alerted the city to evacuate and then offered no way out of the city for the poor he seems so concerned about now. I see aerial photos of 200+ buses sitting axel deep in water (with 300 other city buses in another depot). That doesn't make you angry?
The other problem I have with your complaint is that you assume the government is set up to rescue us from all that might harm us as Americans. What we learned from this catastrophe is that a catastrophe might be so large that the government can't save everyone!!! FEMA is just ONE of hundreds of government agencies!!
This hurricane reminds us that for all our "progress" we are still vulnerable to powers, manmade or nature-made, that can cause death and destruction.
Now, don't go get yourself in a huff and start envisioning a bunch of nuts with guns running rampart through neighborhoods, but think about this carefully.
Of the three states, Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi, that suffered the brunt of Hurricane Katrina, one, and only one is without a state militia. These are generally known as a State Defense Force, but they are more than militias. Many medical professionals participate in the 24 states that have them. These are completely separate from the National Guard, completely voluntary, require annual training, and do not receive any pay unless activated by the state of origin. They, not the state or federal government are best prepared to deliver initial assistance bridging the time gap distant state and federal governments must bring into afflicted disaster areas.
There is a tremendous amount of blame to be spread among local, state and federal authorities over the plight of New Orleans, and none should be spared because of any political affiliation.
Despite popular visions of militias being composed of gun owners gone mad, gun ownership is not a requirement of State Defense Forces. Yes, there are gun owners, but they are trained and well-regulated by the states as prescribed in Article I; Section 8, Clause 16 of the Constitution of the United States of America. Some, certainly not all the members with firearms are to maintain order until relieved by the National Guard, or order is restored. A large number of these gun-bearing members are already members of law enforcement, or retired law enforcement officers.
These are not militias formed by citizens for their own purpose. They are state militias. They are directly related to the militias of the early colonies that realized the central government could not respond immediately to emergencies that threatened or afflicted communities. The logistics of those times are still present today.
The brutality of crimes that afflicted New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina should have never happened. That was entirely due to a lack of foresight by the entire state government of Louisiana.
Hurricane Katrina was the worst catastrophe our nation has ever suffered, but it is far from a worst-case scenario. All states should learn from this disaster and review what plans they have in place, at the local level, to help lend immediate assistance, and maintain initial peace.
Think of this in another way. If you were home and suffered a heart attack, who is best suited to deliver immediate assistance, someone within your household, or paramedics that require time to respond. The honest answer is someone within your household, maybe even to alerting the paramedics of your situation if you are unable to. First responders must be in place before disasters arrive, and it is best they already know the resources of their community.
Post a Comment
<< Home