Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“Political Issues Snarled Plans for Troop Aid”

From The New York Times:

As New Orleans descended into chaos last week and Louisiana’s governor asked for 40,000 soldiers, President Bush’s senior advisers debated whether the president should speed the arrival of active-duty troops by seizing control of the hurricane relief mission from the governor.

For reasons of practicality and politics, officials at the Justice Department and the Pentagon, and then at the White House, decided not to urge Mr. Bush to take command of the effort. Instead, the Washington officials decided to rely on the growing number of National Guard personnel flowing into Louisiana, who were under Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco’s control.

The debate began after officials realized that Hurricane Katrina had exposed a critical flaw in the national disaster response plans created after the Sept. 11 attacks. According to the administration’s senior domestic security officials, the plan failed to recognize that local police, fire and medical personnel might be incapacitated.

Well, yes and no.  The plan assumed that should first responders be incapacitated, the Governor, too, would be incapacitated, or else that the still-acting Governor, short of first responders, would turn control over to the feds in order to expedite replacements for those incapacited first responders (which has nothing whatever to do with FEMA, who had already pre-staged and was already coordinatng agencies).

Here, Blanco decided to keep control—a decision that hamstrung the Administration legally, as we shall see.

As criticism of the response to Hurricane Katrina has mounted, one of the most pointed questions has been why more troops were not available more quickly to restore order and offer aid. Interviews with officials in Washington and Louisiana show that as the situation grew worse, they were wrangling with questions of federal/state authority, weighing the realities of military logistics and perhaps talking past each other in the crisis.

To seize control of the mission, Mr. Bush would have had to invoke the Insurrection Act, which allows the president in times of unrest to command active-duty forces into the states to perform law enforcement duties. But decision makers in Washington felt certain that Ms. Blanco would have resisted surrendering control, as Bush administration officials believe would have been required to deploy active-duty combat forces before law and order had been re-established.

While combat troops can conduct relief missions without the legal authority of the Insurrection Act, Pentagon and military officials say that no active-duty forces could have been sent into the chaos of New Orleans on Wednesday or Thursday without confronting law-and-order challenges.

But just as important to the administration were worries about the message that would have been sent by a president ousting a Southern governor of another party from command of her National Guard, according to administration, Pentagon and Justice Department officials.

“Can you imagine how it would have been perceived if a president of the United States of one party had pre-emptively taken from the female governor of another party the command and control of her forces, unless the security situation made it completely clear that she was unable to effectively execute her command authority and that lawlessness was the inevitable result?” asked one senior administration official, who spoke anonymously because the talks were confidential.

Officials in Louisiana agree that the governor would not have given up control over National Guard troops in her state as would have been required to send large numbers of active-duty soldiers into the area. But they also say they were desperate and would have welcomed assistance by active-duty soldiers.

And therein lies the rub, as we’ve discussed now on several occasions:  In order for active duty troops (under Posse Comitatus) to have the authority to act in a law enforcement capacity, one of two things must happen:  a) The Governor cede control to federal authorities, which didn’t (and still hasn’t) happened; or b) The President invoke the Insurrection Act (which doesn’t typically apply to looting situations), in which case he would be forcing the Governor out of power against her will, and would be committing a potentially impeachable offense.

“I need everything you have got,” Ms. Blanco said she told Mr. Bush last Monday, after the storm hit.

In an interview, she acknowledged that she did not specify what sorts of soldiers. “Nobody told me that I had to request that,” Ms. Blanco said. “I thought that I had requested everything they had. We were living in a war zone by then.”

By Wednesday, she had asked for 40,000 soldiers.

”I thought that I had requested everything they had”?  Nonsense.  First of, on Monday, New Orleans was manifestly not a “war zone,” which leads me to believe Ms. Blanco’s mental timeline is off a bit.  Second, Blanco is the Governor of a state, and so we must assume she has at least some knowledge of the Constitution and of the powers granted the head of a state.  Therefore, she simply could not have thought she was asking for “everything they had” without first surrendering command control—or else, what she was asking for was active duty military troops who who were legally constrained from working law enforcement.

Both of which scenarios don’t reflect well on the Governor, I’m afraid.

In the discussions in Washington, also at issue was whether active-duty troops could respond faster and in larger numbers than the Guard.

By last Wednesday, Pentagon officials said even the 82nd Airborne, which has a brigade on standby to move out within 18 hours, could not arrive any faster than 7,000 National Guard troops, which are specially trained and equipped for civilian law enforcement duties.

In the end, the flow of thousands of National Guard soldiers, especially military police, was accelerated from other states.

Meaning, if I have this straight, that once Blanco finally asked for additional troops (on Wednesday, via EMAC), additional Guard units from neighboring states pored in to quell the civil unrest—and did so faster than could active military.  And because Guard units under the Governor’s control are allowed to keep the peace, this seems the best course of action.

Still, the plot thickens:

But one senior Army officer expressed puzzlement that active-duty troops were not summoned sooner, saying 82nd Airborne troops were ready to move out from Fort Bragg, N.C., on Sunday, the day before the hurricane hit.

The call never came, administration officials said, in part because military officials believed Guard troops would get to the stricken region faster and because administration civilians worried that there could be political fallout if federal troops were forced to shoot looters.



Louisiana officials were furious that there was not more of a show of force, in terms of relief supplies and troops, from the federal government in the middle of last week. As the water was rising in New Orleans, the governor repeatedly questioned whether Washington had started its promised surge of federal resources.

“We needed equipment,” Ms. Blanco said in an interview. “Helicopters. We got isolated.”

Aides to Ms. Blanco said she was prepared to accept the deployment of active-duty military officials in her state. But she and other state officials balked at giving up control of the Guard as Justice Department officials said would have been required by the Insurrection Act if those combat troops were to be sent in before order was restored.

In a separate discussion last weekend, the governor also rejected a more modest proposal for a hybrid command structure in which both the Guard and active-duty troops would be under the command of an active-duty, three-star general – but only after he had been sworn into the Louisiana National Guard.

[…]

After the hurricane passed New Orleans and the levees broke, flooding the city, it became increasingly evident that disaster-response efforts were badly bogged down.

Justice Department lawyers, who were receiving harrowing reports from the area, considered whether active-duty military units could be brought into relief operations even if state authorities gave their consent – or even if they refused.

The issue of federalizing the response was one of several legal issues considered in a flurry of meetings at the Justice Department, the White House and other agencies, administration officials said.

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales urged Justice Department lawyers to interpret the federal law creatively to help local authorities, those officials said. For example, federal prosecutors prepared to expand their enforcement of some criminal statutes like anti-carjacking laws that can be prosecuted by either state or federal authorities.

On the issue of whether the military could be deployed without the invitation of state officials, the Office of Legal Counsel, the unit within the Justice Department that provides legal advice to federal agencies, concluded that the federal government had authority to move in even over the objection of local officials.

This act was last invoked in 1992 for the Los Angeles riots, but at the request of Gov. Pete Wilson of California, and has not been invoked over a governor’s objections since the civil rights era – and before that, to the time of the Civil War, administration officials said. Bush administration, Pentagon and senior military officials warned that such an extreme measure would have serious legal and political implications.

Bottom line, from what I can tell, is that you have a Governor who doesn’t know the law, is confused about request protocols, and who—in spite of all this— refuses to give up the authority necessary to make it legally possible for her to get what it is she wanted and her state needed.

For its part, the Administration had to decide, in light of those facts, how best to overcome the legal obstacles thrown up by Ms Blanco’s dithering and recalcitrance. 

At least, I think that’s what I’m getting out of this.

Because the fact is, it’s very late, and I’m very tired, so I may be very wrong. 

Discuss.

****

update:  Glenn has more.  Meanwhile, Andrew Sullivan is completing his transformation into a Kos Diarist:

It seems to me that the context and the full quote are important. The context shows that both president Bush and governor Blanco screwed up in equal measure.

Not sure how he figures that:  every move the President and his staff made was predicated on a Blanco decision.  Had she known the law or, less broadly, the mandates of her own job, it seems to me that she would have (via EMAC) been able to expedite the arrival of additional Guard troops under her command who, unlike active duty forces, would’ve had the legal capacity to maintain law and order.

63 Replies to ““Political Issues Snarled Plans for Troop Aid””

  1. rls says:

    “Nobody told me that I had to request that,” Ms. Blanco said.

    There it is.  Right out of her mouth.  Does anyone who can read that, still not think that this woman is clueless?

    She needed someone to tell her, “Get out of the way and let the adults handle this.”

  2. Mike C. says:

    Think that statement is going to receive the same kind of play that those by Brown and Chertoff got?

  3. Mike C. says:

    That excerpt of Sullivan just answered my question.

  4. tongueboy says:

    Puts on tinfoil hat:

    Perhaps the Democratic governor of Louisiana was trying to lure the President into committing an impeachable offense.

    Takes off tinfoil hat

    Puts on Wadard hat:

    My reading of the article indicates that Smirky McChimperton is still 100% at fault for the desperate plight of his fellow countrymen in Louisiana. Perhaps things would have been different had he taken Fidel Castro up on his generous offer of 1,500 doctors. Any substantive rebuttal will be considered both fucking rude, uninteresting, and the rebutter should not be engaged or touched with a stick. And the rebutter has a neon sign on his/her forehead that says loser.

    Takes off Wadard hat

  5. Emily Latilla says:

    Why does everyone keep picking on this poor woman?  She did the best she can, just everybody keeps confusing her.  The people that won’t tell her what’s going on are to blame.

    And another thing, why do they keep sending the corpse of engineers down there to fix these things?  Wouldn’t engineers who are still alive do a better job?

  6. David R. Block says:

    Blanco is a typical Louisiana Democratic Governor. When not demonstrating incompetence, she exhibits corruption.

    TW: didn’t, as in “She didn’t have a clue. Somebody please buy her one.”

  7. amyc says:

    read the whole article, and marvel at the fact that they wrote it to be as damaging to the president and as “fair” to the governor as possible.  stunning

    “college” as in did this woman actually graduate from an accredited college?

    And Emily “corpse of engineers” lol maybe that’s who the press wants to photograph.  zombie engineers!  careful though, that unnatural pallor and scrawny physique may not prove cadaver status in an engineer (I do have a master’s in a hard science, so that’s a joke from a fellow geek)

  8. Slublog says:

    “Nobody told me that I had to request that,” Ms. Blanco said. “I thought that I had requested everything they had. We were living in a war zone by then.”

    Maybe I just haven’t entered the same realm of batshit crazy as Sullivan, but how exactly does the full quote and context show Bush fault?  Seems to me it strengthens the case for incompetence on the part of the governor – she didn’t know how to perform an important duty of her office.

    Cripes, that Sullivan can hold a grudge, can’t he?

  9. Lisa says:

    Too bad the news of Michael Brown’s removal is going to overshadow ALL reports of LA’s incompetence.

    Word:  “because” as in “of the hippocracy”

  10. Jeff Goldstein says:

    You are so rigth, Lisa. Just caught Chris Wallace on FOXNews, and all he could talk about was Brown, his resume, Chertoff’s “spin” and how rude he was to the press, etc.

    I can easily see how the McMartin pre-school thing—not to mention the Salem witch trials—took hold in this country.

    Most people are sanctimonious scapegoaters.  How fucking sad.

  11. Neil S says:

    What’s truly tragic is that people of LA had the opportunity to put Bobby Jindal in office – in large part based on votes from the people in New Orleans who have been most affected by this catastrophe.  Mr. Jindal’s intelligence and track record are extraordinary…hopefully the people of LA will have a chance to rectify their mistake in the next election (Run, Bobby, run).

  12. Mike C. says:

    “I ran out of gas. I, I had a flat tire. I didn’t have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn’t come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake. A terrible flood. Locusts. IT WASN’T MY FAULT, I SWEAR TO GOD.”

  13. Neil S says:

    there’s a “but didn’t” missing in the post above.

  14. Phinn says:

    First of, on Monday, New Orleans was manifestly not a “war zone,”

    Well, no more than usual, at least.

  15. shank says:

    The gov was holding the keys.  If she’s too stupid to know the chain of command in a disaster, she should find a new job.  I mean, not that she needs to have it memorized, but you think she would have beefed up on the material when the hurricane took aim on her state.  Jesus.

  16. leelu says:

    Incident Command 101:

    The first responder on the scene is the de facto Incident Commander.  He or she may hand off command to other responders, but that has to be explicit.  Thus, if I’m the first responder at a car crash, I’m the incident commander.  When the police and paramedics arrive, you bet I’m gonna hand off – they’re better trained and equipped than I am.

    Blanco is either ignorant or incompetent if she doesn’t understand this simple idea.

    TW: “building”, as in “building a case for a new governor…”

  17. Rick says:

    I’ll withhold judgement on Governor Blanco until Azael swoops in to clear up our manifest confusion over Smirkybushitlerchimp’s true culpability.

    Cordially…

  18. bennett says:

    This has been a “perfect storm” for the democrats.  We all need to face it, no matter what Bush or the Feds did, we would be hearing complaints from all of the usual quarters.  And I am still looking for any concrete information about mistakes the Feds actually made.  Does Brown faking his resume count?  I know in certain circles it will.  This crap has become so predictable, and its disheartening that so many people buy it.

  19. Paul Zrimsek says:

    Hey, that Wadard hat is even cooler than the Eschacon hoodies!

  20. Patrick the Bryant says:

    How is she living in a war zone? She’s safely ensconced in her mansion in Baton Rouge, isn’t she?

  21. Lew Clark says:

    You don’t realize how damning this is for Bush.  Blanco asked him for everything he had.  As President of the richest, most powerful nation in the world, he’s got a lot of stuff.  Not only a military, but trees, wild buffalo, Air Force 1, the U.S. Mint, Mt. Rushmore, the Virgin Islands, Samoa, etc., etc.  Not to mention Laura and the twins.  He didn’t come close to giving her what she asked for when she asked for everything!

  22. Old Dad says:

    Let me see if I’ve got this right.

    A sub cat 5 hurricane kicks hell out of the Gulf Coast and submerges a major city built largely below sea level–it’s the President’s fault.

    The mayor of this incredibly beautiful and incredibly corrupt city performs abysmally througout the crisis. The incompetent governor of the state does even worse–it’s the President’s fault.

    A huge unweildy bureaucracy communicates poorly and reacts slowly–it’s the President’s fault.

    Idiots mostly on the left but also on the right immeidately after the disaster open their pie holes and spout nonsense about things that they know absolutely nothing about. Worse yet, any average moron could plainly see that the facts would not and could not be known much less understood for quite some time–it’s the President’s fault.

    As the murky facts begin to surface it becomes clear that prognosticators were (in no particular order) wrong, liars, cynical opportunists, ghouls, hacks, buffoons, etc.–it’s the President’s fault.

    Meanwhile, the adults of America, off camera, work tirelessly and with great skill to help–it’s the President’s fault.

  23. Mikey says:

    Leelu:  Not everyone has taken an ICS course.  (Did ICS 100 a few years back); and it is darn clear this governor didn’t and clearly had no clue what was going on.  I wonder if she just froze and everything that was said to her, every option and outcome that was explained to her, just went in one ear and out the other?  She wanted someone else to do the job.  She didn’t want to cede the authority to get the help.  It isn’t a difficult thing to explain.  “If you want A you must do B.” “Why?” “That’s the law.” “Why?” “Because the law is written that way.” “Why?” etc., etc., etc.

    P.S. – Leelu, I’m not knocking you.  Just to be clear.

    Word: More.  “The more that comes out about this the worse Louisiana will look.”

  24. tongueboy says:

    Ron Popeil proudly presents:

    Wadard’s Magic Hat!

    Use the mysterious force of transnational progressive dogmatism and the sharp pointy tip of your hat to confound your enemies! Instantly erect an army of straw to shield your non-sequitors from the minions of Amerikkkan stormtroopers! Spin golden logical fallacies to spellbind the chickenhawks of war! Assume facts not in evidence on par with the best wizards of Middle Earth and Avalon! Change the subject like the pros! All yours for only three easy payments of $49.99US!

    Magicalwandnotincludedbatteriesnotincludednoguaranteeofperformanceisexpressorimpliedyourresultsmayvary

  25. ss says:

    For its part, the Administration had to decide, in lieu of those facts, how best to overcome the legal obstacles thrown up by Ms Blanco’s dithering and recalcitrance.

    I think you meant, “in light of,” yes?

  26. topsecretk9 says:

    Thank you Jeff..

    Now that Brown has been ousted is it too early to begin the sounding bells calling for Blanco’s head? Not too early for me, as it becomes increasing clear that at almost every step in this disaster (pre and post) this women’s utter incompetence contributed to and directly affected the totality of this FUBAR scene. Brown may have been a schmuck, but I guarantee had the LA governor been Haley Barbour we would not have known this, Additionally, I’ll be galled if DEMs use Brown leaving as a TOTAL cover for Blanco.

    Let start the call!

  27. Tman says:

    I’m beginning to wonder how much of this was actually Nagins fault, seeing as how he had to defer the big decisions to Blanco and it seems quite clear that she was not up to the task. During those two horrible days Nagin seemed to me like the only one who was somewhat Guilianiesque in his tone. Maybe not in his actions (the busses, the Superdome/Convention Center fiasco) but he did sound like he was trying to do something. Especially the way he spoke about the meeting between Bush and Blanco saying “just figure this out, nor more meetings”.

    Or he could be covering his ass, I’m not sure.

    I can’t imagine how many pounds of Zanax this lady is taking to get to sleep at night. Does anyone think she’ll get impeached?

  28. Nick says:

    I believe the phrase you’re looking for here is “damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.”

  29. RG says:

    Jeff, everyone,

    A friend of mine pointed me to this law last night and basically said the President hadn’t followed guidelines laid out in this document.  I don’t know if this even has relevance to the situation.

  30. SaveFarris says:

    Perhaps the Democratic governor of Louisiana was trying to lure the President into committing an impeachable offense.

    Trust me, she’s not that smart.

  31. cirby says:

    Tman:

    Oh, a huge amount is Nagin’s fault.  The complete lack of preparedness by his city is squarely in his lap.  No backup for the police comm system, no real evacuation plan (or knowledge in how the one they had was supposed to work), and a complete failure in how to control what resources he had in hand.

    If he hadn’t screwed up so thoroughly, half of the problems we’ve seen would have been non-issues.

  32. bennett says:

    OT- Did anyone else catch Nightline last night?  Koppel is walking through the French Quarter, and interviewed a local who was holding out.  When asked how they were surviving, the local said “we have plenty of food, water, beer, and energy drinks.” When aksed how they were flushing the toilets, he said they had been flushing them with draft beer, because it was pumped wtih an air system and didn’t need electricity.  Classic!  Only in New Orleans.

  33. rls says:

    RG,

    That’s been batterred around on some of the legal blogs.  Argument basically is that this act trumps the Posse Comitatus law.  Not so.  It says right in the act itself that actions must be in accordance with Federal Law.

  34. Rob Crocker says:

    As for the Nagin/Blanco breakdown it looks like it goes this way.

    Nagin gets a big fat kick in the backside for screwing the pooch on the evacuation.  All those flooded busses and lack of provisions at the shelters of last resort land squarely on his shoulders.

    Blanco gets the kick for screwing up the Fed/State interface for the activities after the city started flooding.

    The Bush administration gets a kick for being tone deaf, especially the FEMA head, and giving dumb interviews.

  35. sensible mom says:

    So Blanco is quoted as saying she didn’t know what types of soldiers to ask for, but then later we’re told that she knew that in order to get active duty soldiers into the area, she would need to give up control of the Guard, and she was prepared to do that, but she balked at doing it. 

    Dear Lord, which is it?  If a republican answered questions like that they’d be ripped to shreds.  How did such nonsense get past an editor?  Why wasn’t this article re-written with the headline “Confounded Governor Snarled Military Help After Storm?”

  36. topsecretk9 says:

    I live in Sacramento, surrounded by 2 rivers…levees abound.

    I can say with all confindence that our Dem mayor would act far worse than Naggin in a similar flood, my Governor would act far better than Dem Gove Blanco and Democrats would all be calling for Arnold’s head.

    Ignoring Blanco failures says a lot about the Democrat party, THEY don’t even expect the elected officials do perform.

  37. Mike C. says:

    For all of you criticizing Governor Blanco, please stop exploiting this disaster for political gain. Now that President Bush has begun to do the right thing it’s time to dispense with the blame game, come together as a country and return to the hard work of toppling the Bu…, uh, I mean, aiding the victims and restoring the Democr…, er, Gulf Coast and city of New Orleans.

  38. quiggs says:

    I think maybe we’re letting Blanco off too easy by crediting her with mere incompetence and panic, etc.  Maybe she knew damn well what the legal score was, but resisted anyway because in the past she’s noticed that whenever the Feds come into town, her friends and “associates” end up facing criminal indictments.  And even aside from past crimes, she sure doesn’t want a lot of “clean government” types hanging around when the billions of dollars in recovery aid starts flowing in.  That would sure ruin the party.

  39. hey says:

    speaking of bobby J (R LA), he had a nice editorial in the wsj wednesday (i think) talking about the response to the hurricane. he didn’t exactly say that blanco is a whiny idiot who isn’t fit to tie her own shoes and you voters need to vote for me next time around, but it was pretty politely viciously. which is what happens when you get a harvard educated whiz kid pissed at you and gunning for your job. sucks to be governor blanco now.

    too bad that bobby j is in congress rather than the gov’s mansion. cause he wouldn’t be there, but rather directing relief efforts along with the feds. he did after all turn around louisiana public health care when he was in his 20s!!! He’s a superstar and a good shot to be the US’ first indian preseident.

  40. JJ says:

    Section 331 of the Insurrection Act says,

    “Whenever there is an insurrections in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened…”

    The provisions of this statute can only be implemented upon the request of the Governor or legislature of the state in question.  Bush asked Blanco to federalize the relief effort and she said no.  Therefore, this provision couldn’t be invoked.

    Section 332 allows the President to send in federal troops

    Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States….

    This section might apply but the looting clearly was not a “rebellion against the authority of the Untied States.  If the 82nd Airborne had been sent in and they had shot some of the looters, I guarantee you that there would have been a lawsuit filed by relatives which would have challenged implementation of this act.  There is no chance that the Bush Administration would have succeeded in showing that this was an “unlawful obstruction” or “assemblage” given that the looting was conducted by individuals and small groups acting independently.  They were not organized nor were they attempting to overthrow the government.

    Section 333 authorizes the preseident to send in federal troops

    “to suppress, in a State….domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.”

    This might justify sending in the 82nd Airborne, but I don’t think it was even remotely a good idea.  Furthermore, the looting wasn’t “violence”, it was a crime against property.

    It is kind of hilarious that the same people who now deride Bush for not sending troops in violation of numerous laws (not to mention the principle of separation of powers) are the same ones who are bitching about the Patriot Act giving the government too much power to invade our privacy.  In the befuddled mind of a liberal the government should be prevented from searching business records after obtaining a subpoena from a judge in the course of a terrorism investigation, but the President should have the power to send troops anywhere upon his/her subjective determination that it is justified.  Notice, no one is advocating that the President obtain prior approval from a judge as in the case of the business records provision of the Patriot Act.

    The most important point in this case, however, is that we no know the 82nd Airborne wasn’t needed.  The Red Cross had seven tractor trailers outside New Orleans and ready to distribute food and water to the people in the Super Dome.  In a state of emergency the Red Cross becomes an agent of FEMA.  So FEMA had resources there to help on the very first day of the crisis.  The Louisiana National Guard had 7,000 troops available, but for some reason they were not deployed in significant numbers until Friday Sept. 2nd.  Thirdly, we now know that there was a way out of town over a bridge to the west but the Gretna Police Dept. prevented the evacuees from crossing on foot.  Therefore, most of the evacuees could have gotten themselves out of New Orleans which would have made the relocation to shelters easier and those who needed medical help could have gotten it.

    We didn’t need federal troops.  There were sufficient resources in south Lousiana to take care of the evacuation.  The state and local governments not ony failed to carry out their own evacuation plans, they actively prevented the evacuee situation from being resolved until the fourth day.

  41. benrand says:

    This is just another episode of liberals and lefties blaming others for their own huge fuckups.

    “How was I supposed to know I had to evacuate people? It’s not my problem, someone else can take care of it, I have other things to attend to, like making sure my illegal slush funds and priceless art collections I was given by crime bosses survive this flood I had no hand in exacerbating”

    Nope, not me…

  42. Not a Democrat Governor From Louisiana says:

    What do you mean I was supposed to take care of it?  What the hell do you think I pay taxes for?

  43. Salt Lick says:

    I was listening to Hannity radio about 30 minutes ago (I do it so Jeff won’t have to) and heard guest Newt Gingrich say it might be time to pass laws granting the President of the United States the right to overule state governors.  He said the President should have the authority to say, Mr/Ms. Governor, you are acting irresponsibly, so I must now take over the situation.

  44. Jeff Goldstein says:

    ANd if Hannity were really a conservative – and not just a GOP cheerleader, he’d have told Gingrinch that looking to rewrite the Constitution to strengthen the federal government is a huge mistake, and that you’d simply be taking power away from voters on the local level—who should learn that elections have consequences.

    Buffoons like Hannity and Lott care about power; they should care about the Constitution.

    Gingrich?  Well, he’s a power hungry guy, but he’s generally a friend of conservatism, so I’ll give him a pass this time.

  45. tongueboy says:

    JJ, the best summary of the legal component I’ve seen yet.

    Salt Lick, how did Hannity follow-up, if he followed up at all?

  46. RG says:

    Thanks, rls.  I didn’t think it had much to do with anything…

  47. ed says:

    Hmmmm.

    A happy, and quick, alternative would have been for Blanco to simply ask the President:

    “What do I have to do to get troops and relief here faster?”

    Just asking that one question would have probably solved all the issues.

    Hmmm.  You don’t always get the government you deserve.  But you generally do get the government you elect.

  48. The Lost Dog says:

    I’m sure Bush LEGALLY could have found some way to send in troops, but can you imagine the shitstorm that would have followed? The Fucking Assholes (notice that I no longer call them Democrats) would be raising a stink that would make what is happening now seem like a love-in. I normally laugh at the Fucking Assholes, but I am coming to a point where when I see Pelosi or Reid on my TV, I want to jump through the screen and tear their throats out. I can’t believe that such pieces of human garbage lead the Democratic party. No, that’s not true. It’s not hard to believe at all. These cretins are now climbing on the backs of the dead to raise funds for their party. I would not be surprised if, when I flushed the toilet, I caught a glimpse of Chucky-ucky Schumer waving at me from the toilet paper in the bowl.

    Jesus! I’m so mad that I am beginning to write like a KosKid. Now THAT’S scary…

    TW: growing – as in something the Democrats stopped doing in the eigth grade

  49. ahem says:

    Yeah, that’s whatcha need: permission for the President to steamroll over the state government based on a perception of incompetence. (Slapping sound) “Get a grip, Kathy!”

    And what would these objective, dispassionate, legal–and what’s more, universally endorsed–justifications for such a law consist of?

    Right, they don’t exist.

  50. BLT in CO says:

    No, Jeff’s right.  Elections have consequences and if those in power don’t discharge their duties and instead allow harm to come to their constituents, the people have the option to replace them.  A duty, actually.

    I’d say the people in Louisiana have grounds for a recall election at this point.  But we’ll see if the MSM digs around and finds enough mismanagement and corruption to arouse a typically sleepy electorate to action.  I wouldn’t bet on it, sadly.

    And my spamword?  VERY oddly it’s my first name.  Hmmmm.

  51. Mike C. says:

    I don’t know, BLT. Corrupt government has been an open secret in LA at least since Huey Long. I lived in Baton Rouge for a couple years in the 70’s and it was just accepted as a fact of life by the locals that every politician was on the take. It wouldn’t take a lot of effort for the MSM to uncover it. Whether they even look for it or continue their obsession with Bush is hard to say. And even if they do, I think that it’s been so ingrained in the culture down there that the people may not even care.

  52. mph says:

    Um, I’m really confused.  Up until a week ago, the TV always told me that Bush was a power hungry fascist dictator.  Since then, it keeps telling me that Bush is a spineless pussy for obeying the Constitution and respecting the rights of state and local officials.

    Fucking TV.  I think I need a repairman.

  53. Nahanni says:

    Andrew Sullivan is like Charly in “Flowers for Algernon”.

    He has had his brief period of lucidity and now has fallen back to his natural state of diminished intellectual capacity.

    I pay no more attention to him then my tin foil hat wearing card carrying member of the Green party co worker who told me last week that “Chimpy” had the levees blown to make more money for Halliburton.

  54. Salt Lick says:

    “Salt Lick, how did Hannity follow-up, if he followed up at all?”

    Something like, “You’re a great American, Mr. Speaker, and a great friend of this show, and we respect you and SEANHANNITYSEANHANNITYSEANHANNITYSEANHANNITY.”

    Honestly, he didn’t pursue the implications at all.

  55. Old Grouch says:

    We can expect to hear more suggestions like Gingerich’s.

    The NOLA mess demonstrates the hazards that disorganized/corrupt/incompetent state or local governments pose to the rest of the country (to the tune of $100B and counting), just as 9/11 demonstrated the hazards of corrupt/tyrannical foreign states (or the political movements they support/permit).

    The trick will be to find a way to reduce the potential for damage to the rest of us without federalizing everything.  It won’t be easy.

  56. Tink says:

    A good description of Posse Comitatus and the Stafford act in laymans terms written by a serving member of the military

    here.

    Had he sent in federal troops (for law enforcement)without the permission of the Governor, it’s not only the President that would have faced a veritable shitstorm.

  57. DWPittelli says:

    How can we believe Blanco’s excuse (ignorance) when “the governor also rejected a more modest proposal for a hybrid command structure in which both the Guard and active-duty troops would be under the command of an active-duty, three-star general – but only after he had been sworn into the Louisiana National Guard.”?

    Isn’t it clear that she was obsessed with avoiding any power center other than her own?

  58. This still doesn’t absolve Bush, it just means he had Karl Rove controlling Blanco with some sort of mind control device.

    The alternative explanation is that the woman making the decisions for Louisiana is actually one of Rove’s energy clones, and the real governor is being held in ChimpyBushHitlers evil estate in Anbar Province, the one he shares will Osama bin Laden…

    Or we have yet another criminally incompetent Democrat, but what are the odds of that?

  59. The more we learn, the clearer it is that the President was doing all he could to deal with the situation both before and after, but was frustrated at every turn by Blanco’s utter incompetence.

    Impeach Blanco.

  60. Obviously, Bush was in the wrong here.  He should have sent in active-duty troops, and have had them stand Blanco and Nagin up against a wall as their first act.

    If he had, Ken and Azael would have thrown themselves on articles of impeachment to preserve so manly a man from undeserved calumny.  Right, guys?

    TW:  john.  Obviously, this is my lucky day.

  61. Did you see this video of Blanco:

    http://thepoliticalteen.net/2005/09/12/blancocnndaybreak/ ?

    She is caught on camera on Wednesday saying to her press secretary, “I really need to call for the military and I should have started that in the first call.”

    She’d been saying that she has asked for military help.  So reporters ask her exactly when she made that request.  She can’t remember.  She then goes back to the ‘but I asked for everything,’ argument.  The reporter has to explain the law to her, and she finally admits that she did not actually ask for troops until Wednesday (after getting caught on camera I’m sure).

  62. DADvocate says:

    Deputy Headmistress, you got it right. Saw the video. Blanco doesn’t have a clue and Nagin could just stand and scream like child in a complete panic.

  63. Larry says:

    I see. The White House could have helped New Orleans, but didn’t want to yell at poor Blanco. Mr. “Bring It On” couldn’t fight with Blanco over the phone (and in the media) to what he knew really needed to be done.

    Pathetic.

    I guess the “W” stands for Wimp after all.

Comments are closed.