new orleans: bush's fault??

[Ana]

what do you think?


p.s. ldragogontongue and arianhrod, i'll enjoy your debating!!

[Lilly Dragontongue-Skywalker]

When I first read the title of this article, I was quite taken aback. Now, I'm not quite sure what it's supposed to mean. Was the tragedy in New Orleans Bush's fault? The subject line is the only question present. My direct response would be to say no, because it was caused by Hurricane Katrina. Everyone knows that a hurricane is a natural disaster. Bush can not create a hurricane. This only logical backup for that would be: that the hurricane was caused by global warming which Bush did nothing to stop. However, scientists agree that the long and harsh hurricane season had no connection to global warming. Now, this is a very literal interpretation of this question, I suppose, which would explain why my first reaction would be to think "anyone who thinks Bush created a hurricane has got a real losing argument on their hands." But, now that I think about it, did Bush create the hurricane would be a somewhat silly debate topic. I am assuming that the question refers more to the response and rescue efforts more than anything else. So, was the slow respone Bush's fault. I do not think it was for 2 basic reasons: 1. I don't think the situation was as bad as it was portrayed. 2. I believe that there was a lot of trouble within the local government.

1. Looking at the footage on television, everyone was saying: finally! But I, personally, looking at the brave members of the national guard saving people from the rooftops, felt proud of my country and the effort they were putting in. Now, I wasn't just seeing little clips of footage, I heard the stories too. Here is how the media's version of this story went:
People are saying 10,000 people might be dead.
There was slow government response.
Like we said 10,000.
Other news today: Joran Van der Sloot is still in prison, gas prices are at a record high, 10,000 people were rescued from their rooftops, there were bombs in Iraq
And 10,000 people might be dead.
Now, I have to admit, the rescue effort was far from perfect. But, you have to admit this: the media portrays the glass half empty. I, on the contrary, tend to portray the glass half full. That's one reason why my story and the story you see in The New York Times are going to be different Why does the media portray stories this way? We live in a world of 24 hour news. All day long news channels show the news. So they have to have something to cover all day and still have people interested in it. They need good stories. And good stories are usually not light-hearted. As Bill O'Reilly says in his book, The O'Reilly Factor for Kids, “I suppose I could begin every program by saying, 'today, tens and millions of ordinary Americans did not cheat the taxpayers or steal someone's pension fund, or overcharge a hospital for medicine,' but that wouldn't be news. Which is a darned good thing.” (p. 108) And O'Reilly show was more like that, I doubt that it would be the top show on cable news.

2. There was a lot of trouble with the local governments. I heard that Governor Kathleen Blanco and the mayor, Ray Nagin would did not want immediate help from the federal government. Also, I believe that on the local level, more should have been done to transport those unable to leave out of the city, such as by preparing buses. I heard on Hannity and Columes that the local government may have even turned down an offer of trains to help evacuate people made by Amtrak, but I have no idea if that is actually true or not. It's hard to know what is the truth and what legends the media picks up because it's a good story. Another think is that, as we saw, New Orleans is a city effected by a lot of poverty and crime. And it's hard to have a strong local governments in areas that face so many challenges. For those members like Ana, who live in Michigan, think about the city of Detroit. What would it be like if there was a horrible disaster there? Everything would be a mess. And the gulf coast region was a real mess. Now, I admit, no level of government was perfect. Ever level had it's mistakes. What do you expect? We are all human. But to say that it was all Bush's fault is ridiculous.

[Ana]

mrs. republican...lol, i know it's not really cuz you're republican. but i have this to say:

what about the levees? they needed fixing, and weren't. was this the goverenment's fault? the levees were broken because they were weak, but weren't fixed. because there was no money? well, look where we're spending all our money: we're bombing Iraq!!

also, i think that the response was quite slow. the media may pick up some stories, but the response was still slow. if i might use an example: in the mid to late 1900s, in russia, a big radoactive station called Chernobyl blew up, and there was radioactive infection everywhere, the area was larger then new Orleans. HOwever, the goverenment was able to evacuate everyone in just 3 days! Meanwhile, here, we have a lot of potentional for a big disaster(the flooding and the levees) and the slow response. if not directly bush's fault, this is definately the goverenment's fault.

[none]

Well, really, i think it is a bit silly to blame Katrina on Bush. I mean, he can't control the weather! And yes, global warming would be a problem, if he didn't do anything about it. But what exactly could he have done? I have no clue so I cannot push what I think any farther.

[Ana]

aqua, if you read the debate i think it's understandable what the problem is-the slow response, all the racism, and everything.

[none]

racism?

[Ana]

yes, people who were poor/different races didn't have the means to get out, and weren't rescued or helped as fast and things like that..

[Lilly Dragontongue-Skywalker]

Did you know that more whites died than blacks? That more rich people died than poor people. Sure the response wasn't perfect, but I think the facts cancel out the posibilty of racism.

[none]

Hey! That isn't fair! :-P

[Lilly Dragontongue-Skywalker]

What isn't fair, I don't understand what you are talking about.