Monday, September 05, 2005

Delightful

Assuming it's true - and frankly I've got few reasons to believe it isn't - this report from the New York Times is pretty sick. Instead of figuring out how to fix the muddled federal reponse to Katrina and make darn sure something like it never happens again, the Bush Administration has been working for the last few days on a "plan ... to contain the political damage from the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina."

Shocking, I know.

"It orchestrated visits by cabinet members to the region, leading up to an extraordinary return visit by Mr. Bush planned for Monday, directed administration officials not to respond to attacks from Democrats on the relief efforts, and sought to move the blame for the slow response to Louisiana state officials, according to Republicans familiar with the White House plan.

The effort is being directed by Mr. Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, and his communications director, Dan Bartlett. It began late last week after Congressional Republicans called White House officials to register alarm about what they saw as a feeble response by Mr. Bush to the hurricane, according to Republican Congressional aides."

Those congressional Republicans were right - it was a feeble response. But instead of doing something about that response, the Administration is devoting time and energy to photo ops and blame-shifting. Just peachy.

7 Comments:

At 12:19 AM, Blogger Elizabeth Ayoub said...

Good commentary. You should read the opinion article in the NY Times titled "Fallujah Floods the Superdome."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/04/opinion/04rich.html?ex=1126065600&en=2ffb31817a2c2a7c&ei=5070

 
At 7:01 AM, Blogger cakreiz said...

It's comforting to know that the WH has its priorities straight.

 
At 10:03 AM, Anonymous Charles Amico said...

The politicizing is getting some needed focus. If you read the comments made about relief efforts and study the reasons cited for doing it, you will see the focus on the politics rather than because of compassion. I refer you to the following comments I made yesterday:

"s President Bush scrambles to change his schedule for September his focus seems to be on avoiding more political fallout rather than worrying about relief for the victims of Katrina. Most Republicans have the focus on the wrong place. For example, Newt Gingrich is quoted by the NY Times yesterday as saying "he urged Bush to quickly propose a rebuilding plan for New Orleans and the rest of the Gulf, arguing that an ambitious gesture could restore his power in Congress." Another example quoted was Tom Rath, a New Hampshire Republican with ties to the White House, saying, "This is very much going to divert the agenda. Some of this is momentary. I think Bush capital will be rapidly replenished if they begin to respond here." I have moved from being acentrist to being enraged for the time being. It is extremely difficult to watch this and not be enraged. I was watching on CNN Sean Penn and Douglas Brinkley describe still seeing many people stranded in their homes and that kayaks are needed for the rescue because the streets are so narrow and most of the relief is coming from the air instead of the ground.

 
At 4:36 PM, Blogger Phil S said...

Jeremy, please; you expected something different???

This administration has been about spin since Day One in the WH!!!!!

Nothing, nothing this administration consciously does is without making sure it is framed to show them in the best light!!!

 
At 6:30 PM, Blogger Jessica said...

If we needed any more proof that the administration doesn't care about anyone not able to write a six figure donation we have it.

I'm tired of this. I wish his base would wake up.

Jessica

 
At 6:49 AM, Blogger amba said...

I posted on the exact same topic last night, before seeing your post. The "politics ├╝ber alles" focus is what's always driven me nuts about this administration. It's what makes Bush too small for the job -- only fake-big. Always trying to figure out which "gesture" will sell him as commanding or compassionate or statesmanlike or whatever.

But, Jeremy, you left dangling your provocative remark that you have reason to believe the NY Times' allegations are not true. But then you go on to write as if you believe them. Could you follow up on that?

 
At 7:10 AM, Blogger JBD said...

Amba, I didn't mean to suggest that I thought the allegations weren't true; I'm sure they're probably quite accurate.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home