Brownie appointed after 9/11. AFTER 9/11!?!?!?! [Archive]

Boom

09-21-2005, 12:17 PM

Ok, I understand how the system works and in general I don't have a problem with political patronage. I mean, the Pres has a right to give some figurehead positions to his friends and supporters. No, I am not being sarcastic, I really mean it. The ambassador to Costa Rica really doesn't have to be qualified. It's an honorary position and there is no harm in giving it to your old roomate or to some guy who gave millions to your campaign. It may be stretching it to appoint unqualified buddies to positions of real power that effect Americans, like head of FEMA, but pre-9/11 I could understand it and I wouldn't have complained about it.

However, after 9/11 we were all freaking out, expecting national emergencies to happen at any minute. We were hearing that the terrorists were going to smash planes into our nuclear power plants, or blow up the Hoover Dam, or poison our water supplies. If any of these things happened, FEMA would have a major responsiblity (if not the primary responsibility) for dealing with these disasters.

This was not a time for political patronage. This was the time to appoint an expert. This was the time to appoint someone with unique qualifications to make sure that FEMA would be ready to deal with unprecedented disasters.

And Bush appointed Brownie. His previous experience? Running horsey shows. A job he was fired from for allegedly being incompetent. Zero experience with emergency management.

Bush was right, he is responsible for FEMA's failures.

Swifty_Johnson

09-21-2005, 12:47 PM

Brown was confirmed by the Senate, so if he really was as bad as people say, how come the Senate approved of him?

How come there weren't any issues with all the hurricanes last year?

Swifty

spyder913

09-21-2005, 12:52 PM

How come there weren't any issues with all the hurricanes last year?Probably because 1) they all hit florida, who actually has emergency plans 2) they all hit florida, who has better structures and 3) they all hit florida at not category 5

Swifty_Johnson

09-21-2005, 01:16 PM

Katrina slowed to a Cat 4 before impact, Charley was a Cat 4 when it hit Florida.

Swifty

spyder913

09-21-2005, 01:20 PM

alright, please see point 1 and 2

Allison

09-21-2005, 01:32 PM

And, let's not forget the all-important political aspect. The president's brother is the governor of Florida; 2004 was an election year; and Florida has 27 electoral votes.

I highly suspect that if any of last year's hurricanes had come close to creating the devastation that Katrina did (which they didn't,) that the federal response in Florida would have far surpassed the response we saw in the Gulf Coast.

]LoL[Harm

09-21-2005, 01:33 PM

And the response to Florida was not without its own problems as well, overpayments, late payments and no payments were experienced.

Swifty_Johnson

09-21-2005, 02:18 PM

I highly suspect that if any of last year's hurricanes had come close to creating the devastation that Katrina did (which they didn't,) that the federal response in Florida would have far surpassed the response we saw in the Gulf Coast.

You do know that the Feds responded to Katrina faster then they did last year right?

And the response to Florida was not without its own problems as well, overpayments, late payments and no payments were experienced.

It's experienced where-ever FEMA operates. It's a bureaucracy after all. Paperwork gets misplaced, people abuse the system, etc. Detroit got disaster relief from FEMA without ever seeing a drop of floodwater.

This still doesn't avoid the facts that the Senate screened and approved of Brown. If he was so bad, why didn't they catch it?

Swifty

PoxTheSmall

09-21-2005, 02:33 PM

If he was so bad, why didn't they catch it?

If he was so good, then why was he asked to resign?

Allison

09-21-2005, 02:57 PM

You do know that the Feds responded to Katrina faster then they did last year right?

I don't know how you're using the word "responded," but I don't recall seeing 20,000 people in Florida last year who, 5 or 6 days after the storm hit, hadn't seen a bus or an MRE or a bottle of water, who weren't allowed to leave the disaster area, and who hadn't heard word-one from a public official. And I don't recall the head of FEMA saying he had just learned of these starving people after they had been plastered all over the news for two days.

You say the Feds "responded" faster? I won't even argue that point with you. They should have responded faster. This disaster far surpassed anything Florida experienced last year, and it required a quicker, more effective response. This tragedy was totally forseeable, and yet, we were unprepared for it.

This administration was re-elected due in no small part because it promised to keep us safer than the other guy. They made us afraid, and then they promised to do better at preventing tragedies and to create a system that could respond to the needs of its citizens in the event that tragedies could not be prevented. They have spent billions of dollars on Homeland Security. And what do we have to show for it? We are no better prepared than we were before. It's a disgrace.

As I said, I won't argue whether or not the feds responded more quickly to Katrina than they did in Florida. It really doesn't matter. The bottom line is that their response to Katrina was not good enough, and people paid with their lives.

Riddick

09-21-2005, 03:06 PM

Noleader

09-21-2005, 05:10 PM

Brown was confirmed by the Senate, so if he really was as bad as people say, how come the Senate approved of him?

How come there weren't any issues with all the hurricanes last year?

Swifty

A republican controlled senate... Also might I add that Bush has made very public any time the democrates try to use any method to block a floor vote. The democrates have been forced to pick their battles... I would have let that one past if I was trying to save my good cards till a U.S. S.C. opening occured.

Allison

09-21-2005, 05:15 PM

I just think it is 1) Not fair to compare to Florida

That was my point, really. Swifty said, "Brown was confirmed by the Senate, so if he really was as bad as people say, how come the Senate approved of him? How come there weren't any issues with all the hurricanes last year?", implying that Brown must have been a capable FEMA director because FEMA did a good job in Florida. But, Florida never saw the level of devastation that Katrina brought. It's apples and oranges.

FEMA has always been prepared for the usual sort of disasters, (like the hurricanes in Florida last year) but four years after 9/11, and after spending billions on Homeland Security, we should have been able to respond bigger and better than we did with Katrina.

and 2) Not fair to blame just the Bush administration.

I don't.

Cavan

09-21-2005, 11:53 PM

Brown was confirmed by the Senate, so if he really was as bad as people say, how come the Senate approved of him?

How come there weren't any issues with all the hurricanes last year?

Swifty

This argument can be summed up buy simply saying....

The Senate was controlled by Republicans... not REAL tough to get a Repulican nominee through the Senate under those conditions...

Swifty_Johnson

09-22-2005, 08:14 AM

I don't know how you're using the word "responded," but I don't recall seeing 20,000 people in Florida last year who, 5 or 6 days after the storm hit, hadn't seen a bus or an MRE or a bottle of water, who weren't allowed to leave the disaster area, and who hadn't heard word-one from a public official.

It took the Feds longer to show up in Florida with supplies last year then they did this year. You are right, you didn't see people thousands of people without food or water, why?

In Florida we are drilled before every hurricane season to store at LEAST 3 days food and water. The day after the storm the Salvation Army and Red Cross shows up in the areas that are hit the hardest and hand out food and water. The Feds shows up several days later and takes over from them. This is one of the reason that I give money to the Red Cross. In LA state officials refused to allow the Red Cross and Salvation army into N.O. That is why people went without food.

As to responded, the Coast Guard are Federal, and they were there the day after Katrina hit rescuing people from flooded homes. The army and air force reserve choppers were not that far behind them. That is an extremal good response.

we were unprepared for it.

LA was unprepared for it, the Feds were.

This disaster far surpassed anything Florida experienced last year, and it required a quicker, more effective response.

Not really. Florida was hit by 4 Hurricanes 1 Cat 4, 1 Cat 3 and 2 Cat 2s last year. Most of the states 17 million residents were touched by the storms one way or another. There are still homes that have not been repaired, and won't be for at least another year as there is a large backlog of home repairs to do. This was a great time to be a contractor in Florida. No, we didn't have massive flooding like N.O., but we did have the massive wind damages. N.O. didn't require a better Federal response, it required a better state response.

They have spent billions of dollars on Homeland Security. And what do we have to show for it? We are no better prepared than we were before. It's a disgrace.

The only disgrace is the talking heads on T.V. who don't have a clue and act like they do.

http://www.ready.gov/water_food.html

Look, that is our government telling us, keep 3 days food and water on hand. I was shocked by the images of looting in Florida, people breaking into stores and there was water still there. Before Katrina came over Florida as a Cat 1, stores were out of bottled water. People were waiting in line at the water machines with empty containers filling them up. Bread was gone, the only juice that was left were odd-combinations like unsweetened Cran-Raspberry juice, canned tuna gone. Other canned goods were getting low. I was shocked that there was anything like that still left in N.O. to loot.

A republican controlled senate... Also might I add that Bush has made very public any time the Democrats try to use any method to block a floor vote.

Do you know who chaired Brown's hearing? Lieberman. Jeffords had switched sides and the democrats controlled the senate. A senate under democratic control approved Brown as the head of FEMA.

Swifty

]LoL[Harm

09-22-2005, 09:38 AM

In LA state officials refused to allow the Red Cross and Salvation army into N.O. That is why people went without food.If your going to use some truth, use it all Swifty, don't nitpick to make yourself sound right, from Red Cross: The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city. It is also true that local authorities and the National Guard prevented Red Cross access. This is because they stated they were going to evacuate the people to the Red Cross. Info can be found here: http://www.redcross.org/faq/0,1096,0_682_4524,00.html

Also as a warning to everyone, Swifty will not change his stance on the Fed's. He believes they did all they could, but then will state they had major problems, but then he'll state he never said that, and then when pointed out that fact will decide to not respond to the fact that he has been shown his own shifting position. I would step away from "debating" or "arguing" with Swifty on this point. Because it is pointless.

Swifty_Johnson

09-22-2005, 11:16 AM

Harm, do you know who controls the state Homeland Security Department?

http://www.loep.state.la.us/agencyrelated/aboutagency.htm

The Louisiana Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (LOHSEP); formally the Louisiana Office of Emergency Preparedness (LOEP), was created by the Civil Act of 1950 and is under the Louisiana Military Department. In 1976 LOHSEP via the Louisiana government reorganization, was moved to the Department of Public Safety (DPS). In 1990 LOHSEP was transferred again to the Military Department. In 2003 the Agency name was changed to the Louisiana Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness, reflecting the additional responsibilities to the State and her citizens.

Also as a warning to everyone, Swifty will not change his stance on the Fed's. He believes they did all they could, but then will state they had major problems, but then he'll state he never said that,

Why do you insist on lieing? I never said they had MAJOR problems. NEVER. You just assumed I did. While there was problems, anything of that scale will not go off 100% perfect. Yes, they did send people to the wrong city of Charleston, but that is not a major problem. When I called that a failure, you jumped on that claimed I said there was a major problem. I corrected your incorrect assumption, yet you still cling to it.

Because it is pointless.

The only thing that is pointless debating with you. I have shown time and time again that you are wrong. YOU have failed to show any major problems with the Federal response. Step up to the plate with some proof.

Swifty

Figtoria

09-22-2005, 11:27 AM

Lucky for you, the dead people can't argue this point with you, Swifty.

The only thing that is pointless debating with you. I have shown time and time again that you are wrong. YOU have failed to show any major problems with the Federal response. Step up to the plate with some proof.

Swifty

Swifty_Johnson

09-22-2005, 11:36 AM

Lucky for you, the dead people can't argue this point with you, Swifty.

Why? It was the city and states responsibility to assist in the evacuation. If anything their beef is with them.

Swifty

]LoL[Harm

09-22-2005, 11:49 AM

Well I'm just glad people more intelligent and with more power then me also disagree with you Swifty. Because unlike you I don't think Brown was asked to resign in order to placate the masses, he was removed because he was not the person for the job and never was. Despite all your positive views about an apple (Florida Federal response) when we're all talking about an orange (New Orleans Federal response).

Keep clinging to your views of the Federal government. Keep thinking that the Fed's are doing their job. Because I will continue to see major problems, failures, or whatever word you really want to use Swifty cause I'm tired of your synonym games and I will continue to ask my senator and rep's to help improve and make it more efficient.

Another major problem, failure, shitstorm whatever stupid synonym you want to use: $60+ billion of my money being allocated for reconstructing LA with what seems to be very little oversight on where it's being spent. Guess how many New Orleans based companies are getting contracts. Yeah, failure...major problem...reach-around fuckfest.

Swifty_Johnson

09-22-2005, 12:33 PM

Despite all your positive views about an apple (Florida Federal response) when we're all talking about an orange (New Orleans Federal response).

It's the same Feds for both. There aren't special Feds that only service Florida. Both Florida and LA dealt with the same Federal agency. Also, so did many other states. There was only one breakdown, LA. We are talking apples to apples.

Because unlike you I don't think Brown was asked to resign in order to placate the masses, he was removed because he was not the person for the job and never was.

If Brown didn't have the management ability, it would have came out last year. He also would not have passed through the senate. The only reason why it was a problem in LA, was Blanco. Blanco couldn't be fired, but Brown could. There was also questions about he resume, and if he lied on that then he deserved to be fired.

Keep clinging to your views of the Federal government. Keep thinking that the Fed's are doing their job.

The Feds are doing more then their job, I want the Federal government to pair back.

Because I will continue to see major problems, failures, or whatever word you really want to use Swifty cause I'm tired of your synonym games

My synonym games? Give me a break. You are the one trying to twist my words into what you think they would mean vs what I actually said. You also continued to do so after I pointed out your errors. If anyone is playing games it is you.

Like I said, what major problems?

Too slow? They moved quicker then ever before. The coast guard was saving people the day after the hurricane.

Didn't take control? There are laws preventing that. If Blanco didn't want to give up control, there was little the Feds could do about it.

Federal troops not in N.O. policing? There are laws against that.

So like I said, what problems?

The laws? Well there is nothing that Brown could have done about that. Those aren't things that should be changed on a whim, there are there for a reason. The real questions that are getting ignored, why didn't Blanco turn over control to the Feds?

Swifty

Eiru

09-22-2005, 12:44 PM

... it would have came out last year. He also would not have passed through the senate.

Methinks you're putting WAY too much faith in the Senate. ;)

Swifty_Johnson

09-22-2005, 12:52 PM

Methinks you're putting WAY too much faith in the Senate.

It was under democratic control! ;) Also the FBI was supposed to do some backround checks. If he lied on his resume and wasn't qualified, then you should truly scared as he got through the process without being discovered.

Now, we see another evacuation going on and looks to be going well. Lets see what happened.

http://www.khou.com/news/local/galveston/stories/khou050802_gj_hurricaneseason.35de5241.html

Galveston creates evacuation plan for most vulnerable residents

06:58 PM CDT on Tuesday, August 2, 2005

By Mike Zientek / 11 News

GALVESTON, Texas -- With peak hurricane season just weeks away, NOAA announced Tuesday this year's hurricane season promises to become the most active on record.

KHOU-TV

Buses are now set to go directly to the housing complexes and pick up residents in the event of a major storm.

It's a wakeup call for coastal residents to be ready.

The city of Galveston is taking action in case of a major storm.

You don't have to look far in Galveston to find kids being kids. But Renee Hill knows something the little ones don't.

They live in the Palm Terrace public housing complex, and if a hurricane threatened the city they'd be among the most vulnerable.

Most people here couldn't evacuate without assistance.

"I think about it but I don't know what I'm gonna do though," said Hill. "You know, it's like you don't have a car, where you gonna go? Who'll come get you?"

Galveston emergency planners said they have 17 city buses and 40 school buses, which could be used to evacuate residents. And now the city is set to make an agreement with the housing authority itself.

Wow, the city looked ahead, saw the needs, made the plans and is now executing them. The CITY not the Feds.

Swifty

]LoL[Harm

09-22-2005, 12:54 PM

I'll just list this one, in order to give as little sidetrack/tangent info:

The NRP was not utilized in an efficient way, an Incidient of National Significance was not announced (which addresses your Fed Troops for Policing and other such things) until late Tuesday and was not put into action until Wednesday. When the NRP specifically states that it can (and should have in this occasion) been inacted prior to the landfall of the hurricane.

NRP can be found here: http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/editorial/editorial_0566.xml

Swifty_Johnson

09-22-2005, 02:55 PM

The NRP was not utilized in an efficient way, an Incidient of National Significance was not announced (which addresses your Fed Troops for Policing and other such things) until late Tuesday and was not put into action until Wednesday. When the NRP specifically states that it can (and should have in this occasion) been inacted prior to the landfall of the hurricane.

It was.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1129877

But according to government documents, congressional aides and Homeland Security officials, what first triggered the "incident of national significance" was not Chertoff's memo, but a little-noticed statement issued by the White House on the night of August 27 while President George W. Bush was still vacationing at his Crawford, Texas ranch.

"That was the trigger," said Homeland Security Department spokesman Russ Knocke.

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/editorial/editorial_0569.xml

All incidents are handled at the lowest possible organizational and jurisdictional level. Police, fire, public health and medical, emergency management, and other personnel are responsible for incident management at the local level. For those events that rise to the level of an Incident of National Significance, the Department of Homeland Security provides operational and/or resource coordination for Federal support to on-scene incident command structures.

Multi-Agency Coordination Structures

The National Response Plan establishes multi-agency coordinating structures at the field, regional and headquarters levels. These structures:

Enable the execution of the responsibilities of the President through the appropriate Federal department and agencies;

Integrate Federal, State, local, tribal, nongovernmental Organization, and private-sector efforts; and

Provide a national capability that addresses both site-specific incident management activities and broader regional or national issues, such as impacts to the rest of the country, immediate regional or national actions required to avert or prepare for potential subsequent events, and the management of multiple incidents.

The problem was, one of the States was bucking the Feds.

This does not over-ride laws. This is a plan, not a law or act. This does not over-ride laws. This does NOT address the use of Federal troops to enforce laws in the United States. For that to have happened Bush would have needed to declare LA in a state of insurrection. That would have been an abuse of his powers.

Who do you think is more able to handle the response to these types of disasters? Local and State officials or the Feds?

I think it's the job to the local and state officials, and the job of the Feds to to lend assistance. The Federal government does not have the resources, or authority to act in these situations. Unless the laws are changed and the Federal government given more power, at the expense of the states, there is no way to change that. This will hurt the states that have their act together and worsen the situation, as a large Federal bureaucracy cannot be more efficient then local state offices.

Swifty

]LoL[Harm

09-22-2005, 03:04 PM

Why don't you re-read the link you posted and tell me again there weren't any "major problems", "failures" at the Federal level: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1129877

Swifty_Johnson

09-22-2005, 03:08 PM

Why don't you read the link and admit you were wrong?

I'll not have ABC news tell me what to think.

I'll say it again, the only major problems were with people's expectations from the Federal government, and not with the actual response.

Swifty

]LoL[Harm

09-22-2005, 03:12 PM

Your article is my proof that the NRP was not used properly or efficiently. Your proof is just your words. I'll admit I'm wrong when ABC admits it's wrong...how about that? ;) And just so you know, ABC is not making the shit up their sources are memo's from the White House and Chertoff...I mean come on Swifty, blaming your disbelief on ABC?

And here's some more goodies from the NRP that shows you are incorrect in indicating the Feds could not deploy troops because the State has to request them. Why don't you admit you're wrong?

This is on page 43 and 44 of the NRP.
Guiding principles for proactive Federal response
include the following:
■ The primary mission is to save lives; protect critical
infrastructure, property, and the environment;
contain the event; and preserve national security.
U.S. Possessions and Freely Associated States
■ Standard procedures regarding requests for assistance
may be expedited or, under extreme circumstances,
suspended in the immediate aftermath of an event of
catastrophic magnitude.
■ Identified Federal response resources will deploy and
begin necessary operations as required to commence
life-safety activities.
■ Notification and full coordination with States will occur,
but the coordination process must not delay or impede
the rapid deployment and use of critical resources.
States are urged to notify and coordinate with local
governments regarding a proactive Federal response.

I hope this will put an end to your "The States didn't request it" lines, because the NPR says that ain't gotta be the way it is.

]LoL[Harm

09-22-2005, 03:24 PM

Actually I think I'm all together done with you Swifty. You quote the ABC article to uphold your end of the "discussion" but when I use it to hold up my end you state, and of course I'll quote you: "I'll not have ABC news tell me what to think."So this indicates it is perfectly acceptable for your stance to be supported by this ABC article yet it is not acceptable in supporting mine?

You are incapable of making a coherent argument. Even though I do gain some enjoyment out of reading your incomprehensible arguments I think ignore is the best place for you, at least for my sanity and my health.

Allison

09-22-2005, 03:40 PM

You should receive your membership badge in 7-10 days, Harm. Welcome to the club. ;)

Boom

09-22-2005, 03:54 PM

Yeah, don't get caught in the "source" game with Swifty. Even if you use his own sources, you will be attacked. Of course, he is free to use anonymous posts on message boards as factual support for his arguments, but I can't even cite the Bush administration without being accused of relying on liberal propaganda.

Swifty_Johnson

09-22-2005, 03:56 PM

Your article is my proof that the NRP was not used properly or efficiently.

Nope, my article was proof that it was called BEFORE the hurricane struck, you claimed it wasn't called until after it hit. You were wrong, and failed to admit it.

Actually I think I'm all together done with you Swifty. You quote the ABC article to uphold your end of the "discussion" but when I use it to hold up my end you state, and of course I'll quote you:

I was using the facts presented in the article to counter your claim. You were trying to get to me accept some of the author's statements as facts, when the rest of the items directly counter what you claim. When you look at the facts presented it doesn't hold up what you say. Ignore the author's spin.

So please, point out what in the article you think supports your statement like I did. It isn't to hard to copy and paste.

Knocke said Brown already "was in fact the lead federal official in the field before and after (Chertoff's) declaration. … Everyone knew their roles and responsibilities."

Like I said, you have been proved wrong, so you ignore the facts and go after me. Can't support your statements, so you attack me.

Swifty

Popo

09-22-2005, 04:46 PM

You should receive your membership badge in 7-10 days, Harm. Welcome to the club. ;)

Where do I apply for membership??! :uhoh:

Eiru

09-23-2005, 11:41 AM

He also would not have passed through the senate.

Methinks you're putting WAY too much faith in the Senate.

It was under democratic control!

How in the world does who controls a human run institution affect the fallability of said institution? You either (a) didn't understand the point of my comment or (b) are the world's greatest literal-cynic, using the Senate confirmation out of one side of your mouth to validate the appointment of Brown against those on the thread who would question his qualifications and criticizing the decision made by a Senate controlled by a certain political faction out of the other side when the decision of the Senate is questioned.

Figtoria

09-23-2005, 11:42 AM

/em waves!!

Hey Eiru!! Say "hi" to Airr for me!!

Swifty_Johnson

09-23-2005, 02:51 PM

How in the world does who controls a human run institution affect the fallability of said institution?

You missed the ;) But some people just assumed the Senate was under Republican control and just rubber stamped his appointment, when in fact that was not the case.

What is the point of a Senate hearing? To determine if the candidate was able to do the job.

So if Brown was so unqualified, how did he pass through the hearings?

We know the Senate wasn't under Republican control and he wasn't just rubber-stamped. This was after 9-11 so the director of FEMA would be a very important role to fill so we can say there was some importance to the hearing. After 9-11 the senators would not have been so lax about it.

So while it is human controlled, what are the odds that every one of the senators failed to do their job at the same time? If he was so unqualified, and still got through, then what are the points of the hearings?

So there are two options. He was qualified and the senate did it's job.

He wasn't qualified and the senate failed in it's job.

So if the hearings cannot weed out the unqualified, what is the point in having them? (besides senators grandstanding to the cameras for their bases).

I'm thinking it's option A. I find it hard to believe that after 9/11 the senate did a total brain fart and let an unqualified person take over the role of FEMA.

Swifty

Allison

09-23-2005, 03:27 PM

You can blame the Senate for confirming Brown's appointment as Deputy Director of FEMA. But he was never confirmed as Director because at that time, Fema was being folded into Homeland Security. And, under the act that created Homeland Security, appointees no longer have to be confirmed by the Senate if their current job is deemed germane to the new one.

Eiru

09-23-2005, 05:42 PM

You missed the ;) But some people just assumed the Senate was under Republican control and just rubber stamped his appointment, when in fact that was not the case.

No, I didn't miss the ";)" and I wasn't talking about who controlled the Senate. So in fact, you didn't pay attention to my comment and instead quoted me in error to answer and entirely unreleated question. I suppose that could be considered a (a.1) as ignoring a point is almost the same as misunderstanding it.

Swifty_Johnson

09-26-2005, 08:23 AM

No, I didn't miss the "" and I wasn't talking about who controlled the Senate.

I know.

So in fact, you didn't pay attention to my comment and instead quoted me in error to answer and entirely unreleated question.

Incorrect again. As you could see earlier, many people ASSUMED the Senate was under Republican control, and just rubber-stamped the President choice.

As I continued to point out above, it is the job of these hearings to point out the unqualified, as if the President makes a mistake, there is a check and balance. Once pointed out, the Senate can deny the application and there will be a new choice.
So yes, even if it's run by humans, there are checks and balances to counter-act that.
We would have to have failures by so many people, all of the democrats (assuming the Republicans are just rubber stamping the President's choice) and all of the investigators who checked out his back round that the odds are that this was a mistake is small.

So we either need to look at the process and see where it went wrong, or maybe he really wasn't as un-qualified as people think.

Here is a link to the hearing.

http://www.voluntarytrade.org/newsite/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?cid=11&lid=28

Swifty

Boom

09-26-2005, 10:46 AM

Ok, so the senate shares the responsibility with the President for putting this incompetant boob in charge of an agency with major responsibilities for dealing with the after effects of major disasters (including terrorist strikes) after 9/11.

Is that fair? Or are you saying it is somehow all the senate's fault and Bush has zero responsibility?

Oh, and I am willing to ignore the fact that in 2002 it was considered unpatriotic (almost treason) to challenge a presidential appointment as we had just been attacked. Brownie was wrong and the dems in the senate should have stopped him, even if it would have been political suicide to do so.

And you ignored Ailia's post. It's #37.

Swifty_Johnson

09-26-2005, 02:32 PM

And you ignored Ailia's post. It's #37.

Nope, it doesn't change the fact he was approved by the Senate. He was approved to do the #2 job in FEMA, and if the #1 man was killed or incapacitated he would have taken over the responsibility of it.

Ok, so the senate shares the responsibility with the President for putting this incompetant boob in charge of an agency with major responsibilities for dealing with the after effects of major disasters (including terrorist strikes) after 9/11.

If you believe that he was incompetent (which I do not think he was) then yes you can say that. Then we will have to address the way we also nominate and approve candidates, as this person got through the many checks and balances we have in place without a challenge.

Swifty

Boom

09-28-2005, 11:28 PM

Yes, he was totally rubberstamped. Just like everything President Bush threw at the Senate in the post 9/11 madness. Those senators should be ashamed of themselves. I just checked out the confirmation hearing and it was a very brief hearing. A total rubberstamping affair. Shameful. It may have cost them their carreers to challenge Brownie, but at least they would have kept their integrity.

What is it about Brownie's resume that makes you think he was qualified? His experience running the horsie shows? Or the fact that he got fired from running the horsie shows? There are people who have devoted their entire lives to emergency management. Surely there was someone with more experience than Brownie.

What about the fact that Bush was given a second chance to put someone with some sort of emergency management experience in charge of FEMA but decided to promote Brownie (with no confirmation process) instead? Surely he bears sole responsibility for that? Or are you saying that since the Senate rubberstamped Brownie as deputy director they are somehow responsible for Bush later making him Director?

Swifty_Johnson

09-29-2005, 10:55 AM

What is it about Brownie's resume that makes you think he was qualified?

All the hurricanes between when he was appointed to the present day. The fact the only state that had an Issue was LA, and the fact that people have a general ignorance of what FEMA did.

There are people who have devoted their entire lives to emergency management. Surely there was someone with more experience than Brownie.

At what? being first responders? FEMA isn't a group of first responders. You need someone that can navigate the government bureaucracy in this position, a manager, not a first responder.

Swifty

Boom

09-29-2005, 10:58 AM

A secondary responder huh?

You mean like someone who would be aware of thousand of Americans starving and dying at the convention center days and days after its been all over the news?

Someone like that right?

Swifty_Johnson

09-29-2005, 11:42 AM

You mean like someone who would be aware of thousand of Americans starving and dying at the convention center days and days after its been all over the news?

And who do you think got them the food and water when LA denied the Salvation Army and Red Cross when they tired to do it? You want to blame people for not getting food at the convention center, blame the state officials in LA who turned back the Red Cross and Salvation army,two organizations that work with FEMA to deliver aid.

Swifty

Boom

09-30-2005, 11:15 AM

Yes, they fucked up too. They should be fired or impeached or whatever. I don't see how those local fuck-ups can sleep at night. I would like to see your sources for that though. Not that I doubt it (I think I have heard something like that somewhere), but I just like to get the full story and know the source.

Anyway, none of that excuses Brownie's failures. I never said he was the only one to blame. I never even said he was the worst one of the bunch. But he did fail, miserably. You can point out other people's failures till the cows come home, none of it excuses his failures.

Did you see the look on his face when the reporters were asking him about the convention center and he had no idea what they were talking about? Do you remember how many days after the hurricane that was? How long had you been hearing about the convention center on every TV station when Brownie said he had no clue about it?

Swifty_Johnson

09-30-2005, 02:28 PM

http://www.redcross.org/faq/0,1096,0_682_4524,00.html

Did you see the look on his face when the reporters were asking him about the convention center and he had no idea what they were talking about? Do you remember how many days after the hurricane that was? How long had you been hearing about the convention center on every TV station when Brownie said he had no clue about it?

I am sure he didn't know about people in every little town and hamlet throughout the region. It's not his job to know, it's his job to get supplies to the state and local officials whose job it is to know. It's his job to coordinate local, federal,private organizations to get relief into a region, where it goes from there is beyond his control.

Swifty