Posted on 09/09/2005 7:20:15 AM PDT by ExitPurgamentum
Fri Sep 9, 6:06 AM ET
Colin Powell, the former U.S. secretary of state seen as a potential leader for Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts, has joined the chorus of Americans criticizing the disaster response at all levels of government.
"There have been a lot of failures at a lot of levels -- local, state and federal," Powell said in an ABC interview for the "20/20" program to be broadcast on Friday evening.
American political figures from both major parties have assailed the slow response to the hurricane's assault last week on the U.S. Gulf Coast, which devastated New Orleans and killed hundreds, possibly thousands, in the region.
"There was more than enough warning over time about the dangers to New Orleans. Not enough was done. I don't think advantage was taken of the time that was available to us, and I just don't know why," Powell said in excerpts on ABC's Web site.
He said he did not think that race was a factor in the slow response, but that many of those unable to leave New Orleans in time were trapped by poverty which disproportionately affects blacks.
Powell was the highest-ranking black official during U.S. President George W. Bush's first term and chairman of the military Joint Chiefs of Staff during the 1991 Gulf War. He is among various names mentioned in Washington as a potential "hurricane czar" to take over the long-term recovery effort.
Two senators from Bush's Republican party on Thursday proposed that such a job be created. White House officials have not ruled out the option, saying it is among several being discussed.
Some black leaders, including Democrats in Congress, have charged that racism contributed to the misery of New Orleans' predominantly black storm victims.
"I don't think it's racism, I think it's economic," Powell said. "But poverty disproportionately affects African-Americans in this country. And it happened because they were poor."
It's curious - - freeper Bushbots won't allow any criticism of FEMA's Brown (apparently because he's a Bush appointee), but they're all over Powell -- yet Powell was also a Bush appointee. I don't get it -- if being a Bush appointee makes you perfrect and beyond criticism, then why doesn't that extend to Powell?
"There are reports that Bush signed papers saying the Federal government would oversee the evacuation."
Bush signed off on having FEMA help the state and local governments. Bush doesn't have the authority to put FEMA in charge of the evacuation.
Let's see these papers he signed, but since the president doesn't have the authority to put FEMA in charge of the evacuation, it's pretty hard to believe rumors that he did so.
"Also, there is the issue of taking away funding to help repair the levee."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168846,00.html
"But The Washington Post reports the Bush administration has granted the corps more funding than the previous administration over a similar period and that Louisiana has received far more money for civil works projects than any other state. The paper says much of the funding has been spent not on flood control, but on lawmakers' pet construction projects, including a brand new $750 million canal lock in New Orleans unrelated to flood control."
Also, any decrease in federal funding for levees would likely be an act of congress, not the executive branch.
Not to mention one very important issue. Why is the federal government funding levees to protect New Orleans? Louisiana already gets more federal dollars than any other state for such projects. These projects should be funded with local and state money.
Which mistakes where made by the federal government?
Well, nothing is perfect, and in RETROSPECT, one could find some minor mistakes. The cost of Powel's statement --- that it will be way overplayed by the Dems, who are already screaming at the top of their lunges --- grossly outweighs the benefits.
What is the benefit, what unknown truth did he express? None. What he did express is disunity.
Forgive me, my friend, but you are totally misusing statistics: blacks were affected by Katrina because the population of New Orleans is primarily black.
And, by the way, that population declined by 25% ever the last 25 years.
Beyond statistics, I may suggest to you that they were particularly adversely affected by the low standards to which that community ascribes: high tolerance to crime and corruption (the second is as much shared by the whites). When the Mississippi flooded Midwest a few years ago, nobody was looting, and nobody was shooting at helicopters --- which very much delayed the rescue. Practically nobody among black leaders points that out: certainly not Jesse Jackson and, apparently, not Collin Powell.
Someone, hopefully black so that no charges of racism are raised, must point that out: the hardships and loss of life were greater because the community tolerates crime in its midst --- even at the level of animal-like behavior, whereby a 7-year-old girl --- a BLACK girl --- is raped at teh Astrodom. Poverty, you say? In most other communities the perp would be beaten to a pulp.
Powell does not have to tow the republican line just to make you happy. It's not ALWAYS about politics.
I completely agree with you. And, incidentally, if he merely towed the Republican line, I would respect him less -- as well as any other politician. I hoped, however, that he would rise above Marxism: it is essentially a Marxist idea that people' values are determined by their economic status.
What poverty are we talking about? Did you see dozens, if not hundreds, of buses that were available but unused? Why were they not used by BLACK leadership of NO? What did these people lack to get out? Nothing.
WHat they did lack was leadership, which they themselves elected. And, we all elect leaders according to our own values. New Orleans got the leadership it wanted.
This boy's been sippin' too much tea with his pinky out amongst airheads.
"There have been a lot of failures at a lot of levels -- local, state and federal," Powell" "Not enough was done. ...I just don't know why,"
If you ever get off your knees before those liberal airheads Powell, you might get a rush of oxygen to kick start your brain. The local and State bozo action down there is preventing the feds from effectively operating. Criticism of that fact is appropriate, not mealy mouth condesending liberal BS and feigning ignorance.
Good Points, ExitPurgamentum, and the thought went through my mind that it's obvious that because you have a majority population that is black, you are going to have a majority that are negatively affected by the event. That's seems like an obvious correlation. But I did not express that in my post.
Basically, I just wanted to point out that Colin Powell was saying something very different than some of "Black Leaders", even if he wasn't saying things that were politically beneficial to Bush.
Silly: although it's untrue, can he possibly say that?
More importantly, it's not about whether mistakes were made: I was referring to Powell's attribution of tragic consequences to economics. Blacks suffered in New Orleans in great numbers because they are present in New Orleans in great numbers, not because they are poor. And they suffered from the inept, mostly black and entirely Democratic, leadership that they themselves elected.
It is not economics at all, and it is a shame that Powell caters in this regard to the Left.
And, please add, why did the population of New Orleans significantly declined over the last 25 years --- all under the Dem, mostly black, leadership --- racism?
appoint Powell as the Katrina czar. let's see how he can handle things.
No, it's a purely Marxist idea. It's been falsified to many times too enumerate.
But if you want a simple proof: blacks in Antigua (which is 98% balck) are much, much more poor than American ones. There is nowhere near as much crime, and certainly less corruption than in NO.
Another simple example: American blacks were incomparably more poor 100 --- even 50 --- years ago. But in 1950s, the percentage of married black women was greater than white married women. No, economics does not determine values: religion and upbringing does.
To show that they were ADVERSELY affected, you should demonstrate that the percentage is GREATER than 80%. The fact that 80% is a large number is misleading.
And from the language that some of these people used, you can see that they are also not educated
Why stop here: why are they uneducated, what does that have to do with economics. Their public schools are under black leadership and are financed by taxes just like any other. What is the problem?
And, have you ever asked yourself, why is that Ukrainians, where a professor makes $50/months (this is not a misprint) are more educated than our kids in Detroit, Chicago or New Orleans. Economics has nothing to do with this: it's values. And, the problem is perpetuated because many people in this country perpetuate this Marxist myth --- that economics determines one's values.
That is not the point: his attribution to economics is.
Did the Libs want Bush to really trample the state rights?
Well, it's too bad, because the idea that economics determine values is purely Marxist --- it was his claim to fame, actually. And, as a conservative, you should know better.
DAMN!!! I NEVER hear that crap re a tornado in Kansas or Missouri--Oklahoma......Wada we do, move blacks up there for equal opportunity?....Will these axxhxxxx ever get real?
What does being too poor to leave town at the drop of a hat have to do with values? All the poor people who stayed in NO during the hurricane were not criminals.
Where did I say they were?
THey are not criminals, but the tolerate criminals in their midst. And, to the extent that massive looting took place, by thousands of people, they are.
The point was that even those that are not criminals themselves tolerate criminals and vote for them: it is their elected representatives that betrayed them.
Secondly, they were NOT too poor to leave the city: they has hundreds of PUBLIC buses that their leadership, mostly black and Democratic, did not provide for them. People what do not mind voting for corrupt, inept politician lost their lives.
Please reread my numerous post, if you'd like, but do not put words in my mouth: it would be racist to suggest that they were all criminals, and would never say such a thing.
Thans for the info.
He is way to smart to want that thankless imposable job, he had his chance earlier. But if he does go for it I would gladly take him over Hilary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.