Jump to content
CrazyBoards.org

Presidents stand united for Haiti


Recommended Posts

Personally, I find it kind of disgusting that Bush, who elected to let 1800 or so people die in New Orleans is pretending to be some sort of compassionate humanitarian.

Agreed! I think he's there for show and it would look bad.

I've always hated him he left obama with all he's shit to clean up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about ignoring the Tsunami? Bush is just generally incapable of empathy.

And did you hear that Limbaugh said that Obama was just trying to "burnish his image with light skinned and dark skinned blacks!" WTF? Not just light skinned blacks, not just dark skinned blacks, but BOTH! Who the fuck makes a distinction like that, except for Rush and Harry Reid? Rush is seriously mentally ill, and I don't say that colloquially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bush couldn't order troops into New Orleans unless he was to invoke the Insurrection Act, which hasn't been used since the Civil War. I'm sorry, but it's in the Constitution.

In general, I have no love for his domestic policy, but no well informed and intellectually serious person can blame him for Katrina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I am well informed about the Constitution, and you are just wrong.

Or are you forgetting Little Rock?

ETA: Not to mention the admission of the black student to a Southern University, where the governor actually blocked his entrance into the door, until the National guard was federalized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I am well informed about the Constitution, and you are just wrong.

Or are you forgetting Little Rock?

ETA: Not to mention the admission of the black student to a Southern University, where the governor actually blocked his entrance into the door, until the National guard was federalized.

Okay, you are indeed correct about that. And, for what it's worth, a bit of research now informs me that there were actually three post Civil War cases of its employment.

Bush Sr utilized the act twice--once after Hurricane Hugo and later during the Rodney King riots. Although it's important to note that in those cases, this was after the governors of the Virgin Islands and California respectively put in requests.

The difference between those cases and that of Katrina is one of political viability as well as cooperation of local and state officials. The second Bush administration had already been under extreme criticism, quite rightfully in my opinion, for civil rights abuses and expansion of government power. The first line of defence regarding such things falls to the state and local government, and the governor initially refused Bush's requests to federalize the National Guard command structure. And the deployment of federal troops on American soil would not have been well received by those who now claim that it was a self-evident thing to do, given the political climate.

I was wrong about that factual point, but my main argument stands--Bush wasn't principally responsible for the handling of Katrina(although he is indeed a douchebag). Although I do think that there needs to be a serious discussion of what to do when local government is incompetent or disabled. Because according to the current structure, the only way the President can take over is through declaring "Insurrection," which is pretty thin legally.

The real problem with Katrina was that Blanco and Nagin were incompetent morons. Checks and balances prevented them from being pushed aside. And although this was a huge problem in practice, I think that checks and balances are important.

If things had happened differently, people would be talking about what a fascist asshole Bush was for sicking stormtroopers on poor black people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...