Bush: 'I take responsibility'

[NYCmitch25]

Bush takes responsibility for failures in the federal response to Hurricane Katrina...

[NYCmitch25]

Holy lol

[NYCmitch25]

Thats awful.

[BBAddict]

:laughnew:

[Bouncer]

bwahahaha, that shit is funny.

[Stonecold54]

what a chicken shit. he isn't even running for re-election and is owning up to shit that he doesn't need to. The fact that people think they need to rely on govt in the first place is their first mistake. The levees breaking weren't his fault and the people to dumb to not leave weren't his fault. I don't like him at all but stupidity at all levels bothers me.

[Timma]

That pic is hilarious.

[spidey]

It was the job of State and Local government to provide first response; not the federal government.

Federal response to Hurricane Katrina was faster than the federal response for the past 5 serious hurricanes including the mother of them all, Andrew. It took 5 days for FEMA to get on the ground after Andrew but only 3 days for Katrina. That is a 40% faster response for Katrina. Journalists blasting the feds for it's "slow response" have no understanding of what it takes to mobilize troops to an area the size of England where there is no power, no communication, damaged and impassable roadways, and washed out bridges. The federal response to Katrina was exceptional viewed in that light.

Also, I would point out that Bush only took responsibility "to the extent that the federal government failed in it's role to protect the American People". He did not take responsibility for massive incompetence at the state and local level.

[bonebreaker]

[QUOTE=spidey] Federal response to Hurricane Katrina was faster than the federal response for the past 5 serious hurricanes including the mother of them all, Andrew. It took 5 days for FEMA to get on the ground after Andrew but only 3 days for Katrina. That is a 40% faster response for Katrina. Journalists blasting the feds for it's "slow response" have no understanding of what it takes to mobilize troops to an area the size of England where there is no power, no communication, damaged and impassable roadways, and washed out bridges. The federal response to Katrina was exceptional viewed in that light.

Nobody, especially the press and special interest groups, wants to look at the other "disasters" and the length of time taken for first responder's to get going. The press, as usual, are a bunch of liberal morons looking for something that will stir people up. If there had been 100,000 helicopters there the next morning and picked everyone up and took them to the Ritz-Carlton, that would have been a "happy" story. Reporters rarely report "happy" stories. Not interesting and provoking enough. Also, the press loves to play the "race card". Many reporters who hinted, (if you read between the lines), that race made the response too slow should be arrested for trying to incite a riot and prosecuted for willful and criminal negligence. BB

[realconan]

Man, I hate our liberal media!!! They thrive on controversy and smear campaigns. They can't have their way so they make up shit to bitch about. Spoiled little brats.

[Primal Instinct]

It has nothing to do with the fallacy of a "liberal media" nor partisan politics. Being "on the ground" and actually doing the job are two seperate things. I agree that there are responsibilities for local and state officials and that things could have been handled much, much more efficiently BUT once the president declared a diasaster area PRIOR to the hurricane making landfall, it became a federal issue under federal control. The federal government under FEMA and now by default- the Department of Homeland Security- thus supercedes any state and local municipalities' authority. This is especially true if they (feds) have reason to believe that the state and local officials cannot handle a disaster of such magnitude either through incompetance or overbearing needs. EVERYONE knew that the leveee system was not designed to handle above a category 3 hurricane- EVERYONE, especially the Army Corp of Engineers, who repeatedly asked for funding to enhabce the levee system for years prior to this tragedy.

Short story: material and personnel were not managed efficiently nor was it applied effectively-regardless of requests by local and state officials. It was a federal baby the minute Bush declared it a federal emergency, period. This tragedy illustrates the problem when one appoints a patronage job to an unqualified individuals of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the over-bureacracized Department of Homeland Security. Neither Chertoff nor Brown are/were qualified to handle such important positions in our government. THAT blame does fall upon the president. He never took a personal interest in his job and instead opted for others to make all of the most important decisions for him and basically gambled on bad things not happening to our nation. I truly feel that he, as POTUS is severely underqualified and himself, is a beneficiary of a patronage job. This is a glaring result of the severe inadaquacies he presents as the leader of our nation. Just imagine if instead of a hurricane it was a dirty bomb that exploded in the region. We are so unprepared for such things it is frightening. Talk doesn't protect citizens from tragedy, actions do and there has been NO real measure of action taken to upgrade border security, port security, illegal immigration, etc. Aside from the lack of will to stop illegal aliens from crossing the southern borders (cheap labor for business at the expense of the taxpayer), we simply do not have the funding necessary to secure such measures because we spoend upwards of $4 billion each month in Iraq- and that does not include any rebuilding costs either.


I can tell you this much; if this was an election year, Bush would have been ALL OVER this hurricane and things definitely would have not gone down as badly as they have. Does ANYONE here disagree with that statement? Why or why not?


Lastly, let's see if making the tax cuts for the wealthy permanent remains a primary issue with this administration. You certainly cannot fund an ultra-expensive (and elective) anti-guerilla war in Iraq while rebuilding much of the gulf coast states AND still justify such tax cuts that benefit the average and lower income people very, very little. There will have to be some sort of fiscal responsibilty at some point, as we haven't seen any measure of this yet since Bush was sworn in as president. Not one single spending veto- or ANY veto- in either term. That's just amazing and not very fiscally sound. It is the mark of a president who is detached from the reponsibilities of his office. These numbers (in the billions of dollars) seem not to make any sort of impact to Bush because they are just numbers pulled from the air to him. It's just more detachment from reality because these things will never personally affect him like they would the other US readers on this board. Our grandchildren will be paying off these debts of the past 4+ years long after we're all passed away.

[realconan]

It has nothing to do with the fallacy of a "liberal media" nor partisan politics. Being "on the ground" and actually doing the job are two seperate things. I agree that there are responsibilities for local and state officials and that things could have been handled much, much more efficiently BUT once the president declared a diasaster area PRIOR to the hurricane making landfall, it became a federal issue under federal control. The federal government under FEMA and now by default- the Department of Homeland Security- thus supercedes any state and local municipalities' authority. This is especially true if they (feds) have reason to believe that the state and local officials cannot handle a disaster of such magnitude either through incompetance or overbearing needs. EVERYONE knew that the leveee system was not designed to handle above a category 3 hurricane- EVERYONE, especially the Army Corp of Engineers, who repeatedly asked for funding to enhabce the levee system for years prior to this tragedy.

Short story: material and personnel were not managed efficiently nor was it applied effectively-regardless of requests by local and state officials. It was a federal baby the minute Bush declared it a federal emergency, period. This tragedy illustrates the problem when one appoints a patronage job to an unqualified individuals of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the over-bureacracized Department of Homeland Security. Neither Chertoff nor Brown are/were qualified to handle such important positions in our government. THAT blame does fall upon the president. He never took a personal interest in his job and instead opted for others to make all of the most important decisions for him and basically gambled on bad things not happening to our nation. I truly feel that he, as POTUS is severely underqualified and himself, is a beneficiary of a patronage job. This is a glaring result of the severe inadaquacies he presents as the leader of our nation. Just imagine if instead of a hurricane it was a dirty bomb that exploded in the region. We are so unprepared for such things it is frightening. Talk doesn't protect citizens from tragedy, actions do and there has been NO real measure of action taken to upgrade border security, port security, illegal immigration, etc. Aside from the lack of will to stop illegal aliens from crossing the southern borders (cheap labor for business at the expense of the taxpayer), we simply do not have the funding necessary to secure such measures because we spoend upwards of $4 billion each month in Iraq- and that does not include any rebuilding costs either.


I can tell you this much; if this was an election year, Bush would have been ALL OVER this hurricane and things definitely would have not gone down as badly as they have. Does ANYONE here disagree with that statement? Why or why not?


Lastly, let's see if making the tax cuts for the wealthy permanent remains a primary issue with this administration. You certainly cannot fund an ultra-expensive (and elective) anti-guerilla war in Iraq while rebuilding much of the gulf coast states AND still justify such tax cuts that benefit the average and lower income people very, very little. There will have to be some sort of fiscal responsibilty at some point, as we haven't seen any measure of this yet since Bush was sworn in as president. Not one single spending veto- or ANY veto- in either term. That's just amazing and not very fiscally sound. It is the mark of a president who is detached from the reponsibilities of his office. These numbers (in the billions of dollars) seem not to make any sort of impact to Bush because they are just numbers pulled from the air to him. It's just more detachment from reality because these things will never personally affect him like they would the other US readers on this board. Our grandchildren will be paying off these debts of the past 4+ years long after we're all passed away.

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.... :thumbsdow

Same shit, different day. You all give the same obtuse remarks to everything. You don't like the war...Bush must be incompetent. You don't like paying taxes...Bush must be incompetent. A hurricane destroyed New Orleans...Bush must be incompetent. The levees broke....Bush must be incompetent. Are you so gullible as to believe that Bush single-handedly denied funding to strengthen the levees? It's all so preposterous it makes me want to laugh. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!! What a joke. Hind sight is 20/20. It's always easier to just sit and criticize after the fact. You claim that the "liberal media" is a fallacy and that it has nothing to do with partisan politics yet you're parrotting exactly what all of the left wing extremists say every day against Bush. God, what a bunch of cry babies. GROW UP!!!!!

[SloppyJo]

i love how the liberals hate tax cuts... sure lets take money away from ppl who actually earn it and work for it and lets give it to the lazy ppl who sit around all day and get their welfare checks... GET A JOB... its not that hard... even mexicanswho cant speak a god damn word of english are better than these sorry asses... makes me sick.. not to mention without the tax cut we would have gone into a recession after 9/11

[Primal Instinct]

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.... :thumbsdow

Same shit, different day. You all give the same obtuse remarks to everything. You don't like the war...Bush must be incompetent. You don't like paying taxes...Bush must be incompetent. A hurricane destroyed New Orleans...Bush must be incompetent. The levees broke....Bush must be incompetent. Are you so gullible as to believe that Bush single-handedly denied funding to strengthen the levees? It's all so preposterous it makes me want to laugh. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!! What a joke. Hind sight is 20/20. It's always easier to just sit and criticize after the fact. You claim that the "liberal media" is a fallacy and that it has nothing to do with partisan politics yet you're parrotting exactly what all of the left wing extremists say every day against Bush. God, what a bunch of cry babies. GROW UP!!!!!

I put a lot of thought into my posts and I do not rely on any media source or political hacks to formulate my opinions. Perhaps you should do the same and put aside political affiliations and do a little bit of your own research.


Let's consider this failure (on all levels) in a different way:

You are the CEO of a large corporation and trusted to run it smoothly and efficiently. You hire out several high level executives for key roles in the company. Among these people, you have chosen one to safeguard the company's finances (comptroller). However, this person has never performed any type of duties nor does he even have a degree in finance, much less a CPA. So, the quarterly statement comes out and the board of directors and shareholders are pissed because the company lost gobs of money due to poor fiscal responsibility. All along, employees in the know were telling the CEO and his his level officers that there was a financial disaster in the making but they get ignored. Who is ultimately responsible- the people who blew the whistle or the guy who hired the incompetant person to begin with- KNOWING that the person was unqualified to do the job in the first place?

Here's a hint: outside of politics, the blame eventually falls upon the boss, as he is the captain of the ship, so to speak, and is responsible for the actions (or inactions) of his underlings. In politics however, the inverse is true and you blame anyone else except those who are responsible for the mishap.



Did I say that the Executive branch was solely responsible for the tragedies which occurred? No, I did not. Is New Orleans the ONLY area who had been severly affected by the hurricane? Certainly not. Much of Mississippi along the coast had been wiped out as well. Does that make the mayor of New Orleans or Louisiana's state govenor responsible for slow actions of relief efforts in those areas? Hardly. The federal response goes far beyond just New Orleans. You can't pin that on a "liberal media" or local and state officials. The response was very slow and there are STILL areas in Mississippi that either haven't seen a FEMA or federal official there yet or just had some attention to their situation in the last couple of days. This is 2 weeks after the storm. 2 weeks.


Where does the buck stop in your eyes, realconan? It appears that if you don't like the message you feel the need to shoot the messenger. It also appears that "left-wing extremists" means anyone not attached to the far-right. I am neither a left-wing liberal extremist nor a far-right neoconservative. You say I'm parroting the liberal media. Perhaps you should drop your partisan veil and look at things from a centrist perspective- or better yet- an outside, non-affiliated perspective. You may just learn that your perception has been keeled much too far to the right just as some people are keeled much too far to the left.


One last question- Why do we pay taxes to support a federal disaster program that doesn't respond well (or timely) to federal disasters? You should probably bone up on how much the tax cuts actually cost you over the long-term. You might get $600. back this year but it will cost you on average, in in the neighborhood of $7500. to pay the finance charges for the borrowed money that covers your tax rebate to pay for federal programs & in other ways, such as higher state and local taxes to cover the shortfalls from less federal money granted to these municipalities due to the loss of overall tax receipts from tax cuts. No one can run a household like this successfully (deficit spending), so how can you run an entire government like this successfully? If you are concerned about your money then you should delve into what the tax cuts really cost you. I'll be more than happy to send you $100. now if you'll pay me $1000. back later. That's exactly what's going on with this situation, believe it or not.

[coffee-guy]

This is a little off topic but is in relation to this...

No one can run a household like this successfully (deficit spending), so how can you run an entire government like this successfully?

Way back in the early 1980's the American Dollar was taken off of the "gold standard" system for dollar valuations. As long as the U.S. is allowed to keep printing their own currency and the world economy is based upon the "value" of the dollar our debts can continue to accumulate and will never have to be accounted for. The reason for this is because all we have to do is print more money instead of procucing gold in order to account for the additional dollars.

The only caveate to this is if the World Bank (which house majority lies in the U.S.) and the world economy decides to change the standard currency for which all other economies values are based upon. I'm sad to say that as long as the American Dollar reigns supreme (even though it's bascially worth no more than the paper it's printed upon) we don't technically have to concern ourselves with such "minor" things as debt.

:) Picked directly for George W. Bush's brain telepathically :)