2007-10-26 02:05:56 · 9 answers · asked by always4him 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
He acted completely different. Just as the victims of Katrina and California acted different.
One group was given over a weeks notice and stayed. That group looted, robbed, shot at volunteer workers, stole from their neighbors and to this day are still crying for assistance.
The other group had about 8 hrs notice and got the hell out of there. They decided the best way to handle was to extend a helping hand to others in need, ralley around each other, assist themselves and not wait for others to assist them, commit no crimes, and generally act like a human race.
So yes everybody from the President to the vicitms acted differently.
2007-10-26 19:40:38 · answer #1 · answered by brandon72223 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, since Katrina was a hurricane and California is on fire, I would hope the response is different.
Look to the local and state governments for the difference in effectiveness of the evacuation and civil assistance. The Feds don't control that, in either case.
2007-10-26 09:17:58 · answer #2 · answered by thegubmint 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well considering that one disaster was a fire & the other was a hurricane that led to a flood, I would hope he acted differently! I mean, come on, would you really have wanted to see planes dropping more water on NO? But seriously - Bush - the federal gov't - can only get involved when the state & locals request it. & they can only be involved to the extent that is requested. NO's problem was that their state & local gov'ts were & are inept & completely corrupt. So Cal has had a massive response on the state & local level & also the people involved have mostly kept their heads together & turned to help each other, not hurt each other. Big difference right there....
2007-10-26 09:39:41 · answer #3 · answered by anna s 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
We were just talking about this last night
The differance is night and day.
Katrina took days to weeks to get a responce.
California is NOW getting help and Bush right there standing with them.
Thank goodness Bush will be gone soooooonnn.
2007-10-26 09:18:14 · answer #4 · answered by bigthinker 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
money and the fact that Hollywood in general is NOT pro Bush. And he screwed up Royally in Katrina
2007-10-26 09:40:28 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
yes because he cant being seen to make the same mistake twice by acting slow again. then again if he does act fastthen people will say he is racistbecause this time its white rich people. when it was Katrina it was mostly poor black people. so really he is dammed if he does dammed if he doesnt but he should ignore that and just send serious help because there are lives at stake
2007-10-26 09:20:16 · answer #6 · answered by 10 out of 10 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
no bush have responsibility to save the country people why he he did with Katrina.
2007-10-26 09:26:31 · answer #7 · answered by bhavani g 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Of course he did.The world and its mother knows he messed up big time with Katrina.Even someone as gormless as Bush knows that he wouldn't get away with that sort of lax incompetence again.Problem is he'll have to take the flack for the comparisons drawn.
2007-10-26 09:17:31 · answer #8 · answered by Misty Blue 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
you bet ye he did.
2007-10-27 00:51:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋