BIAS ALERT: Media that ripped Bush on Katrina ignores Obama on La. flooding

[Northern Light]

1) FEMA is in Louisiana, managing a huge relief effort, and doing its job. They're helping rescue people, providing supplies, and trying to find housing.

I'm aware of this, but the relief could be way, way more with the proper approval, like what Katrina received. It seems like the relief structures have not been improved all that much since last time.

2) This is happening in areas that have never flooded before. Rivers were getting up to 6 feet above record highs.

Can you say duh? This was predicted over a decade ago. It's not like we didn't know this was going to happen.

3) The media isn't paying much attention to this flooding. Suggesting they didn't pay attention to Katrina is beyond ridiculous.

They didn't pay attention to Katrina in the beginning either. :shrug:

The difference is that I have no partisan axe to grind... people turn everything into a Republocrat brawl when they aren't in possession of the facts. Nobody in the White House really cares about the poor of La. If something like this happened in DC, or IL, or LA, or FA, it would be 24/7 international news coverage.

They just don't care about La. Never have and never will.

 

[Fenton]

According to this article, the governor of La. has stated that:

"But Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, brushed aside criticism of Obama being on vacation during the floods. 'I don't feel forgotten by the federal government,' Edwards told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on Thursday night, adding that he would prefer Obama wait at least a week to visit. 'We have what we need from the federal government.'​

The lack of Federal support was what Bush (or really, Bush's appointments) was charged with, that he waited to long in order to get FEMA and related organizations to help support the area. I have no idea when Obama will come in to visit, but all things being equal, I think he should follow the governors advice, as the local elected leader. That being said, there is Federal money helping out the citizens of La. right now. That was not the case with Katrina, so this is a false comparison.

LA Governor is a Lib, isn't he ?

 

[a351]

Why are different things different? More at 11.

 

[Greenbeard]

So what's the reason for the different treatment?

You're asking why a successful disaster relief operation isn't treated the same as a staggeringly unsuccessful one?

 

[roughdraft274]

Probably because the difference is not the changes at the federal level but the actual state itself isn't all dicked up? I mean, LA majorly screwed the pooch on their own operations and the responsibility lies on their shoulders.

It would be like me getting a moving company to come in to move me but I had done nothing to prep for it and didn't really have any idea of how to do it and then complaining about how horrible of a job they did.

Like I've said numerous times, Katrina was a **** storm on local levels also. And I could understand that as an excuse since the Feds rely on local for info on the ground. But when you assign a guy who has no experience with disaster management at all then you can expect criticism when things don't go well. Maybe a competent fema head could have done a much better job that still was lacking but at least wouldn't be as bad as it was. We'll never know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RenoCon]

Would have been better with a current (today) photo of Obama on the golf course instead of an old one.

He has golfed 300 rounds since taking office...pick one. On the other hand GW quit golfing with Gulf War II in deference to our troops...a definite contrast of character.

 

[FieldTheorist]

The same thing happened with Katrina. Blanco, the incompetent governor who burst into tears during a press conference, did not request federal help for several days. Until she did, there was nothing the Feds could do.

As has already been explained by myself originally, and by Visbek in post#47, FEMA has boots on the ground. There is Federal assistence going in to La. That was the issue with Katrina. If you didn't think that it was, you need to re-read the news articles or Wikipedia that pertain to what happened.

I'm not really certain what you want me to do with a post that's just openly denying the facts of the matter. Here's Visbek's post, in case you missed it:

With Katrina, the federal response was an unmitigated disaster.

With this flood, the federal response is doing pretty much what it's supposed to do.

This is also not the first time we've heard this nonsense. E.g. conservatives screeched about Katrina when Sandy hit, and it didn't work -- because the responses were night and day. Instead, they lost their minds because Christie actually worked with Obama, which most conservatives vindictively mischaracterized as a "hug."

So, as I wrote elsewhere:

FEMA has been on the ground, doing its job, from very early on. They've got at least 1000 people on the ground, medical resources are deployed, they have participated in the rescue of 30,000 people, and signed up 70,000 people for federal assistance. Almost all the displaced people have moved from shelters to temporary housing situations. They've already provided over 600,000 gallons of water and 800,000 meals to the state. The federal response is significant.

Louisiana's governor is pleased with the federal response. He also doesn't want Obama to show up for another week or two, since the logistics of getting the President around would complicate relief efforts -- e.g. diverting police to cover a President's driving route would be, to put it mildly, counter-productive.

Bush's incompetence was not that it took him a few days to show up and eat some beignets. It was a failure to prepare in advance; a failure to recognize the magnitude of the storm for several days; the failure to take it seriously; the failure to properly work with state and local governments; it was a continued failed response throughout the entire episode, resulting in a disaster of epic proportions.

Let's get real. FEMA, under Obama, has performed admirably throughout his term.

Let's also be accurate about the criticisms. No one on the ground is saying that the federal response is absent, that it's compounding the disaster. They primarily want media attention, which is lacking. NOLA wants the President there to raise the public profile of the flooding; the Advocate wants him there to express solidarity with the victims.

I do think these are valid criticisms -- but they are also minor ones. It is part of a President's job to bring attention to a major disaster, and for something of this scale comfort the victims. Comparing this to the inept response of the Bush administration to Katrina, though, is mere partisan nonsense.

LA Governor is a Lib, isn't he ?

That's extremely pertinent to this story... how?

 

[Fishking]

Like I've said numerous times, Katrina was a **** storm on local levels also. And I could understand that as an excuse since the Feds rely on local for info on the ground. But when you assign a guy who has no experience with disaster management at all then you can expect criticism when things don't go well. Maybe a competent fema head could have done a much better job that still was lacking but at least wouldn't be as bad as it was. We'll never know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can agree with that.

 

[danarhea]

BIAS ALERT: Media that ripped Bush on Katrina ignores Obama on La. flooding | Fox News


So what's the reason for the different treatment?

Louisiana's governor made the following statement about Obama coming to his state:

"Quite frankly, that's not something I want to go through right now," Edwards said. "I would just as soon he wait a week or two"

Why would he say that? Because resources would be tied up providing security to Obama instead of going where they are needed..... To the victims. Obama, however, did send FEMA head Craig Fugate there already to assess the situation in preparation for Federal aid to be sent there. Said Jay Dardenne, Louisiana’s Commissioner of Administration:

"This is not your 2005 FEMA,” said Commissioner of Administration Jay Dardenne. “They have been much more responsive.”

And this is what we want to see, not a photo op by Obama but actual management. Sure, he is on vacation, but has quickly taken the necessary steps towards providing timely relief to the state. In fact, FEMA is there NOW providing aid. Obama did what is expected of a president, as he heeded the wishes of Governor Edwards not to get in the way of the relief effort.

If you want to trash Obama, how about a real issue, such as his support of the TPP? I would be 100 percent with you on that. We could definitely trash him together on the real stuff that exists, which IMHO is what REALLY makes him dangerous to democracy. But astroturfing fake issues makes those who are doing it look like petty and petulant children.

 

[danarhea]

Like I've said numerous times, Katrina was a **** storm on local levels also. And I could understand that as an excuse since the Feds rely on local for info on the ground. But when you assign a guy who has no experience with disaster management at all then you can expect criticism when things don't go well. Maybe a competent fema head could have done a much better job that still was lacking but at least wouldn't be as bad as it was. We'll never know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't necessarily blame Bush for the Katrina response. I put most of the blame on the Army Corp of Engineers who insufficiently built the levees so they were unable to withstand an event like Katrina. Honestly, I believe Bush was caught by surprise. I don't think of him as a great president, but come on.... Can people really believe that he had no heart for the Katrina victims? I emphatically disagree with that assessment.

 

[PeteEU]

Speaking as someone that has lived through Katrina and the current flooding, the differences are extreme.

Fema royally ****ed up at every possible turn during Katrina. There was a massive failure at every stage by nearly every politician (local and federal) during Katrina. The people that Bush appointed to lead FEMA during Katrina were woefully underqualified and did a terrible job. Granted, he was working with morons on the local level. But never the less, the response was terrible. A photo op doesn't change that.

With this flooding, FEMA and LA have been on their game. Supplies are steadily flowing in to those who need them, shelters have been setup to more than adequately take care of those who are stranded, information on where the floodwater is at, the stages, etc has been superb etc. I'm not sure how much credit goes to the federal government and how much to the state government and how much to just the good people of baton rouge and the surrounding areas, but there have been so few misteps with this disaster that I think it should be studied by FEMA and other states as how to get **** done in the even of a flood.

I'd much rather a president send competent people who do a good job than one who will come and visit and tell me how much he cares while the ignorant **** bags that he has taking care of everything ****s up at every possible turn.

Sadly this will go unnoticed by the Trumpets and right wing propaganda-sphere..

 

[blackjack50]

Incorrect. She requested assistance the day before landfall.

Local and state government did screw up, especially with the preparation and delayed evacuation. However, they were not the ones who screwed up the federal response.

And it was the primary duty of the state and local governments to have a plan. Here is a piece of advice: if you live in a state along an ocean...you should have a plan for hurricanes/typhoon, flooding, and any other water related natural disaster. You shouldn't need federals to wipe your ass. Fortunately we learned our lesson with Katrina. But what would I know? I've only been listening to the daily hurricane disaster prep guides my ENTIRE life here in Florida.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SHOOTER]

Bush was personally responsible for 1000's of U.S casualties that we now know were for nothing. I don't care how many visits he made it won't bring those soldiers back. Bush is hiding in the shame he deserves.

you can keep your doctor and insurance.,what a guy,this will be the most transparent adm. ,red lines,the russian reset,nothing like brain dead liberals .now the people that did not vote for him can eat cake.
you must live on planet obama too.


run don run


run don run

 

[American]

Louisiana's governor made the following statement about Obama coming to his state:

"Quite frankly, that's not something I want to go through right now," Edwards said. "I would just as soon he wait a week or two"

Why would he say that? Because resources would be tied up providing security to Obama instead of going where they are needed..... To the victims. Obama, however, did send FEMA head Craig Fugate there already to assess the situation in preparation for Federal aid to be sent there. Said Jay Dardenne, Louisiana’s Commissioner of Administration:

"This is not your 2005 FEMA,” said Commissioner of Administration Jay Dardenne. “They have been much more responsive.”

And this is what we want to see, not a photo op by Obama but actual management. Sure, he is on vacation, but has quickly taken the necessary steps towards providing timely relief to the state. In fact, FEMA is there NOW providing aid. Obama did what is expected of a president, as he heeded the wishes of Governor Edwards not to get in the way of the relief effort.

If you want to trash Obama, how about a real issue, such as his support of the TPP? I would be 100 percent with you on that. We could definitely trash him together on the real stuff that exists, which IMHO is what REALLY makes him dangerous to democracy. But astroturfing fake issues makes those who are doing it look like petty and petulant children.

I wouldn't expect anything less from a rabid Bush hater.

 

[Kobie]

I wouldn't expect anything less from a rabid Bush hater.

Well, that is definitely a response.

 

[danarhea]

I wouldn't expect anything less from a rabid Bush hater.

Really? Read my very next post from that one. I said Katrina was not Bush's fault. Reading is fundamental. Your uninformed snide little remarks day after day are not.

 

[roughdraft274]

I don't necessarily blame Bush for the Katrina response. I put most of the blame on the Army Corp of Engineers who insufficiently built the levees so they were unable to withstand an event like Katrina. Honestly, I believe Bush was caught by surprise. I don't think of him as a great president, but come on.... Can people really believe that he had no heart for the Katrina victims? I emphatically disagree with that assessment.

I've never said bush didn't care. I'm just saying that Katrina was a tough situation with no great out come but at the very least you could have qualified people in charge. Instead of the horse whisperer. When you put someone with zero experience of disaster relief in charge of fema you should know that people are going to lay some blame on you when things go wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RAMOSS]

BIAS ALERT: Media that ripped Bush on Katrina ignores Obama on La. flooding | Fox News


So what's the reason for the different treatment?

The government was much better prepared to deal with the emergency, so while there was a disaster, there is a much better humantarian response to the disaster, and people are getting the resources they need to get over the emergency.

 

[Visbek]

I'm aware of this, but the relief could be way, way more with the proper approval, like what Katrina received. It seems like the relief structures have not been improved all that much since last time.

If you knew, then why did you ask "Where is FEMA?" You should have known they were already there, on the ground, right from the start. As such:

1) The federal response is much more thorough and effective than Katrina.
2) This situation is very different than Katrina, in that there isn't actually many places for people to go. In particular, there aren't a lot of rental properties in those areas for people to move to. Despite that, they are moving people out of shelters.
3) Holding up Katrina as some sort of paragon of a federal approach is sheer insanity. What "proper approval" did the federal government get then, and at what point in the effort, that they aren't getting now?

Can you say duh? This was predicted over a decade ago. It's not like we didn't know this was going to happen.

What are you talking about? Predicted by whom, and on what basis?

This is not a region that flooded during Katrina or any subsequent storm. The area affected is north of New Orleans and the Mississippi River. These areas have NEVER flooded before. That's why most people don't have flood insurance.

This would be like Arkansas getting hit by a massive flood that wrecks 100,000 homes, and saying "you should have expected it, why don't you all just move to Nebraska?"

They didn't pay attention to Katrina in the beginning either.

Sorry, but the media DID pay attention to Katrina, from the get-go.

The difference is that I have no partisan axe to grind... people turn everything into a Republocrat brawl when they aren't in possession of the facts. Nobody in the White House really cares about the poor of La. If something like this happened in DC, or IL, or LA, or FA, it would be 24/7 international news coverage.

You personally may not be partisan, and I agree the media response has been slight.

However, your assessment of the response by the federal government is fundamentally flawed. The federal government is there, on the ground, responding. The only thing that hasn't happened yet is that Obama has not personally set foot on the ground.

 

[Visbek]

And it was the primary duty of the state and local governments to have a plan. Here is a piece of advice: if you live in a state along an ocean...you should have a plan for hurricanes/typhoon, flooding, and any other water related natural disaster. You shouldn't need federals to wipe your ass. Fortunately we learned our lesson with Katrina. But what would I know? I've only been listening to the daily hurricane disaster prep guides my ENTIRE life here in Florida.

I've said several times that yes, local response (Nagin in particular) was poor, and certainly caused lots of the issues.

At the same time, there should be no question that Katrina was not an ordinary situation, the scale of the flooding was unprecedented, and there is absolutely no way a state like Louisiana can be expected to be prepared to handle the response entirely on its own. Add to that how a great deal of the people who lived in areas affected by Katrina were very poor, and didn't exactly have the resources to head up to Shreveport and stay in the Hilton.

Also, keep in mind that about 1/3 of Louisana's National Guard troops were serving in Iraq; and that relief efforts wound up involving tens of thousands of Guards, along with the US Coast Guard.

It also really is not in doubt that FEMA screwed up royally, in no small part because Bush aTpointed a crony of his who had literally no experience whatsoever handling disasters.

In contrast, the current head of FEMA is Craig Fugate, who has been working in emergency services since 1987. Since then, he's been dealing with record numbers of disasters, and routinely runs drills on FEMA operations centers. Michael Brown had the gall to criticize Fugate for positioning disaster relief supplies in advance of Hurricane Sandy.

Last but not least, I find the implication that Florida can handle hurricanes on its own, without federal aid, to be mildly amusing. E.g. FEMA distributed over $1 billion for Wilma. Would you like Florida to repay that sum, and for FEMA not to show up the next time there's a hurricane...?

 

[MrWonka]

So what's the reason for the different treatment?

Simple. The government didn't fail under Obama. Evacuations went about as well as they realistically could have. The recovery efforts are moving along about as well as they reasonably could under the direction of Obama's head of FEMA.


Also this notion that Bush was lambasted for not returning from vaction is entirely made up. He was on vacation, but cut it short and flew over the devastation in New Orleans on Air Force one. The criticism of Bush is that the efforts to evacuate New Orleans were horribly mismanaged, and the fact that it took way way too long to get the recovery effort underway. It took FEMA days to even start getting into the city.

In fact when asked the other day. The Governor of Louisiana said that "he did not feel as though Louisiana was being ignored by the Federal government."

 

[celticwar17]

No one criticized bush* for not showing up. He was criticized because FEMA screwed up

https://thinkprogress.org/as-katrina-struck-bush-vacationed-639ca60c2b2

USATODAY.com - A compassionate Bush was absent right after Katrina

just a quick google search of the news going on at the time

 

[blackjack50]

I've said several times that yes, local response (Nagin in particular) was poor, and certainly caused lots of the issues.

At the same time, there should be no question that Katrina was not an ordinary situation, the scale of the flooding was unprecedented, and there is absolutely no way a state like Louisiana can be expected to be prepared to handle the response entirely on its own. Add to that how a great deal of the people who lived in areas affected by Katrina were very poor, and didn't exactly have the resources to head up to Shreveport and stay in the Hilton.

Also, keep in mind that about 1/3 of Louisana's National Guard troops were serving in Iraq; and that relief efforts wound up involving tens of thousands of Guards, along with the US Coast Guard.

It also really is not in doubt that FEMA screwed up royally, in no small part because Bush aTpointed a crony of his who had literally no experience whatsoever handling disasters.

In contrast, the current head of FEMA is Craig Fugate, who has been working in emergency services since 1987. Since then, he's been dealing with record numbers of disasters, and routinely runs drills on FEMA operations centers. Michael Brown had the gall to criticize Fugate for positioning disaster relief supplies in advance of Hurricane Sandy.

Last but not least, I find the implication that Florida can handle hurricanes on its own, without federal aid, to be mildly amusing. E.g. FEMA distributed over $1 billion for Wilma. Would you like Florida to repay that sum, and for FEMA not to show up the next time there's a hurricane...?

Lmao! Really? Cannot expect to be prepared? Well. You are right. It can't be when it has been mishandling flood control and building below sea level for like 80 years. And the fact that you laid the federal blame on FEMA also tells me you missed the point. The federals are to blame for their decades of corruption in handling levee construction by...the US Army Corps of engineers.

And I like how you listed the $1 Billion for a $29 Billion storm. And then compare it to a massive failure for what? Over $100 Billion? How many lives lost? You also seem to be ignoring how prepared our insurance industry is too. Unfortunately for us that is starting to lapse a little bit (we haven't had a major storm in 10 years [knocks on wood]). Then of course you have building codes and inspectors and the disaster prep stuff, in the small underfunded counties (those are mainly non coastal though). It permeates our state my man. Even when you build a crappy little shed you have to use a special little thing called a "hurricane clip."

I'm just saying that the failure in New Orleans was catastrophic at the federal level, but laying it on bush is stupid. The us army corps of engineers sucks. They are a pain in the ass, and they are disorganized. Just try dealing with them and how they handle lakes, dams, and rivers. And they have been doing it for decades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Visbek]

Lmao! Really? Cannot expect to be prepared? Well. You are right.

I usually am. Not always, but usually.

It can't be when it has been mishandling flood control and building below sea level for like 80 years. And the fact that you laid the federal blame on FEMA also tells me you missed the point. The federals are to blame for their decades of corruption in handling levee construction by...the US Army Corps of engineers.

When Katrina hit, the ACE was already doing studies on upgrading the levees. They were expecting it to take 20 to 25 years. And of course, some of the designs that didn't work well were driven by cost efficiencies. Damn that cost-effective federal government! Oh, wait....

And I like how you listed the $1 Billion for a $29 Billion storm. And then compare it to a massive failure for what? Over $100 Billion?

Uh huh. Try this: Actually read my post. I made no such comparison.

I'm pointing out that Florida also utilizes federal disaster resources. FEMA was right there on the ground, and pitched in $1 billion for relief. Federal flood insurance paid out another $350 million.

Bush 41 and Congress threw $11 billion at Florida after Andrew... in 1992. Y'all want to pay us back for that one too? Preferably with interest and adjusted for inflation.

The idea that Florida is somehow able to handle massive disasters without federal aid is a joke.

Then of course you have building codes and inspectors and the disaster prep stuff, in the small underfunded counties (those are mainly non coastal though). It permeates our state my man.

OK then my man, why would an area of established houses that has never experienced a flood in its entire history, as is the case in this latest flood, be as prepared as South Florida?

I'm just saying that the failure in New Orleans was catastrophic at the federal level, but laying it on bush is stupid.

sigh

1) Blaming FEMA and Bush for the entire debacle is not accurate. That's why I keep saying: Blame FEMA for its own failures. That pretty much requires recognizing FEMA's screwups, and differentiating them from the lack of preparation.

E.g. when FEMA was delaying sending firefighters for no good reason, or turning away National Guards, or preventing supplies from getting to the affected regions, or turning away shipments of ice? That has nothing to do with a lack of local or state prep. That is FEMA not knowing what the heck it was doing.


2) The topic under discussion is a comparison of the federal response to Katrina, and the federal response to this unnamed storm. The allegation is that because Obama hasn't personally visited, he's equally negligent as Bush 43 -- despite the fact that the a) federal response this time is orders of magnitude more effective than Katrina, and b) the criticism was never about politicians flying over floods, but about the quality of the federal response.

Thus, all this "Army Corps of Engineers sucks" and "Screw Louisiana stuff" is, well, pretty much irrelevant.

But hey, the next time Florida gets hit? The rest of the US will make sure not to send any federal aid at all. Enjoy.

 

[Casper]

Strange, I cannot get any more upset with Obama than I did with Bush. Clue the President does not need to drop in to get the area the help it needs and having a President and their assembly of staff and security disrupting efforts in the beginning serves no purpose. If I am not mistaken he is scheduled to visit the area this week, about the same amount of time that Bush showed up after Katrina. Look want to whine about Obama, go for it, but to say he is being treated differently is BS, because from what I recall the media was not all over Bush it was those that attacked Bush at every opportunity, just as the Obama haters do with him, nothing new.:coffeepap