Bush takes responsibility for shortcomings...

[Rat Faced]

Ok... now i dont know how it all works, but David Paulison was in charge of "Emergency Preparedness"...

Does that mean the boss has resigned in favour of the guy that actually did the fuckup?

Im actually being serious in the question.. as I said, i dont know how FEMA is organised..

[j2k4]

Ok... now i dont know how it all works, but David Paulison was in charge of "Emergency Preparedness"...

Does that mean the boss has resigned in favour of the guy that actually did the fuckup?

Im actually being serious in the question.. as I said, i dont know how FEMA is organised..

The problem was essentially a reluctance at local and state levels to face the true threat Katrina presented, combined with the two additional factors of incompetence at FEMA (Miller), and a belief on everyone's part that the duty of pulling the trigger on the whole operation belonged to the "other guy".

Paulison was not in that decision-making hierarchy, and so presumably bears no responsibility.

On the other hand, it could be argued that he works for Bush and is thus tainted...

[Busyman]

I'd ask Clocker, were I you; just to be sure.

I believe he said that Katrina was not an unanticipated event.

True enough.

I was merely going a bit further to provide him with one.

I'm down for a nap, now.

Have to work in the morning, you know?

Uh...er...uh...Katrina was not unanticipated....just like he said....so what what was your point again.....irregardless to both posts?

Before you go to sleep, don't forget to put a towel down and put on your maxi-pad. Mmk?

Sleep it off j2, sleep it off.

Follow me now, B.-

If there were an earthquake as I've described, I'm sure you could imagine events being even worse than I've painted them, and likewise the difficulty of addressing the damage easily as overwhelming as Katrina, but the prevailing school of thought here would demand that the self-righteous who go about demanding the heads of all those who have fallen short of their pie-in-the-sky expectations be placated almost before any aid is dispensed.

If a certain death-count stipulates a resignation, what would that number be, pray tell?

If massive suffering is the measuring-stick, how is that to be calibrated?

Do you know of any way to gauge what level of public outrage should be required to effect the removal of a critically-placed public official?

If the demanded resignations take place, who is then charged with timely replacement of these officials, given that, in this case, "timely" means "yesterday"?

Is it your view that a disruption of command authority is a small consideration?

There is here unanimous agreement that the handling of Katrina was, at least in the first few days, an unrelenting fiasco; and some heads currently intact will ultimately have to roll.

Who is qualified to fix a schedule for this?

Should we name a commission, a la 9/11 to study this?

Who shall appoint it?

Is there anyone without a rooting interest in the outcome of any such investigation?

There were fuck-ups before the storm. I'm talking aftermath. Plus you are barking up the wrong resignation tree....that's Rat.

In the aftermath, help seemed timed for Presidential arrival.

Please get off the earthquake doohicky 'cause clocker already adressed that.

We've had earthquakes before.

All in all I think.....I hope Bush gets his head outta his ass. "If your best friend ain't qualified for Emergency Management, get'im a job in oil."

[j2k4]

...you are barking up the wrong resignation tree....that's Rat.

Oh-sorry.

So you don't think he should resign?


Please get off the earthquake doohicky 'cause clocker already adressed that.

No, he did not.

Sorry.

[j2k4]

The following was not for Busyman after all, but for others.

Or so I've been told.

If there were an earthquake as I've described, I'm sure you could imagine events being even worse than I've painted them, and likewise the difficulty of addressing the damage easily as overwhelming as Katrina, but the prevailing school of thought here would demand that the self-righteous who go about demanding the heads of all those who have fallen short of their pie-in-the-sky expectations be placated almost before any aid is dispensed.

If a certain death-count stipulates a resignation, what would that number be, pray tell?

If massive suffering is the measuring-stick, how is that to be calibrated?

Do you know of any way to gauge what level of public outrage should be required to effect the removal of a critically-placed public official?

If the demanded resignations take place, who is then charged with timely replacement of these officials, given that, in this case, "timely" means "yesterday"?

Is it your view that a disruption of command authority is a small consideration?

There is here unanimous agreement that the handling of Katrina was, at least in the first few days, an unrelenting fiasco; and some heads currently intact will ultimately have to roll.

Who is qualified to fix a schedule for this?

Should we name a commission, a la 9/11 to study this?

Who shall appoint it?

Is there anyone without a rooting interest in the outcome of any such investigation?

[lynx]

J2, if and when earthquake prediction becomes as obvious as the impending arrival of Katrina, your points may well be valid. However, as far as I am aware at the present time there are no reliable predictors which indicate when a devastating earthquake is going to occur.

Therefore, when one does occur it is hardly surprising that emergency preperations may not be in the correct place to deal with the aftermath.

WRT Hurricane Katrina, I live over 3000 miles away, I had a good idea of what was going to happen, it was in the news. People all over Europe had a good idea what was going to happen, it was in the news. People in China had a good idea what was going to happen, it was in the news. So how come the people at FEMA seem to have been unaware what was going to happen? From your comments we should probably assume they were gearing up for an earthquake.

[clocker]

The following was not for Busyman after all, but for others.

Or so I've been told.

If there were an earthquake as I've described, I'm sure you could imagine events being even worse than I've painted them, and likewise the difficulty of addressing the damage easily as overwhelming as Katrina, but the prevailing school of thought here would demand that the self-righteous who go about demanding the heads of all those who have fallen short of their pie-in-the-sky expectations be placated almost before any aid is dispensed.
Which critics are withholding aid till resignations are accepted? A very nice political move (used well by both parties sadly)...claim that now is not the time for criticism, but to join together and help the victems, we'll look into it later.
Later, naturally the response will be "Why are you dragging up all this old dirt? It's politically motivated!"

If a certain death-count stipulates a resignation, what would that number be, pray tell?Irrelevant

If massive suffering is the measuring-stick, how is that to be calibrated?
As above
Do you know of any way to gauge what level of public outrage should be required to effect the removal of a critically-placed public official?

If the demanded resignations take place, who is then charged with timely replacement of these officials, given that, in this case, "timely" means "yesterday"?

Is it your view that a disruption of command authority is a small consideration?
A chain of command that malfunctions under live fire conditions is hardly worth preserving,is it?

There is here unanimous agreement that the handling of Katrina was, at least in the first few days, an unrelenting fiasco; and some heads currently intact will ultimately have to roll.

Who is qualified to fix a schedule for this?
I imagine that the person with the most to gain (i.e. Bush), would be the most enthusiastic to initiate any inquiry that satiates the public outrage.
Should we name a commission, a la 9/11 to study this?

Who shall appoint it?

Is there anyone without a rooting interest in the outcome of any such investigation?
No.
Why should there be?

[j2k4]

J2, if and when earthquake prediction becomes as obvious as the impending arrival of Katrina, your points may well be valid. However, as far as I am aware at the present time there are no reliable predictors which indicate when a devastating earthquake is going to occur.

Therefore, when one does occur it is hardly surprising that emergency preperations may not be in the correct place to deal with the aftermath.

WRT Hurricane Katrina, I live over 3000 miles away, I had a good idea of what was going to happen, it was in the news. People all over Europe had a good idea what was going to happen, it was in the news. People in China had a good idea what was going to happen, it was in the news. So how come the people at FEMA seem to have been unaware what was going to happen? From your comments we should probably assume they were gearing up for an earthquake.

Well, lynx, I am very well aware that you are tone-deaf to any brand of sarcasm apart from your own; I am loathe to explain it to you.

[j2k4]

The following was not for Busyman after all, but for others.

Or so I've been told.

So-

Should he resign?

[Busyman]

...you are barking up the wrong resignation tree....that's Rat.

Oh-sorry.

So you don't think he should resign?


Please get off the earthquake doohicky 'cause clocker already adressed that.

No, he did not.

Sorry.

Yeah he did...as irrelevance.

lynx done the same.