Acknowledging that there is a difference between throwing money
at a problem (BAD idea) and recognizing a problem, I must admit
SEVERE disappointment last night with the paltry attention paid by
Bush to the greatest natural disaster in this nation's history. For
many, many reasons, INCLUDING federal incompetence through horrible
engineering by the Corps of Engineers, about two-thirds of one of
the world's great cities still lies in ruins. But all Bush could do
was boast about the money already approved for hurricane relief (he
needs to check on how much of it has actually made its way to
victims so far -- VERY very little of it) and then change the
subject to how people in New Orleans and elsewhere all need good
schools, etc. (Huh?) From the day Hurricane Katrina appeared in the
Gulf, notwithstanding all the imbecilic moves by state and local
officials in Louisiana, the Bush administration's response has been
uncaring, incompetent, and obstinately unhelpful. Any budgetary
concerns he has about the brilliant "Baker bill" for a
reconstruction revolving fund are made inconsequential and frankly
hypocritical in light of Bush's veto-less, budget-bloating,
big-government, free-spending record.
In sum, then, in terms of how well the speech dealt with
Louisiana, the speech was so utterly inadequate as to be an
insult.
