[fellowpatriot]

He forthrightly acknowledged his responsibility for the egregious mishandling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

How did President Bush mishandle the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina? What more could he have done?

[Southack]

"He forthrightly acknowledged his responsibility for the egregious mishandling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina."

Notice the clever wordplay. What the NY Times said is accurate, but misleading.

Yes, President Bush acknowledged **his* responsibility...but out of the gregious mishandling, little or none was his doing (state and local refusals to use buses and AMTRAK come to mind).

So their sentence above is accurate...as well as constructed so deviously as to imply that President Bush was the egregious one when the NYT knows that he was NOT at fault for the evacuation failures (among other things). They accomplish this deviousness in no small measure by leaving out any reference to the failed state and local efforts...giving no clue to the casual reader as to the real responsibility for the errors made after Katrina hit.

FR was once devoted almost exclusively to pointing out this sort of journalistic jab...that's a needed function in the world today.

[xlib]

How did President Bush mishandle the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina? What more could he have done?

1. He could have fought for FEMA's independent status, instead of rolling over to the demand it be moved to DHS. (For that matter, he could have stuck to his guns and refused to create DHS to begin with.)

2. He could have put an experienced emergency manager at the head of FEMA, instead of a patronage appointment. IMO, given our recent history, this may be his biggest blunder,and fortunately, it's already been fixed.

3. He could have returned to DC instead of giving a speech in California. I know this is mostly symbolic, but symbolism is a big part of POTUS's job description, and Bush is usually more astute than this.