| May 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
GWB was harshly criticized for moving too slowly in responding to Katrina. People said he was incompetent or even malicious. As usual, the facts were not of interest to those making such allegations. Today's news confirms reports that GWB was unable to move until permission to do so was received from the Louisiana state governor.
From the Washington Times:
President Bush yesterday sought to federalize hurricane-relief efforts, removing governors from the decision-making process.
"It wouldn't be necessary to get a request from the governor or take other action," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said yesterday.
"This would be," he added, "more of an automatic trigger."
Mr. McClellan was referring to a new, direct line of authority that would allow the president to place the Pentagon in charge of responding to natural disasters, terrorist attacks and outbreaks of disease.
"It may require change of law," Mr. Bush said yesterday. "It's very important for us as we look at the lessons of Katrina to think about other scenarios that might require a well-planned, significant federal response -- right off the bat -- to provide stability."
The irresponsible reaction from the ACLU: attack GWB for seeking to make a power grab.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) accused Mr. Bush of attempting a power grab in the wake of fierce criticism that he responded too slowly to Hurricane Katrina a month ago.
Note that the ACLU does not question GWB's statement that he was not permitted to respond to Katrina because the Lousiana governor wouldn't authorize him to do so. Their opposition to this move confirms that they accept that statement.
But the Libs will keep trying to tell you GWB didn't respond as fast as he should have.
The article continues:
"Using the military in domestic law enforcement is generally a very bad idea," said Timothy Edgar, national security policy counsel for the ACLU. "I'm afraid that it will have unforeseen consequences for civil liberties."
Isn't that something? People in danger of losing their lives evidently doesn't rise, in the eyes of the ACLU, to a threat to "civil liberties."
By taking this position, the ACLU makes itself a danger to the lives of Americans.
#1
Note that the ACLU does not question GWB's statement that he was not permitted to respond to Katrina because the Lousiana governor wouldn't authorize him to do so. Their opposition to this move confirms that they accept that statement.
If Bush ever made a statement to that effect, it can't be found at that link. The article doesn't even address the larger issue of Bush's ability to "respond to Katrina." The relevant debate is limited to the much more specific issue of who controls the National Guard during emergencies.
But if you want to pretend that the only way Bush could "respond to Katrina" was by seizing control of Louisiana's National Guard, then I'm still left wondering why you think this exonerates Bush from criticism for his slow response. He didn't even request the federal takeover until shortly before midnight September 2, four days after Katrina hit New Orleans.