Very, very sad bloviating. Here's a devastating critique, citing the state of Louisiana and New Orleans' own disaster-preparedness documents, that shows that Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin bear chief responsibility for the initial failures after the hurrican.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007219

And please, without calling anyone names, develop a coherent, logical response to this article.

Oh, and another thing about your obsession with poll numbers. Popularity is not a measure of power. In the late '90s, President Clinton's approval rating stayed well above 60%, even after he was impeached. But Mr. Clinton had almost no clout. Name a single Clinton initiative of his second term that will matter to Americans 50 years from now.

A true mesure of power is who controls congress and who gets to name two (possibly three or four) justices to the Supreme Court. A Bush aide recently said (quoted in WSJ): "The difference is between polls in the 40s and changing history and being in the 60s and twiddling your thumbs. We'll take the 40s. "

Why do I feel like whatever Bush finds out was done wrong is nothing Halliburton can't fix for a price?

Hey Chet - Fuck You. Go somewhere else to spew your "glory to bush" shit. You people that swallow the lies and the utterly dishonest spin coming out of rove's office make me physically ill. pres dickhead let the country down, yet again, big time. FEMA blew it, as planned by your leader. Now you attempt to shift blame, but it ain't working this time.
Go somewhere else, where you are not despised.

OJ is just a trashy wing-wing rag. They form their opinions based on extremists talking points, not on facts.

WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Pursuant to a September 7 request by Representative John Conyers to review the law and legal accountability relating to Federal action in response to Hurricane Katrina, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) issued a report today about whether the Governor of Louisiana took the necessary and timely steps needed to secure disaster relief from the federal government. The report unequivocally concludes that she did.

Congressman Conyers issued the following statement:

"This report closes the book on the Bush Administration's attempts to evade accountability by shifting the blame to the Governor of Louisiana for the Administration's tragically sluggish response to Katrina. It confirms that the Governor did everything she could to secure relief for the people of Louisiana and the Bush Administration was caught napping at a critical time."

In addition to finding that "...it would appear that the Governor did take the steps necessary to request emergency and major disaster declarations for the State of Louisiana in anticipation of Hurricane Katrina. (p.11)" The report found that:

-- All necessary conditions for federal relief were met on August 28. Pursuant to Section 502 of the Stafford Act, "(t)he declaration of an emergency by the President makes Federal emergency assistance available," and the President made such a declaration on August 28. The public record indicates that several additional days passed before such assistance was actually made available to the State;

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=53236

Some this might be true, but some of the claims made are outright horseshit. Claiming the governer failed to make a timely request for SPECIFIC aid? Oh, so she didn't very specifically enumerate every very specific need? Can we split hairs any thinner? ANd of course the vauge claim that Blanco failed to take charge. I love comments like that. I'm sorry, but while there are facts mentioned to support the claims, a lot of this claptrap is just opinions, pure and simple. A lot of inconvienent facts also aren't mentioned to boot. But you know what? If the Gov. and mayor screwed up bad, run 'em out of town. Let them get their just desserts. My political affilation dosen't prevent me from seeking responsability, even from my own party. It still is ever so laughable how desperate people are to make them the out and out scapegoats.

Hey badgervan, might I humbly suggest being more civil? (Boy, that sounded snooty, not my intent) I only ask that because it robs the opposition of an often used arguement, that 'we' have no leg to stand on so we simply resort to namecalling and the like. Being civil means they have to try out argue us on factually grounds, somthing the opposition isn't very good at. Or you can just lay it on them, most of them really don't care what we have to say so we may as well keep things simple and direct.

No apologies. We have been way too polite with these dishonest bush enablers for too long. I despise liars, and I despise the bushies for what they are doing to our country.
Howard Dean and Paul Hackett have the right idea - let 'em have it. Speak truth, and speak it loudly and even rudely. Being "nice" to these sycophants hasn't been working too well, as I assume you've noticed.

1. Timely
   
2. Strategery
   
3. Webb wins
   
4. Huh?
   
5. Bunnypants in Bagdad
   
6. Outage
   
7. Filthy Lucre Watch
   
8. Playing the numbers
   
9. My letter to Countdown
   
10. Jefferson's Nigerian Scams