posted
Sorry, I can't find a link anywhere for this. Maybe it never happened. But yesterday on NPR I heard President Bush talk about the "good news." He said the good news is that the Gulf coast would be rebuilt...better. He also was there with a Senator who'd lost a home he had on the Gulf. He said that the "other good news" is that Senator's home would be rebuilt better too. And that he's looking forward to sitting on the new home's porch.
Now some may find this comforting, even a bit folksy. Some may say that NPR has this penchant for selecting the soundbites that put Bush in the worst possible light in any situation.
I just have wonder...this isn't the dumbest thing that GWB has ever said, of course, but in the context of being on his way to visit the site of a terrible natural disaster, and having just said that the Federal response to that disaster was "acceptable" but that the results were "unacceptable," I have to wonder just how these comments were conceived.
I also have to wonder about the disaster relief funds. Are we, the taxpayers, going to foot the bill for that new house of the Senator's?
I realize the President is just not "good" when speaking extemporaneously. Heck, I'm not either. But I swear the man's sense of hitting the right note and mine are diametrically opposed. But then, he's President and I'm not, so he must have something going for him.
I just don't get the guy. When people hear comments like this do they really feel inspired?
More importantly, until the people are safe and the bodies are dealt with, who gives a rat's ass if they plan to rebuild the Gulf or some Senator's home or not?
I LOVE New Orleans. I want to see it made whole. But can we go take care of the people first, please?
Bush met with two sisters on the street in NO yesterday. They mentioned that they didn't have any clothing. He directed them to the Salvation Army. An aide stepped in to inform the President that the Salvation Army center was gone -- destroyed in the flooding.
I'm reminded of the time Ronald Reagan angrily waved the "Help Wanted" section of the newspaper and talked about how many jobs there were available when people complained to him about high unemployment.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmmm....I don't get the same thing out of these comments that you do, Bob.
I get "Hey, look - it's everybody that's been affected, rich, poor, senator, sanitation worker. We're going to rebuild these cities for everybody, and I'm looking forward to that day."
quote:More importantly, until the people are safe and the bodies are dealt with, who gives a rat's ass if they plan to rebuild the Gulf or some Senator's home or not?
The survivors care, very very much. Wes said everywhere the biggest topic among survivors was insurance. When would the insurance companies be ready to issue money on claims so they could get started rebuilding. Many of them have already started, one guy was repairing his own roof - my sister in law yesterday went ahead and hired someone to fix her house, because she said she didn't want to wait and would just let the insurance reimburse them. I think it might actually be encouraging for the people on the ground trying to rebuild their lives to hear they aren't the only ones, that people like Trent Lott and Bret Favre are in the same boat as they are. I don't know, maybe it doesn't maybe you're right about their reaction. We won't know until we can ask them.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You could be right, Belle. I don't know. I just heard it and thought "what a weird thing to say."
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had the same reaction, Bob. Still has me puzzled.
On the other hand, Belle, I found a link you might find helpful and interesting in responding to some of the criticisms out there: The Anchoress blog. She is articulating a thoughtful response to GWB naysayers.
Edited to add: My own thinking is more along the lines of this critical Washington Post article, but then again, I admit to a strong bias against the current administration. It's been good for me to seek out the strongest presentations of positions to the contrary.
I'm still pretty ashen, though.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hear it the same way, Bob, for what its worth (I'm beginning to feel America isn't any of my business, although I know it is). It doesn't feel like he's doing a good job holding together an inspiring and comforting prescence. There was no strength behind anything I saw or read yesterday.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I too had the same reaction, but I always have a jarred reaction to Bush's statements like that irratated twitch I do when I hear an out of key note. The man just seems to lack sense and subtlety.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Synth...I've come to suspect that it is me that is off key. At least I'm not singing from the same sheet music as the rest of the country seems to be with regards to this President.
The possibility that I'm the oddball has at least flitted across my mind before being summarily rejected as too unlikely.
To be fair, I think the job of President is an exhausting one and the person in that role is called upon to speak intelligently on a huge range of topics at any moment. And, really, I dislike "prepared remarks" even more than I dislike a malaprop dropped now and again.
I do get these moments of jarring unreality when I hear SOME of the things that GWB has said. This one caused a mild tremor -- not my usual nervous tic. I could hear him trying to be a little light-hearted. I sort of thought afterwards that maybe he was trying to buoy people's spirits. But he just sounded glib to me. And I know that's partly because I've decided he's an over-grown frat boy and he'll tend to sound that way because I've perceived him that way.
At least he's not boring.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I just don't get the guy. When people hear comments like this do they really feel inspired?
I think that people who trust him to have good intentions tend to be inspired by those types of comments. He already tends to speak only to those that agree with him as it is; I think that those who support him will hear inspiration, and those who don't, won't. I don't.
Regardless of how I feel about his particular policy decisions, or his performance in office, the one thing that really disturbs me about GWB is that he is a divider. He makes very little effort to reach out to people who aren't already in agreement with him (that I can see, anyway). Some people may feel comforted by the fact that the Senator's home is being rebuilt; some people who had the means to get out of the city may be comforted by his assurance that the city will be rebuilt. The people stuck in the city who aren't getting any help? Well, they can't hear him, anyway, right?
At bottom, I think those who trust him will take comfort; those who find nothing to trust in his assurances won't.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you take people out of context, you can make them say pretty much anything. Maureen Dowd managed to edit Bush's quotes so that he ended up "saying" that terrorists are no longer a threat. The whole media edited Bush's "we have a long tough job ahead of us" speech to the troops just after the invasion of Iraq, so that it came across as "the job is over, we can party now."
Michael Moore is the master of this. He made Charlton Heston's "the NRA is America" speech come across as "the mayor of Denver can go stuff himself, we're staying." Heavy editing and putting different parts of a speech together. But you don't need to go that far. You can simply videotape someone laughing, and put it in a story about puppies and kitties dying, to make him look like a sadist.
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This whole situation angers me for one reason, one amazingly large reason. That is everyone in my society would rather point fingers and complain rather than get to work and fix the issue.
To me this should show people how even one of the richest nations in the world can be hit hard by a natural disaster. No one is so powerful , yet anyhow, to divert an incoming storm, earthquake, etc. Instead people complain about the President not being prepared enough, the war taking away resources etc. Every bad word that they can throw in on Americas current policy. I've already read, and I did expect this, that some people see it as our punishment from god or some other higher source for our misdeeds. I would have loved for someone to put that in the media after Asia was hit by the Tsunami.
I have to admit that this is the most embarassing thing that has ever happened to my nation. Not so much because of the condition of the people in New Orleans, but how Americans reacted. It has shown me what the people in my supposed homeland feel. I will tell you this much, I am through being nice to all those who would bash my society left and right, but never lift a finger to try and heal it. In my society of supposed 100% acceptance I see more hate and intolerance than any other I have personally experienced.
What sort of people sit on a sinking raft and complain?
Posts: 1753 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
But, how do you fix the issue if the people who are in power are not even bothering to do much about it?
Also, the problem is not when Bush's statements are edited. I have heard him talk in conferences and things like that and my teeth just clench in irratation because of the things he has said and the way he has said them.
I wish I could find a way to fix and improve society. The best way seems to be, on a smaller level, taking care of friends and family the best way I know how and by forming threads and connections to other people. But, it is difficult for me NOT to be hateful and intolerant of this administration because of how incompetent they are and because of how most of the things they are doing is completely wrong. I cannot and will not accept it. If they are doing wrong, it should be pointed out. But other than that, I don't know w hat I can do about it.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Black Fox, first, you're complaining about the complainers. Hardly better, ne?
Second, you're exaggerating grossly. I believe you'll find most of the people criticizing have donated money and/or time, not that "everyone in my society would rather point fingers and complain rather than get to work and fix the issue."
Most people can do little to fix the issue beyond small contributions, but they can make damn sure its known who and what have supported conditions that have led or would lead to more death and loss than was necessary, so that it is less likely to happen again.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fox, I get what you are saying, but that fact of the matter is that the war HAS taken a huge toll on our ability to react quickly, and saying ohterwise is a lie.
Mind you, I don't like Bush, but I am not bashing him, or complaining about him....I feel that there will be plenty of time to point fingers later, if necessary.
But closing your eyes and yelling "It ain't so" doesn't mean all the problems go away, you know. That seems to be what a lot of people are trying to do. If we want a better response time for teh next disaster, we need to figure out how to do a better job of this then.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Michael Moore is the master of this. He made Charlton Heston's "the NRA is America" speech come across as "the mayor of Denver can go stuff himself, we're staying."
Well, in Moore's defense (which I don't do often), Heston capped off that speech by holding his rifle in the air and shouting "From my cold dead hands!" So I'd say he didn't really edit out much of the meaning in Heston's words.
As for Bush, he comes off as a guy who is trying to reassure America, but clearly has little to no grasp of the situation. He comes off as very naive to me. I would've trusted Clinton more to understand the situation and console the nation than Bush, who was a day late leaving his vacation to come back for this. Maybe he just shouldn't be allowed to speak unscripted.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bush's comments seem more like they're designed to help him save face. By mentioning the senator who lost a home he's saying "rich people are effected too". That just so happens to counter certain, somewhat ignorant assertions that the response was slow because the majority of victims where black.
He could have used that soundbyte to encrourage a larger response, I would like to hear something like "We don't need 20,000 relief workers, we need 250,000, the federal government should have been sending in national gaurdsmen from all over the country one or two days after the hurricane, states should be dipping into their own budgets to send large scale help. This won't happen again."
Posts: 58 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I will tell you this much, I am through being nice to all those who would bash my society left and right, but never lift a finger to try and heal it.
And are you equipped to judge, based on people's comments, and whether they are loyal enough in your estimation, whether or not they are lifting a finger to help, or would? Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess the question is, if you have done all that is feasible and practical for you to do right now (i.e. volunteering, donationg time, money, blood, etc.), is it the time to 'point fingers' right now?
I don't know what I think the answer to that question is, actually, but I do know that in my opinion it isn't a given, necessarily, that if you've done what you can to help in a concrete fashion, it necessarily follows that now is the time to start making judgements and pointing fingers, in any direction.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If no one had been critical of Bush in the past 48 hours, do you really think he would have changed his tune from "things are going great!" to "we aren't doing enough, and we can do better."
I've never seen him flip sound bytes that fast before.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sometimes I think Bush really doesn't have the ability to process reality the same way others do. I think he gets it fed to him most of the time, and then when his aides stop because they think it's self-evident, he isn't able to come across as coherent and appropriate.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know, Lyrhawn. I suppose if the answer to that question is 'yes', then obviously the time for finger-pointing and criticism is now.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess the question is, if you have done all that is feasible and practical for you to do right now (i.e. volunteering, donationg time, money, blood, etc.), is it the time to 'point fingers' right now?
I don't know what I think the answer to that question is, actually, but I do know that in my opinion it isn't a given, necessarily, that if you've done what you can to help in a concrete fashion, it necessarily follows that now is the time to start making judgements and pointing fingers, in any direction.
What an arbitrary question! Why does one preclude the other? You can't criticize until after you've "earned" a voice--not by helping, but by helping "enough"?!
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I've already read, and I did expect this, that some people see it as our punishment from god or some other higher source for our misdeeds. I would have loved for someone to put that in the media after Asia was hit by the Tsunami.
Umm, they did. It was hardly a majority view (nor is it in this instance), but the claim that the tsunami was divine punishment for lands of idol-worshipping heathen and prostitutes (among other claims) was and is definitely out there.
Posts: 884 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm suggesting that possibly no one has 'the right' to start pointing fingers and criticizing right now, simply because at this time it may be counterproductive, not morally wrong. At the current time.
Please bear in mind this is totally my opinion.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I mean, really, what will be the result of criticism right now about past decision? Not current decision s about rescue operations, but stuff like cutting the ACoE budget?
For the record, I think that was a careless decision. Such a massive cut in an area around a city so at risk for water-issues is careless, to say the least. But to lambast politicians about it right now...those bums, whichever side and whatever stripe will either expend energy defending themselves from such accusation, or piling on with accusation of their own.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It might help draw attention to the fact that similar cuts and lessened regulations have been made in many other locations that resulted in dangerous situations for residents but improved situations for developers.
While we can -- and should -- all donate money, blood, and support, we can't all be physically involved in rescue operations. But we can start making noise about this and other ill-thought legislation that increases the chances for disaster, and we can try to get that legislation changed. The next disaster might not wait for us to finish clearing up this one.
I'm not interested in partisan blame, or in scoring points against any parties or individuals. It wouldn't bother me if all the coverage of the situation ignored everything that was said or done prior to today, mentioned no names at all, and just analyzed the current legislation to see where else our safety has been reduced.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Current legislation and current deployment of the National Guard. I know that some governors have been complaining about the lack of national guard presence in their state since the invasion of Iraq, but I do wonder whether this current situation is an example of the downside of the NG deployments in general?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's what I'm talking about, Chris. That kind of criticism is, in my opinion, the most effective and worthwhile, because it doesn't give politicians on either side of the aisle anything to latch onto. Put that way, criticisms or observations can only be addressed on their merits or faults, and they can't parry the complaint by saying it's unseemly.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, Rakeesh, what about things like when GWB says something stupid? Is that just another instance when I should remain silent in the spirit of cooperation and constructiveness? I mean, really, I could've just not posted my mild rant. It didn't bother me that much. I just thought it was weird. So, I could've just let it pass.
But... We are a discussion board. And people post all sorts of things that catch their attention.
And I wasn't being disrespectful. At least I don't think so.
Or, is the problem that the criticism is of a particular person and their behavior instead of something that is vague as to the perpetrator but asks a more serious and probing question? (like Chris' bit about legislation or maybe questions about National Guard deployment?)
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
I've said several times that I realize this is arbitrary on my part and totally my opinion, first of all. I'm not suggesting that there's some moral wrong inherent in criticizing right now.
I guess it's my frustration that in times of strife and turmoil, it's sort of like there's a shotgun spread of criticism of current leadership, on every single level, on all sorts of things. Perhaps it's just a reflection of my frustration that I'm capable of doing little other than donating blood and sending a few bucks their way. I yearn for something to do, and I've expended my means and all the things I have left to say seem hollow and unimportant.
Please don't take that as a criticism of things you've said-it's not. I'm just tired from lack of sleep and also weary just from hearing of the suffering of friends and friends of friends throughout Louisianna.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, I have a slightly different take, although (believe me!) I'm very sympathetic to your feelings of grief and frustration. The City of New Orleans keeps playing through my head, over and over. (((Jeff)))
quote:Good morning America how are you? Don't you know me I'm your native son ...
Reposted from elsewhere for your viewing pleasure:
The first priority is to feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, clothe the poor, heal the sick, and comfort the widowed and orphaned. But while we are doing this, we can ask questions and brainstorm together about what happened, why, and how to make it better next time. Not to ask questions now (and again, and constantly, and always) is to dishonor those who are devasted now, and those who are in harm's way of being devasted in the future.
Some of those questions are about local response, some about national policy, some about individual people. They all need to be asked, and we all need to think hard about them and offer the best we have to answering them. I'm sorry if that makes us uncomfortable. Truly, I am -- being frustrated, uncertain, and confused is a terrible feeling. But we have to deal with it.
I'm going to be a butt and keep reposting this wherever I see discussion -- any discussion that is not interfering with the ongoing addressment of the first priority -- being shut down. I want to hear it all. We need to hear it all. Praise for the good as well as thoughtful critique of the not-so-good -- we need all we can come up with in the public forum of ideas, and as soon as possible, so long as the first priority is also being taken care of. Sure, one shouldn't be sitting down to shoot the breeze while the bodies pile up next to you, but nobody reading this forum is likely to currently be engaged in a relief effort themselves, this very minute. (If you are, then there are better things to be doing than monitoring the discussion on Hatrack.) I think it is a moral duty for us to engage in such a discussion, and it's our moral duty to get through these uncomfortable feelings in the hopes of averting similar devastion in the future.
You want to honor the dead? Do the very best you can to make sure more don't die like they did. Even if that means listening to people who disagree with you about the reasons why this happened. Nobody -- nobody -- has a lock on the answer, and it's an important and complex enough answer that a multitude of views must be expressed and allowed to stand or fall on their own merits.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I find incredibly annoying right now is how much of the criticism is based on unconfirmed and verifiably incorrect facts right now. It's tiresome and it's terribly unfair. And at least some of the people (not here) spreading the inaccurate information are doing so for political gain.
A lot of the frustration at the criticism stems from this, I suspect, and spills over into other discussions about what went wrong.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, I hope we all start getting some better news and that the worry and frustration is replaced by positive change.
I too am very frustrated. I assure you, though, that money or useful items sent there are not just "nothing." UMCOR (the United Methodist Council on Relief) is based a bit West of New Orleans. They are reporting that contrary to the usual flood stuff that they send around the world (various "kits" that include things for cleanup as well as personal hygeine) that what's really needed is some basic health kits. They have a huge distribution center there and their overhead on relief funds/efforts is 0% (nada, nothing). It's a good thing to give to agencies that really know how to do stuff and aren't making a buck out of whatever tragedy they are working on.
And giving blood is useful too.
I believe prayer is useful.
And words of encouragement.
Some can do more -- like taking in refugees or organizing relief efforts. And we should support them too.
I love what CT and Dagonee had to say.
And there is ALWAYS a lot of rumor and speculation and people willing to report it and even act on it. A lot of the anarchy we saw in NO was due to people believing the rumors -- like that police were looting grocery stores (um...to get food for people???)
Anyway, I am not going to criticize anyone who is doing anything positive. I didn't really mean to criticize the President. It struck me as funny and I couldn't see the side of it that people like Belle have indicated they heard. I needed to hear that -- that it was not necessarily a flippant remark, but perhaps inspiring.
And I just wish we had a way to get to everyone before they got hit, or before they died waiting for aid. I'm afraid that the perception among many will be that the poor people of this area of the country don't count. True or not, I think there's going to be a huge political price to pay for the deaths and the way things broke down. Even if the country decides (collectively) that this was completely unforeseen and unavoidable, there are going to be a fair number of people who wonder how long the response would've taken if the majority of the stranded people had been richer or whiter, or traditionally GOP supporters, or whatever.
It's going to be a mess.
But the point is (as has been so eloquently stated) what can we do to get to the people who need rescuing, and then shelter and food, and medical treatment. once the situation is more stable and we know we aren't just leaving people to die 'cuz we didn't find them in time, then we'll worry about the fallout.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought I'd bump this thread instead of making a new one.
I heard what GW's mom said and my jaw dropped. Maybe it's just me.
quote: Barbara Bush, who accompanied the former presidents on a tour of the Astrodome complex Monday, said the relocation to Houston is "working very well" for some of the poor people forced out of New Orleans.
"What I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality," she said during a radio interview with the American Public Media program "Marketplace." "And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this is working very well for them."
Living on a cot in the Astrodome is working for them? Because they are poor. I guess when you come from the slums, a cot in the Astrodome, which is filled with 15,000 other people, "works" for you.
You know, I am pretty certain she didn't mean it the way it sounds. I'm sure it was meant as a compliment to Texans, but I sometimes wonder if people ever think about what is coming out of their mouths or if they just talk. (My son is one of those people who doesn't have an edit button, so I understand, but sheesh, the woman has been First Lady and First Mom for quite a while now. You'd think at some point and time, one would have been installed.)
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
While the situation was and is dire, I find myself left with a bad taste in my mouth from hysterical policticians. It doesn't matter which party. Hysterics don't help the situation. Even in the worst of times, if you comport yourself with dignity and respect it will give others hope.
If a first responder had hysterics it would be one thing, but a politician having hysterics is entirely another.
posted
BTW, the senator whose home was destroyed, and who Bush wanted to "sit on his porch, once it was rebuilt," was Trent Lott, who is now leveling accusations at the administration as well.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only reason I bumped this post was so I could comment on BB's statement without starting another thread.
To me, when I initially read what she said, thought it could easily be taken poorly by anyone who thinks that the world is racists and out to get them. I mean, we are talking about a large group of people who think the government actually blew up the flood wall near 17th Street Canal to protect the French Quarter.
To those people, what BB said was "It's scary that the black people all want to stay in Texas. I mean, we've been so hospitable that they say they want to stay! They are so poor that a cot in room with 15,000 other cots is better than what they had. Oh my lord, what are we going to do with all these poor black people?" It's almost like she wishes that Texas wouldn't be quite so hospitable so that they would all leave.
Like I said, I'm sure she intended it completely differently, but you'd think that at this particular point and time in history, she'd know that charges of racism are rampant and that the "underprivileged" are wary of government.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the fear of a mass migration of poor people away from New Orleans to their new host cities is a bit premature. People are saying that they don't want to go back to NO, but honestly, once they get a taste of Texas or the winters in Omaha, or what have you, and start to miss the familiar surroundings (where they were plugged into the social services available, etc., etc.) the vast majority of them will go back. I'm sure of it.
This is a lot of poor people for any city to absorb all at once though, and I can understand the concerns. HUD is prioritizing the housing it controls to handle the flood of evacuees all over the nation, from what I hear. One thing that means is that poor people who have been living in communities around the country are having their "leg up" put on hold so that poor people from the Gulf Coast can have a roof over their heads. As a temporary measure, that will be a great thing and make communities proud to help out in a time of crisis.
But it will probably wear thin if, say, 500 new families below the poverty level establish permanent residence in Omaha, for example.
The hospitality of the host cities is going to wear off eventually. And Federal disaster relief isn't necessarily being promised to the communities that pitch in. They're doing it because it's the right thing to do. But I'm sure none of them are thinking this is for keeps.
But they must all know it's for at least six months.
I assume that the people in the Astrodome will be out of there before the football season is in full swing. I imagine its like what's going on in Omaha -- there's a lot of repossessed or tax-liened buildings scattered around any major city in the US. The city essentially "owns" a lot of that property and can use at least some of it to house people. Some isn't suitable, but there's probably enough housing out there that many cities can absorb an influx of evacuees.
Which might make people in those areas wonder why the city wasn't already doing something to house all the needy who were already there. Sure makes me wonder anyway.
There's a definite pattern at work in the US to discourage "comfort" for the destitute. Not saying we should give stuff for free, but if we can take care of people for a time and give them a way to escape from poverty, isn't it odd that we aren't doing it? Isn't it odd that cities have these untapped resources when they have a huge homeless population already there?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:And Federal disaster relief isn't necessarily being promised to the communities that pitch in. They're doing it because it's the right thing to do. But I'm sure none of them are thinking this is for keeps.
I heard on NPR this evening that Bush declared Utah (and 10 other states) as disaster areas in order to send disaster relief to help those that are helping those from the Gulf. NPR reported that it is expected that most of the money communities are spending to help them will be reimbursed by the federal government.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
It's important to not send some of these urban areas over the edge. Many of our cities have really stretched their social services budgets to the max already and a huge influx of need is likely to mean decreased services for all. Even if the churches and other volunteer organizations step up their efforts. There just aren't enough qualified care-givers, case workers, etc.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bob, they built a new dome (Reliant Stadium) for the Houston Texans, so the one currently housing evacuees is available all season. Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm trying to figure out why the Gov of Louisana and the Mayor of New Orleans still aren't seeming to be on the same page... Seems like a pointless power struggle, why aren't they at the same meetings together at least 70% of the time?? (though I realize more of the state was damaged than just new orleans)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
)
