By collapse I meant the Minneapolis bridge collapsing a few days ago...
He sent help super late...hundreds of people died...And then he waited until like 5 days later to actually go down there physically...
2007-08-06 23:30:47 · 15 answers · asked by Queen Powerpuff [thinks ur cute] 7 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
He was wrong not to intervene during Katrina sooner. However, whenever FEMA is involved things are a mess and they were not involved in the bridge collapse.
There is NO excuse why the people were not helped sooner during Katrina. As far as Bush going down there though; it would have impeded things even more for him to go down with all his secret service men, etc. Many resources that could be used to help the Katrina victims would have gone to protect the President instead.
Many people "dropped the ball" so to speak during and before Katrina. It is too bad that so many people suffered and lost their lives unnecessarily.
2007-08-07 02:19:48 · answer #1 · answered by Patti C 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, you can break it down a bit further too my dear. The mayor Ray Nagen (I thinks thats his name) of New Orleans knew full well of the size of Katrina and the problems they may have had to encounter. If you remember there were tons of school buses that could have been used to evacuate the city. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, which proved true in this instance.
As far as the president waiting five days. There was no secondary issues at the collapse of the towers, i.e. flooding There were flood waters everywhere which made access to the city nearly impossible. Are you suggesting that he parachute into the middle of it? I think it is reasonable that he be allowed to wait until at least some danger has passed, considering he is the president (just a man) and not God.
Don't get me wrong. I am incredibly horrified at the way the aftermath was handled. More aid and comfort should have been administered to our own at home prior to dropping poptarts on Afghanistan or worrying about other foreign nations. The way FEMA handled the whole situation is deplorable as well. They all deserve a good thrashing in my opinion.
Enjoy your day!
EDIT: Oh you meant the bridge, same situation, there were no secondary issues preventing a visit.
EDIT 2: I also remember people being interviewed prior to Katrina's arrival. Knowing that an evacuation order was in effect. They said that they were going to "ride out the storm," because maybe they didn't want to leave their material possessions? Hindsight is 20/20.
2007-08-06 23:47:29 · answer #2 · answered by Sr. Mary Holywater 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Democrats have a common answer to this: the reality that Bush spent recklessly excuses the reality that Obama spends recklessly (besides the reality that this argument is in many cases in no way stated this quickly). Bush's presidency replaced right into a disaster. on the least, there is not any disputing that the Iraq conflict (desire I point out all the lies instructed to tug us into that conflict or the reality that Bush's selection to invade Iraq brought about the return to means of the Democratic occasion?), the Medicare growth (using that regulation, Medicare is going to interrupt down interior of right here couple of years), and the Social secure practices "privatization" notion (think of what a disaster that notion to "make investments" Social secure practices interior the inventory marketplace could have been and how the liberals could have blamed this debacle on the "loose marketplace") have been terrible concepts. as long using fact the Republican occasion pretends that any of those 3 issues have been stable concepts, the electorate might have stable reason to reject Republicans on the polls. Obama has been much greater reckless and much greater irresponsible than Bush. i do no longer even might desire to complex in this, as each physique is properly conscious of this actuality. If we proceed to have the two events fluctuate only on the value at which they like to destroy our u . s ., then this u . s . is doomed.
2016-10-14 06:46:22 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe the secret service advised him not to go to New Orleans because the morons down there were running around stealing and shooting each other.
2007-08-06 23:35:09 · answer #4 · answered by Mit 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
we're talking about none other than mr.bush, right?
well, the only explaination i have is that nothing makes sence with this dude... maybe he was playing golf at the day of katrina, or drinking in a bar somewhere... he's someone who can't be blamed for anything... i mean he's bush...!!!
that was fun... lol
2007-08-07 07:38:07 · answer #5 · answered by basharho 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Well I could not put it any better than Sr. Holywater.
Amen Sister, I agree.
2007-08-07 00:55:17 · answer #6 · answered by Starr 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Laura told him to quit coming home with wet socks
2007-08-06 23:41:35 · answer #7 · answered by icunurse85 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
At Katrina, he wanted to make sure it was safe so he wouldn't have any chance of hurting his poor, frail, cowboy president body.
2007-08-06 23:38:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Cause he's Bush
2007-08-06 23:34:57 · answer #9 · answered by Always Curious 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He's an *A*s*h*e.
Let's not forget whenever a Strong breeze kicks up in old Jeb's state, They have aid waiting as soon as the weather reports announce it!( : { o)
Why hasn't he been impeached yet?
2007-08-06 23:44:04 · answer #10 · answered by cowlynz 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋