In the crazy world in which we live, a blog looking to make sense of it all.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Who is Ray Nagin?

That is the question that is asked by a good article from Michelle Roberts of the Associated Press, regarding Mayor Nagin running for re-election in New Orleans this month.

Most Americans never even heard of this man until the Hurricane Katrina disaster late last August. And for a while, it was a name you heard every day.

The article covers his pre-mayoral resume fairly good and I even learned a few things about him. Though he has an MBA from Tulane University and was a top executive at Cox Communications, I am not very impressed with his performance as mayor with the Katrina disaster. From what I've seen and read, I don't really think he was prepared to deal with the matter before, during and after it.

Days before the hurricane, as reported from an investigation of the Wall Street Journal, President Bush pushed Mayor Nagin and Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco to complete documents so the Federal government could have a leg up to send in relief efforts (the Federal government cannot come in unless the local governments request it). Both, Nagin and Blanco refused. Finally, before Hurricane Katrina even hit, President Bush declared New Orleans a disaster area. Why did they refuse to sign documents requesting help? It was a political maneuver; they would appear as weak leaders if they were to get a head start on asking for Federal assistance.

More previously, New Orleans accepted Federal tax dollars to be used to reinforce its levee system. Somehow, the money was used for other purposes and the levees remained as is.

But let's not forget about the predetermined plans for evacuation for when this situation would arrive. It was not implemented. Scores of school buses that were to be used to evacuate those who needed help and could not leave on their own remained unused, parked idle in a parking lot. In addition, a CNN reporter (forget his name) discovered that a train that was scheduled to depart from New Orleans asked the mayor's office if they would like the train to take on extra passengers for evacuation efforts. The mayor's office claimed that that would not be necessary.

Then the storm hit. The levees broke. The city was in shambles. Mayor Nagin threw his little temper tantrum on camera, cussing out Federal and state officials on the whereabouts of aid. Then on MLK day, Nagin declared that New Orleans would again become a "chocolate city." Good Grief!

And now Mr. Nagin is running for re-election against a vast array of other candidates.

Common Sense of it All: There is enough blame to go around on the disaster relief effort from Katrina, but I think Ray Nagin should shoulder a large portion of it. Had the man kept his cool, followed predetermined contingency plans for evacuation, used acquired funds to strengthen levees, asked for Federal help instead of being too arrogant, a lot of this disaster could be avoided (and saved the taxpayer some dollars). Maybe the people of New Orleans should write in Rudolf Giuliani's name for mayor.

11 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sctobrien says,

A few months ago the Atlantic magazine had an essay about FEMA and how the Feds blew it. The essay was written by Richard Clarke and he started it by seemingly writing an "imagine this" piece and described an ideal description of how the Federal Government should have responded prior to Katrina hitting. He wrote about buses to transport people, trucks full of food, ice and water and of medical people standing by.

He concluded by telling the reader that such a response by the Federal Government has happend in the past - one guess where and when? Yes, in Florida just prior to the Presidential Election.

Yes, there is plenty of blame to go around, but what is a state, muncipality or local government supposed to do when hit with an obvious disaster that completely overwhelms them? Yes, rely on the Federal Government for help.

April 17, 2006 12:33 AM

 
Blogger BJ Aberle said...

Scatterbrain,
Yes rely on the Federal Government.........But you have to ask for the help first. It is not the Feds job to do everything.

The Feds:
"Hey Nagin, Blanco.....you guys need help? you good?....we got stuff if you need stuff"

Nagin and Blanco:
"Naw......I think we're good. It sure is getting windy here.... but we're good, thank's"

The Feds:
"You know, all you have to do is say the word and we can get stuff to you ASAP."

Nagin and Blanco:
"Rest assured, when we want your help, we'll ask."

Scatter....you miss your own obvious point. The municipality and local government should have been MORE prepared than they were. They had planned contingencies that were not implemented. The main communications infrastructure relied totally on the existing terrestrial lines. Hello!?!?! If a hurricane destroys a city, do you think the cell towers and telephone poles will still be there? Is this the Feds job? Do you want the Feds to hold our hands on everything? Yes there is blame to go around, but I think it is more than fair to lay most of it at the incompetence of Nagin and Blanco.

April 17, 2006 1:22 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ray Nagin and George Bush, both MBA's, blew it big time. They deserve each other.

April 17, 2006 5:15 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Scotobrien says...

Let's see.....a person that goes by the name of "BJ" calls me "Scatterbrain"?

One thing you also left out in your posting is that one of the reasons Blanco and Nagin would not sign off on what the Bushies wanted was because buried deep in the red tape was a caveat giving a pass of any blame toward the Fed Govt.

And again, you miss the larger point - when a disaster is so large it will overwhelm local resources, then what entity should step in?

Also, if NO had been Florida and this an election year and the folks in NO's not poor people, reactions certainly would have been different.

April 17, 2006 11:38 PM

 
Blogger BJ Aberle said...

"One thing you also left out in your posting is that one of the reasons Blanco and Nagin would not sign off on what the Bushies wanted was because buried deep in the red tape was a caveat giving a pass of any blame toward the Fed Govt."

Not only did I miss it, but so did just about every news outlet. From where did you hear that? Franken?

"Also, if NO had been Florida and this an election year and the folks in NO's not poor people, reactions certainly would have been different."

Factual that statement is not.
Speculative and misguided at best.

"when a disaster is so large it will overwhelm local resources, then what entity should step in?"

Like I said, the Federal Government needs to step in. Are you suggesting that You would be fine with the Bush Administration usurping power and intervening with out due process? That is tyranical. The Fed Gov. can not and should not be everybodies watchdog. But who knows.....maybe that's what you want. I don't want to discredit Richard Clarke ad hominum, but, after reading his book Against All Enemies it seems he has a pretty big ax to grind with the Bushies. I didn't get the feeling I was getting an objective point of view.

April 18, 2006 10:53 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sctobrien says:

Just love how you respond to everything with juvenile sarcasm - are you sure you really aren't "Vonster"?

I cannot recall exactly where I read it first that the Feds wanted the locals in LA to relinquish any blame from FEMA's inaction, though it was heavily reported on. That is one reason why Blanco and Nagin resisted. It's out there, just have to find it.

And here is the link to Richard Clarke's piece in the Atlantic
detailing Bush's pre-hurricane response to Florida - take the time to read it and tell your readers then if it is speculative if the reponse would have been different if Florida had been LA.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200511/richard-clarke-on-fema

And I have no idea what you are throwing around "due process" for. It is an entirely different concept. We are talking about a disaster that completely overwhelmed the resources at the state and local level. I'm not talking about a president ordering in military troops to take over the policing of a city or suspending the US Constitution, but for providing aid to locals when an obvious disaster is headed our way.

And as for Clarke's axe to grind - have you ever been the member of an organization that completely fails in its mission? There is only so much some can take when it comes to incompetence before being forced to speak out. I'm certain the man has an axe to grind because if anyone goes back an looks at the pieces of the puzzle before 9/11 (especially those trained in these occupations) the writing should have been clearly written and readable. But what do we get? Self-serving bureaucrats like Condi Rice stating that no one anticipated terrorists flying planes into buildings, when we later find out that there was an actual daily security briefing stating it was believed Bin Laden was planning just that.

As for Al Franken - I'll put up his honesty against any of your favorded children of O'Reilly and Limbaugh any day.

April 18, 2006 2:13 PM

 
Blogger BJ Aberle said...

This is fun....
And I have no idea what you are throwing around "due process" for. It is an entirely different concept.
Scott, we are a nation of laws. Laws must be followed. Stepping in over Nagin and Blanco would not be following the process. I can only imagine what you would be screaming about if Bush would have actually done that.

"He's a racist, sexist tyrant!!! Who does he think he is!?!??! He doesn't trust a black man or a woman to do the job!!"

Once again.... I will state. The Feds can not watch over everything. And they cannot prevent natural disasters. When Nagin says something the President has to believe he is being told the truth. Seriously, what leader is not going to ask for help because of “I’m gonna get blamed.” If our leaders care more about that than the people they serve, that should be a clear indication of their incompetence.

Let me know when you find that "article." I'm sure it will be on somebody’s "reputable" blog.

I like how you automatically think of me as a zombiotic lurch of the likes of O'Reilly and Limbaugh. Typical. I don't listen to either one of them and I would have hoped that by the fact that I actually read Clarke's book you could at least appreciate the fact that I make an attempt to hear the other side. In fact I listen to Scair America from time to time just to keep myself in check.

As for Franken. He is a buffoon. Have you ever heard him try to seriously defend his positions against the likes of Michael Medved or Laura Ingraham? He ends up screaming and walking out of the interview like a little baby.

I do want to continue in robust discourse. I tried with "Storm in the port" dude but he didn't seem interested or up to the challenge. So let me first apologize for the "Scatterbrain" comment. It was a poor attempt at humor and not very courteous of me. I posted a response to your "War on Christians" post.....”O'briens Briar Patch” is you ...right? To be continued....

April 18, 2006 2:49 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sctobrien says:

BJ,

I have to admit, yes, you did post a reply on my blog about the PJS Sunday paper - and it baffled me when I read your thoughtful reply there and then popped over here and read the one reply here. But all is forgiven (all around hopefully).

As for talk radio - I wish I could stomach some of it, but can't. There are just too many commercials. I don't even listen to Air America, though hope it does succeed.

Now back to Hurrican Katrina. I am in my fourties and have never seen a disaster hit in such a way. Have you? And I seriously doubt anyone would have thrown Nagin's race or Blanco's gender into the Federal Govt stepping in. In cases like this there is a moral obligation for the Fed Govt to do all it can. To me, it is as simple as that. Hell, I remember coming home on the Friday before the hurrican hit and deciding to stay up late watching the news. Then I learned that it wasn't due to hit for two or so days. ALL the reports then were what a catastrophic storm this was, so it was known very early on that it was going to be a bad one.

And if you look up quotes by the Brown, the former head of FEMA, he even admits that FEMA dropped the ball.

Oh, and come one with the Nation of Laws stuff. My God. Will you conservatives out there please make up your mind - do you believe in the rule of law or not? Or does the rule of law only kick in when a Democratic president has an illicit affair?

Next you will be saying conservatives really do believe in State's rights - oh, except in the case of Florida voting laws.

Laura Ingraham?!?! Michael Medved? Oh, please.

Though you know one of my favorite shows? It's Fox's media program
NewsWatch. It is a sterling example that you can put together two liberals and two conservatives and not have a shoutfest. Hell, if one can get Cal Thomas off of religion, he is really a fascinating person to listen to.

April 19, 2006 12:49 AM

 
Blogger BJ Aberle said...

Scott,
I hope you enjoy engaging in these things as much as I do. Thanks for being gracious.

Yes, I believe in "The Nation of Laws" stuff. Now, do the people I voted for reflect that? At times, I will admit, it seems "no." But I feel that the overarching goals of conservatism have the best interests of this country and its' people in mind. More so than liberalism.

I do listen to Laura Ingraham and Medved. It seems to me that they can articulate and defend their positions better than any liberal I have heard. My point wasn't about the content of their shows. It was about how each instance Franken shared a mic with them in a debate he left crying and screaming. He seems to be a typical example of how most liberals act. They are so full of passion (which is good) that it gets in the way of clear, rational thinking. In their eyes Bush can do nothing good. Even if somehow Bush could conjer up the force, ala Moses, to prevent Katrina from happening, that still wouldn't be good enough because he would have crossed the bounds of church and state.

I do not disagree with the fact that there were major problems with the handling of Katrina. But it is not all the Feds. fault!.......ok, that's the last time I will say that. We can at least be clear that we disagree. And that's ok.

One last thing.....yes I consider myself a conservative and a Christian, but please don't paint me into your narrow view of what you think that is. I don't think of you as a typical liberal. You at least, according to your PJS Sunday post, are open to the idea of there being a God. Which there is, but that is another post altogether.

April 19, 2006 10:37 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sctobrien says:

As my now deceased Grandma taught me, she didn't care if a person was religious or not, only that they don't try to jam that stuff down her throat. To this day, I never knew if she believed in God or not. Oddly, whe was one of the most civic minded people who frequently banded together with members of the Methodist church during times of need. And with all Grandmas, she was the most moral, honest and kindest person I've ever known.

And that is how I am. I think there are great things in religion, but sadly, too many people pick the things they want to use to make their points.

Now, I'm not blaming the Feds for all of Katrina. What I am stating is that the Feds had the resources to deal with Katrina and those resources were not utilized. Do I think GW Bush is an evil bastard and said, "oh, screw those poor, mostly black people." No, I do not. But what I do believe is, is that the hardest people hit down there lacked the ability to garner attention because they were poor and mostly black.

Let us be honest here - if tomorrow in Peoria there was a weather report of a freak storm hitting along the Illinois Riverfront, which would get more attention: if it was going to hit where the Taft Homes is located or that nice little riverside condo grouping over in East Peoria?

Oddly, you and I disagree about the perception of liberals when it comes to passsion: where you see it, I don't and I think that is part of our problem. We keep this distanced, unemotional seperation from life that ends up hurting us. That's what I see anyway.

As for Bush and the liberals accusing him of doing nothing right; sadly, I think many, many American people have been hoodwinked by this guy. What I mean is, his past business history should have shown the American people what sort of leader he would be, but paraphrasing that old saying, those who fail to study history, are doomed to repeat it.......

April 19, 2006 1:00 PM

 
Blogger BJ Aberle said...

"Let us be honest here - if tomorrow in Peoria there was a weather report of a freak storm hitting along the Illinois Riverfront, which would get more attention: if it was going to hit where the Taft Homes is located or that nice little riverside condo grouping over in East Peoria?"

Maybe you can clarify but all of the attention was focussed on the poor people. There was nary a story or report about the devestated middle class and rich homes . Clarke's article basicly ties to coincidences together. Does it look suspect? Yes, but, he is only projecting what he "feels" the motive for such quick aid for Florida onto Bush. Nowhere is there a citation of evidence. So to me it's just Clarke and his opinion.

If we want to further the exercise, the folks in the Taft homes would stay there and not evacuate, even though they have been warned. Or sit there and wonder when those district 150 busses will be along to pick them up. Maybe the plan was to help the evacuees when they arrived on those busses. Who knows?

April 19, 2006 4:21 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home