Buy Text-Link-Ads here
Recent Comments

    follow OlbyWatch on Twitter

    In

    John Gibson Welcomes Back the Infamous, Deplorable Keith Olbermann

    tonyome wrote: <a href="http://twitchy.com/2014/07/28/voxs-laughable-praise-of-keith-olber... [more](11)

    In

    Welcome Back, Olby!

    syvyn11 wrote: <a href="http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/keith-olbermann-reviving-worst... [more](9)

    In

    Former Obama Support/Donor Releases Song Supporting Romney/Ryan: "We'll Take It Back Again" by Kyle Tucker

    syvyn11 wrote: @philly I don't see that happening. ESPN has turned hyper left in recent... [more](64)

    In

    Blue-Blog-a-Palooza: Ann Romney Edition!

    djthereplay wrote: By mkdawuss on August 29, 2012 6:17 PM Will John Gibson be having a "Red-B... [more](4)

    In

    No Joy in Kosville...Mighty Olby Has Struck Out

    djwolf76 wrote: "But the FOX-GOP relationship (which is far more distinguished and prevalen... [more](23)

    KO Mini Blog



    What's in the Olbermann Flood Feed?
    Subscribe to Olbermann Flood Feed:
    RSS/XML

    KO Countdown Clock


    Warning: mktime() [function.mktime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/owatch/www/www.olbermannwatch.com/docs/countdown.php on line 5
    KO's new contract with MSNBC ends in...
    0 days 0 hours 0 minutes

    OlbermannWatch.com "My Faves" Set

    OlbermannWatch.com Favorited Photos from other Flickr Users

    Got OlbyPhotos? See some on Flickr? DO NOT email us. Send us a FlickrMail instead. Include a link to the photo. If we like the photo you will see it displayed in the Olby Flickr Flood above.

    New to Flickr? Sign up for a FREE Flickr account!


    Got some OlbyVideo? See some on YouTube? DO NOT email us. Send us a YouTube Messages instead. Include a link to the video. If we like the video you will see it displayed in our favorites list in our YouTube page.

    New to YouTube? Sign up for a FREE YouTube account!

    Red Meat Blog
    Keith Olbermann Quotes
    Countdown Staff Writers

    If they're not on Keith's payroll...

    ...they should be...

    Crooks & Liars
    Daily Kos
    Eschaton
    Huffington Post
    Media Matters for America
    MyDD
    News Corpse
    No Quarter
    Raw Story
    Talking Points Memo
    Think Progress
    TVNewser
    Keith Lovers

    MSNBC's Countdown
    Bloggerman
    MSNBC Transcripts
    MSNBC Group at MSN

    Drinking with Keith Olbermann
    Either Relevant or True
    KeithOlbermann.org
    Keith Olbermann is Evil
    Olbermann Nation
    Olbermann.org
    Thank You, Keith Olbermann

    Don't Be Such A Douche
    Eyes on Fox
    Liberal Talk Radio
    Oliver Willis
    Sweet Jesus I Hate Bill O'Reilly

    Anonymous Rat
    For This Relief Much Thanks
    Watching Olbermann Watch

    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site I
    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site II
    Keith Olbermann Links
    Olberfans
    Sports Center Altar
    Nothing for Everyone

    Democratic Underground KO Forum
    Television Without Pity KO Forum
    Loony KO Forum (old)
    Loony KO Forum (new)
    Olberfans Forum (old)
    Olberfans Forum (new)
    Keith Watchers

    186k per second
    Ace of Spades HQ
    Cable Gamer
    Dean's World
    Doug Ross@Journal
    Extreme Mortman
    Fire Keith Olbermann
    Hot Air
    Inside Cable News
    Instapundit
    Jawa Report
    Johnny Dollar's Place
    Just One Minute
    Little Green Footballs
    Mark Levin
    Media Research Center
    Moonbattery.com
    Moorelies
    National Review Media Blog
    Narcissistic Views
    Newsbusters
    Pat Campbell Show
    Radio Equalizer
    Rathergate
    Riehl World View
    Sister Toldjah
    Toys in the Attic
    Webloggin
    The Dark Side of Keith Olbermann
    World According to Carl

    Thanks for the blogroll link!

    Age of Treason
    Bane Rants
    The Blue Site
    Cabal of Doom-De Oppresso Libre
    Chuckoblog
    Conservative Blog Therapy
    Conservathink
    Country Store
    Does Anyone Agree?
    The Drunkablog!
    Eclipse Ramblings
    If I were President of USA
    I'll Lay Down My Glasses
    Instrumental Rationality
    JasonPye.com
    Kevin Dayhoff
    Last Train Out Of Hell
    Leaning Straight Up
    Limestone Roof
    Mein BlogoVault
    NostraBlogAss
    Peacerose Journal
    The Politics of CP
    Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy
    Rat Chat
    Return of the Conservatives
    The Right Place
    Rhymes with Right
    seanrobins.com
    Six Meat Buffet
    Sports and Stuff
    Stout Republican
    Stuck On Stupid
    Things I H8
    TruthGuys
    Verum Serum
    WildWeasel

    Friends of OlbyWatch

    Aaron Barnhart
    Eric Deggans
    Jason Clarke
    Ron Coleman
    Victria Zdrok
    Keith Resources

    Google News: Keith Olbermann
    Feedster: Keith Olbermann
    Technorati: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Countdown
    Wikiality: Keith Olbermann
    Keith Olbermann Quotes on Jossip
    Keith Olbermann Photos
    NNDB Olbermann Page
    IMDB Olbermann Page
    Countdown Guest Listing & Transcripts
    Olbermann Watch FAQ
    List of Politics on Countdown (by party)
    Mark Levin's Keith Overbite Page
    Keith Olbermann's Diary at Daily Kos
    Olbermann Watch in the News

    Houston Chronicle
    Playboy
    The Journal News
    National Review
    San Antonio Express
    The Hollywood Reporter
    The Journal News
    Los Angeles Times
    American Journalism Review
    Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
    St. Petersburg Times
    Kansas City Star
    New York Post/Page Six
    Washington Post
    Associated Press
    PBS
    New York Daily News
    Online Journalism Review
    The Washingon Post
    Hartford Courant
    WTWP-AM
    The New York Observer
    The Washington Post


    Countdown with Keith Olbermann
    Great Moments in Broadcast Journalism
    Great Thanks Hall of Fame
    Keith Olbermann
    MSM KO Bandwagon
    Olbermann
    Olbermann Watch Channel on You Tube
    Olbermann Watch Debate
    Olbermann Watch Image Gallery
    Olbermann Watch Polling Service
    OlbermannWatch
    OlbyWatch Link Roundup
    TVNewser "Journalism"

    July 2013
    September 2012
    August 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008
    December 2007
    November 2007
    October 2007
    September 2007
    August 2007
    July 2007
    June 2007
    May 2007
    April 2007
    March 2007
    February 2007
    January 2007
    December 2006
    November 2006
    October 2006
    September 2006
    August 2006
    July 2006
    June 2006
    May 2006
    April 2006
    March 2006
    February 2006
    January 2006
    December 2005
    November 2005
    October 2005
    September 2005
    August 2005
    June 2005
    May 2005
    April 2005
    March 2005
    February 2005
    January 2005
    December 2004
    November 2004

    Google

    Olbermann Watch Masthead

    Managing Editor

    Robert Cox
    olby at olbywatch dot com

    Contributors

    Mark Koldys
    Johnny Dollar's Place

    Brandon Coates
    OlbyWatch

    Chris Matthews' Leg
    Chris Matthews' Leg

    Howard Mortman
    Extreme Mortman

    Trajan 75
    Think Progress Watch

    Konservo
    Konservo

    Doug Krile
    The Krile Files

    Teddy Schatz
    OlbyWatch

    David Lunde
    Lundesigns

    Alex Yuriev
    Zubrcom

    Red Meat
    OlbyWatch



    Technorati Links to OlbyWatchLinks to OlbermannWatch.com

    Technorati Links to OlbyWatch Blog posts tagged with "Olbermann"

    Combined Feed
    (OlbyWatch + KO Mini-blog)

    Who Links To Me


    Mailing List RSS Feed
    Google Groups
    Subscribe to Olbermann Watch Mailing List
    Email:
    Visit this group



    XML
    Add to Google
    Add to My Yahoo!
    Subscribe with Bloglines
    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Add to My AOL
    Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader
    R|Mail
    Simpify!
    Add to Technorati Favorites!

    Subscribe in myEarthlink
    Feed Button Help


    Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004


    September 9, 2005
    From Worst to First

    Tonight was Olby's night to gloat. The Vice-President was heckled by someone who cursed at him, and for Countdown, that immediately becomes headline news. The clip ran at 8:01, but Olby was going to play it again, and the rerun was teased at 8:13, 8:14, and 8:22. Finally it ran again at 8:34, and just to make sure nobody missed his sledgehammer-like point, KO brought it up yet again at 8:40, when he was chatting with Howard Fineman. (Fineman is the perfect pundit for all occasions--he can go on with Laura Ingraham and serve up exactly what she wants to hear, then come on Countdown and say whatever makes Keith happy.)

    The ostensible reason for inviting Fineman was to discuss comments critical of Bush from the Manchester Union-Leader and columnist Robert Novak (also teased incessantly). And, um, the last time Olby ever thought the opinions of the Union-Leader were news? And for that matter when did he ever cite Robert Novak for his insightful commentary?

    Oh wait, he did cite Robert Novak: when he named him one of the "worst people in the world". But today Novak was suddenly a respected columnist. If only Bob had known, all he had to do was say something critical of Bush, and in Olby's world, he goes from worst to first.

    Olby had more "worst" people tonight. They included Tom Tancedo and Rick Santorum. What do they have in common? That's right, they are both Republicans. Are any of KO's "worst people" ever Democrats or liberals? We decided to do a quick search of the msnbc archives. Here are the "worst people" that we found:

    • Bill O'Reilly [Fox News]
    • Brit Hume [Fox News - twice]
    • Pat Robertson
    • Ann Coulter
    • Rush Limbaugh [twice]
    • Paula Jones
    • Geraldo Rivera [Fox News]
    • Robert Novak [twice]
    • Wayne LaPierre
    • David Horowitz
    • Brent Bozell
    • The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page

    So the breakdown is:

    • Conservatives/Republicans: nine
    • Fox News personnel: three
    • Liberals/Democrats: zero

    Incredibly, Olby still claims he is "non-partisan". As proof of it, he brags that he never votes. Thank heaven for small favors.


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (67) | | View blog reactions

    67 Comments

    Wow, Cox. Your blog is yet another pack of full of lies. For more info, visit my blog.

    First why don't we do what I always do in my blog response. We'll dissect each inaccuracy one at a time.

    Lie #1: KO was gloating that Cheney was cursed at. Not necessarily. I'm sure Keith would have played that clip non-stop if someone had been cursing Al Gore out. You see Cox, there has not been a Democratic president since Countdown debuted in 2003. Likewise, we don't know Keith would react if we had a liberal in office. So either you've conveniently forgotten that piece of information, or you weren't born until after Countdown's debut. I'm going with the latter myself. Secondly, Cheney said the exact same thing to Democratic senator Patrick Leahy last year, another tidbit you've forgotten to post. With that most recent statement in mind, Keith's "gloating" was quite justified in the terms of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

    Lie #2:Howard Fineman is a shapeshifter to whomever he is appearing with. Now I haven't seen enough Mr. Fineman to judge whether or not you accusation is valid or not, but I think Fineman brought up some excellent points last night. Believe it or not Cox, there ARE Republicans who disagree with their leader and criticize him when he's done wrong. That's part of a little something called DEMOCRACY.

    Lie #3:Because he criticized Bush, KO now considers Robert Novak a credible journalist. WRONG! Keith never showed any indication of this. He simply was showing that there were Republicans upset with the President's handling of Katrina. "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."-Thomas Jefferson. I know, how dare KO show reality that we are not living in a Communist society where everybody agrees with our leader and anyone who does not is an automatic traitor who must be sent to the gallows. And where was Novak teased on this episode? Unless are you referring to him playing the tape of Novak cussing out James Carville(which I think I can count on my left hand how many times he played that), that remark has no basis to last night's broadcast.

    Lie #4:Being a Republican automatically makes you eligible for "Worst Person in the World." You raise an intresting point that a lot of the nominees are indeed Republican/Conservative. However, the people on this list are on there because they did something that was stupidly self-serving and/or cruel. Santorum, for instance, wants to increase penalties on those who refuse to evacutate during a natural disaster. But as Keith pointed out, how do you prosecute dead people.

    Lie #4 Hypocrisy #1-I find it intresting that you constantly slaughter Keith for alledgedly not getting his facts right, or targeting certain groups of people. Yet how can you be upset that Coulter, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly made his Worst Person in the World?

    Lie #4 Relevent Thought #1-I find it hard to believe that a supposedly grown man(I'm starting to get serious doubts though) like yourself is getting himself all worked up over a list that is not an official word, nor something a nominee will carry with them the rest of their life. But rather, it is a JOKE, a light-hearted look at all the corruption and stupidity in this world.

    Mr. Cox, please explain to me. What is your justification for devoting a whole blog to attacking one journalist for not performing up to your standards, when you yourself are not a real journalist, nor do you always have common sense and/or correct facts in your post?

    And this is the blog Cox runs primarily by proxy. Well done, D. Hunker down,now.

    I'm not Mr. cox but maybe i can help first of all
    olby is not a journalist he's a hatchetman for the
    the left......you know what if you don't like this
    blog go back to your own stupid blog ......boy things must busy there if you and pauley boy can waste your time here.

    I tuned by Olbermann about five times for ten second intervals last night. I saw Keith blabbing about Dick Cheney getting heckled at least three times. Exactly how big a "story" is that? Does a ranting crazy person warrant such exposure? Well . . . I guess we could say the same thing about Keith.

    Perhaps Keith identified with the nutjob? After all, they both basically do the same thing. Maybe Keith should have the crazy profane lunatic who yelled inanities at the Vice President co-host his show -- I don't think anyone would notice the difference.

    I also caught the last segment on "worst person in the world." I was actually frightened by his demeanor and behavior. That a talk show host can be such a hateful prick is beyond me. As far as the overwhelming bias of his choices, that is so obvious that anyone defending these choices as "non-partisan" is either a political operative or a complete idiot.

    By the way, for all you Dummycrats out there, the Louisiana State authorities (i.e. the Governor) prevented the Red Cross and Salvation Army from going to the Superdome because they didn't want people to think it was OK to stay there. Will Krazy Keith list Babineaux Blanco as a "worst person in the world?" Stupid Liberals. I think I'll post something supplementary below. Yes. . .yes I will!

    I tuned by Olbermann about five times for ten second intervals last night. I saw Keith blabbing about Dick Cheney getting heckled at least three times. Exactly how big a "story" is that? Does a ranting crazy person warrant such exposure? Well . . . I guess we could say the same thing about Keith.

    Perhaps Keith identified with the nutjob? After all, they both basically do the same thing. Maybe Keith should have the crazy profane lunatic who yelled inanities at the Vice President co-host his show -- I don't think anyone would notice the difference.

    I also caught the last segment on "worst person in the world." I was actually frightened by his demeanor and behavior. That a talk show host can be such a hateful prick is beyond me. As far as the overwhelming bias of his choices, that is so obvious that anyone defending these choices as "non-partisan" is either a political operative or a complete idiot.

    By the way, for all you Dummycrats out there, the Louisiana State authorities (i.e. the Governor) prevented the Red Cross and Salvation Army from going to the Superdome because they didn't want people to think it was OK to stay there. Will Krazy Keith list Babineaux Blanco as a "worst person in the world?" Stupid Liberals. I think I'll post something supplementary below. Yes. . .yes I will!

    INTRODUCING KRAZY FOR KEITH'S "WORST HOSTS IN THE WORLD" LIST

    #1. Krazy Keith (of course)
    #2. Chris Matthews
    #3. Paula Zahn
    #4. Aron Brown
    #5. Lou Dobbs
    #6. Larry King


    By the way, did anyone see this (excuse me if this has already been posted somewhere on the site):

    http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/335982p-286995c.html

    "It might be a good idea for Keith Olbermann and Rick Kaplan to give each other a wide berth until things cool down. . . MSNBC staffers in the Secaucus newsroom-studio watched in horror Monday night as the volatile Kaplan, the president of the cable outlet, publicly laced into the eccentric Olbermann, anchor of the 8 p.m. show "Countdown," after the latter eulogized lung-cancer victim Peter Jennings with a graphic rant about his own cancer scare."

    Talk about the Crazy leading the Crazy! Wackadoo central at MSLSD!

    D-Day: nice of you to join us here, instead of just sniping from the sidelines. Your list of "lies" was most amusing; you obviously have adopted the moveon definition of "lie", since you can't recognize a difference of opinion when you see one. But let's try and have a reasoned discussion instead of the schoolyard insults, shall we?

    "we don't know Keith would react if we had a liberal in office"

    We don't?

    "So either you've conveniently forgotten that piece of information, or you weren't born until after Countdown's debut."

    Talk about conveniently forgetting things, Olbermann hosted for years on MSNBC before "Countdown" began. His coverage during the Clinton administration was as nauseatingly sycophantic as his Bush-era coverage is twisted and slanted. But perhaps you weren't born until after Olbermann's "Big Show" on MSNBC. So much for your "lie" #1.

    "Lie #2:Howard Fineman is a shapeshifter to whomever he is appearing with. Now I haven't seen enough Mr. Fineman to judge whether or not you accusation is valid or not..."

    Let me get this straight: You don't know enough about Fineman to say whether we got this right or not, but never mind, it's still "Lie #2". OK, let's move along...

    "Lie #3:Because he criticized Bush, KO now considers Robert Novak a credible journalist. WRONG! Keith never showed any indication of this."

    Of course not. He cited Novak and read from his column because he considers him an NON-credible source, right? How odd that Novak only gets approving coverage from Olby when Novak says something Olby likes. (And this segment was teased repeatedly). Like we said, Novak goes from worst to first simply because Olby likes Bush-bashing. Non-partisan Olby. Sort of like jumbo shrimp.

    "Lie #4:Being a Republican automatically makes you eligible for "Worst Person in the World." You raise an intresting point that a lot of the nominees are indeed Republican/Conservative."

    Indeed. So what makes it "Lie #4"?

    "However, the people on this list are on there because they did something that was stupidly self-serving and/or cruel."

    Right, and it just so happens that Liberals and/or Democrats NEVER do anything stupid, self-serving, or cruel, at least they don't on OlbyPlanet. Funny how for days as controversy swirled around a Dem Congressmen who likened the US military to the Nazis and Pol Pot, Olby didn't touch the story. But when he found an old Santorum speech with a Nazi analogy from YEARS EARLIER, that became an entire segment on the Hour of Spin.

    "Lie #4 Relevent Thought #1-I find it hard to believe that a supposedly grown man(I'm starting to get serious doubts though) like yourself is getting himself all worked up over a list that is not an official word, nor something a nominee will carry with them the rest of their life. But rather, it is a JOKE, a light-hearted look at all the corruption and stupidity in this world."

    I find it hard to believe that a supposedly grown person like yourself is getting all worked up over a website that is not an official word, nor something that poor Olby will carry with him the rest of his life. But rather it is a light-hearted look at all the bias and stupidity in Olby's world.

    "What is your justification for devoting a whole blog to attacking one journalist for not performing up to your standards, when you yourself are not a real journalist, nor do you always have common sense and/or correct facts in your post?"

    This is called the "tu quoque" fallacy. It is the last refuge of debaters who are unable to argue on facts and logic. You might want to look it up.

    I hereby agree to determine who is righteous in the debate of one "Johnny Dollar" versus one "D-Day."

    Debate Rating Form

    Judge: Krazy for Keith

    Debate Topic: As above

    Procedure:

    1. Use this scale: 1= not at all

    2 = somewhat

    3 = to a great extent

    3. Using the scale in (2), rate separately the two team members on the following criteria:

    NAME NAME

    ___J. Dollar_____ _____D. Day______

    CRITERIA:

    Rating Rating

    A. Gave clear reason ___3___ ___-1___

    for his/her position

    B. Spoke within time limit ___3___ ___3___

    C. Showed knowledge of topic ___3___ ___1___

    D. Spoke so as to be heard ___2___ ___2___

    E. Cooperated on a division of labor__?__ __-3__

    TOTAL POINTS ___11___ ___2___

    JUSTIFICATION:

    Explain why you assigned each debater the rating that you did assign to her/him on each of the criteria:

    Johnny Dollar created cogent concise arguments with mastry of sentence construct and content. He included a reference to debate lingo in Latin, which was a turn on. I give him 4 stars.

    D. Day didn't make much sense. He also contradicted himself. In addition, he used no cool Latin phrases and clearly had to Google "tu quoque." I give him 1 star.

    JD,

    What exactly is "light-hearted" about your "look at all the bias and stupidity in Olby's world," (as if calling people stupid and worse is "light-hearted)," unless, of course, "light-hearted" and "mean-spirited" have magically become synonymous?

    Paul, you apparently missed the irony. I was just throwing D-Day's words back at him/her. (S)he seemed to think that Olby declaring people stupid and worse is light-hearted, so I replied in kind.

    How convenient in your "quick search" that you evidently didn't find any liberals, but only Republicans/conservatives.
    My quick search [params: transcript "worst person"] begins with
    1) some Average Joe with an agression problem
    2) an English university professor (obvious liberal, right?)
    3) a (probably) Communist
    4) a liberal save the Guinea Pigs group
    5) some idiot fat person
    6) a bitch
    7) Novak
    8) a union leader
    9) the most hate-filled man in the world

    In case you didn't get it 6) is Coulter and 9) is BORe.

    "Exactly how big a "story" is that?"
    What makes it interesting, but not necessarily big, as KO pointed out is the fact that, for once, the VP is somewhere where they can't handpick the crowd and this is what happens. It's about as big as Fox covering Cheney's tour, live.

    "That a talk show host can be such a hateful prick is beyond me."
    I presume you are talking about BORe, right? Or Sean Hannity? Or "look I saved NO" Joe? Or ...

    Interesting that KKK's (oops, sorry, KfK's) list contains only 'supposed' liberals and no conservatives. Mine would contain at least two of these 'liberals' though, obviously, the top three are all conservatives. Except BORe claims he's not a conservative but an independent, right?

    "Funny how for days as controversy swirled around a Dem Congressmen who likened the US military to the Nazis and Pol Pot, Olby didn't touch the story. But when he found an old Santorum speech with a Nazi analogy from YEARS EARLIER, that became an entire segment on the Hour of Spin."
    Interesting, I never knew KO did that. I presume you have the proof and will provide it. I do know that KO's show covered all the Nazi references when a Dem (Durbin, I believe) did it again. The only reference I knew about Santorum making Nazi analogies was in May of THIS YEAR. You mean he's been using these references for years? Wow, great guy.

    Hello DI (Dickus Insipidus?)

    Congrats on nearing lucidity in your prose.

    I would say that plenty of negative yelps come from crowds when ANY politician is near. To single out a specific yelp ad nauseum displayed Olby's need to the VP, couched in "reportage." After all, does this lone yowling cursing critic have "Mother Sheehan"-style absolute moral authority to represent the people of the USA? Is this one heckler the "everyman" you dems have been looking for? Or is he a deranged profanity slinging nutjob? I would bet the latter. Anyway, this is ONE MAN squeeking -- so why all the fuss? IT SERVES OLBY'S NEEDS, that's why.

    As for this beauty of a line:

    "Interesting that KKK's (oops, sorry, KfK's) list contains only 'supposed' liberals and no conservatives."

    I love the reference to the Ku Klux Klan! Brilliant . . . you can deduce that I am a racist from my posts. How about checking if I am black first you stupid c-sucker? I would bet you are white my mud-slinging liberal pal. Like all good liberals, you believe conservatism = racism. Way to make yourself look stupid.

    As for my PERSONAL list of "worst hosts," it is just that -- A PERSONAL LIST! Perhaps your problem seeing Olby's bias is rooted in your lack of ability to tell what is and is not opinion.

    Lame lame lame

    Correction: "displayed Olby's need [to attack] the VP"

    PIMF

    Furthermore, DI, what does this line mean:

    "[Krazy for Keith's] list contains only 'supposed' liberals. . ."

    If they are just "supposed" liberals, I assume you consider them something other than liberal, and accuse me of unfair labeling? Except I DIDN'T LABEL THEM IDIOT. So, you intuit that I consider these hosts liberal, the same way you intuited my skin color and racial attitudes? Quite frankly, I made up that list based on how crappy the hosts are. They just plain STINK! Nice presumptions though.

    "How convenient in your "quick search" that you evidently didn't find any liberals, but only Republicans/conservatives."

    That's because there weren't any. I don't count some guy in some foreign country since the point is we're living in America, the good old USofA. I also didn't bother to count private sector people like some bigwig at Wal-Mart who did something that Olby didn't like. I looked for a) politicians, b) commentators and pundits, c) reporters and commentators. And the record stands: lots of conseratives and Republicans, zero liberals or Democrats. And I note that your quick search didn't come up with anybody either.

    " I do know that KO's show covered all the Nazi references when a Dem (Durbin, I believe) did it again."

    I am sorry but you are very mistaken. As the controversy swirled about Durbin's remarks, for days on end, Olby spiked the story. And of course Durbin never made "worst" list either. He has the wrong letter after his name for that.

    Finally, a day after Durbin was forced to apologize--and Olby had the night off!--only then did Countdown report on the Durbin controversy.

    http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2005/cyb20050623.asp#2

    You are perfectly free, DI, to try to defend Olby and the Hour of Spin. But your efforts will be more credible if you get your facts straight.

    It would serve everyone well if each of us stops trashing about so. This site's agenda is clear. Many of its proponents embrace polite discussion only if you hold their views. Some are civil, but unyielding. Others are simply surly. The ideological "depth of field" of Olbywatch is narrow. The site's bias-based, and serves only to indict and impugn. There's much we don't know about Katrina, FEMA, and about this administration that will eventually surface. Think back to 9/11. Remember any shocking reports that proved to be false? And others that seemed even more absurd at the time were proven true. In Katrina's wake, we heard of dead infants in the Convention Center. Today, I heard a member of the recovery team say that wasn't true--that they had found no dead infants there. Similarly, certain sniping incidents, along with some rapes that were reported, were never confirmed. When such a disaster fills us with horror, amid complete chaos, unsubstantiated and conflicting reports are common. I feel we've all put too much stock in what we've been hearing. In time, cooler heads will prevail. There will be an investigation and I'm convinced that W won't be at its helm. We need answers, not more spin and eventually a majority of Americans--sensible republicans, moderates and sensible democrats--will succeed in demanding and finding a semblance of truth. Mike "heck of a job" Brownie will retire, we'll pay to rebuild the Gulf Coast, the public will hit rock bottom and change will come. Maybe our leaders will even build higher levees and restore the wetlands. But as I see the bodies floating, the destroyed families, the barely unrecognizable landscape, the stranded loose pets and the broken lives, I can't get too worked up over this petty excuse for a web site. It is but an infected follicle on the butt of a nation shifting painfully in its seat.

    "I would say that plenty of negative yelps come from crowds when ANY politician is near."
    That would be correct, except dissenters aren't allowed to come anywhere near. Usually, the Prez and the VP perform to select audience. Hence, the reporting of it. (Likewise the reporting of both Dem and Rep dissenters when they slip through.)

    "conservatism = racism"
    No, that would be neo-conservatism = racism.
    True conservatives are not racist as it is bad for business. I label you neo-con through guilt by association (why else would j$ be here?).

    "If they are just "supposed" liberals, I assume you consider them something other than liberal, and accuse me of unfair labeling?"
    No, I made no accusation of unfair labeling. I pointed out, correctly, that your list contains what many would call liberals yet none generally labelled conservative. Now if I had said "those that you label liberals" then, yes, that would accuse you of labeling. Simple english.
    The 'supposed' emphasis is because at lest three (KO, Matthews, and Dobbs) I have seen labeled as conservative by liberal interests.

    "your efforts will be more credible if you get your facts straight."
    I did get my facts straight.
    I said " I do know that KO's show covered all the Nazi references when a Dem (Durbin, I believe) did it again."
    What fact was wrong.
    1) KO's show did cover it.
    2) They covered it when a Dem did it.
    Therefore, you are incorrect when you said "I am sorry but you are very mistaken." Your proof had nothing to do with what I actually said, so, please, "get your facts straight."
    BTW, I really do want to know how/when KO pulled up a speech from Santorum "YEARS EARLIER". Otherwise, I presume it is misinformation.

    "That's because there weren't any [liberals]."
    Interesting, there are no liberals in the world except American liberals.

    This is a comedy goldmine!

    Hey Paul. . .Paul, are you there? You said:

    "I can't get too worked up over this petty excuse for a web site. It is but an infected follicle on the butt of a nation shifting painfully in its seat."

    Paul, what do you call a bacterium feeding on the "follicle?" I think the name starts with a "P" and ends with an "S." All your haughty wind-blowing about "civility" and "discourse" is self-serving baloney.

    As for the relentless DI, you sound better when you aren't responding to criticism. Your last post was the least plausible. Calling someone a "racist" based on absolutely nothing is not justifiable. Calling a black dude a KKK member is just plain stupid. By the transitive property, you are stupid.

    By the way, please tell me where the people who think Keith Olbermann is a conservative live. Perchance do they live in "Twinkly Land" where the sugar fairies play tiddlywinks and magical happiness is had by all?

    "1) KO's show did cover it.
    2) They covered it when a Dem did it."

    I'm sorry you are still mistaken. They didn't cover it when Durbin said it. They didn't cover it the next day. Or the day after that, despite it being front page news in papers around the country.

    They didn't even cover it the day Durbin had to apologize as a result of the intensive press coverage (from everyone EXCEPT Olby). They covered the day AFTER he apologized, when the story was old news. They did their best to cover for Durbin.

    "BTW, I really do want to know how/when KO pulled up a speech from Santorum "YEARS EARLIER". Otherwise, I presume it is misinformation."

    Keep presuming. That's a lot easier than actually reading the link I already provided. In May of this year Olby dug up a comment about the NY Times that Santorum made in 2003. That's years earlier. He thought this was so objectionable that he dedicated an entire program segment to it.

    Now why was Santorum's two-year-old comment big news, but Durbin's was not news on the day he said it, the next day, the day after that, or any time until well after he had been forced to apologize (and Olby was conveniently on vacation)? More Olbypocrisy.

    Do you mean the link you didn't bother to label? The link that appears after you discussed Durbin? In most intelligent conversation, one makes a statement then provides the proof. If one changes the subject, one indicates it.

    Wherever did I say when they reported it? Never, which makes your argument invalid. I certainly didn't know when they did, I barely remembered it. The point is that they DID report it. If anything, it's good they reported it after the "story was old news" because it kept it in the news. Duh!
    I would've thought you would've complained that they were keeping it in the news to take shots at Santorum.

    Di, your words are already on the page. You can't rewrite them now:

    "They covered it when a Dem did it."

    No, they AVOIDED covering it when a Dem did it. While every other major news source found it to be big news, Olby didn't want to embarass his ideological soulmate and ignored the story. It was over a week later, and after an apology had to be issued--because of the heavy press coverage by everyone OTHER THAN Olby--that Countdown got to it, and Olby had a convenient day off.

    And Di, I'm still waiting for you to produce all those liberal columnists, left-wing pundits, and Dem Congressmen and Senators who have been named Olby's "worst person". Heck, I'll settle for ONE!

    Um, JD, I remember clearly Durbin getting coverage on Countdown following his remarks. Want proof?

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8330948/ (And yes I'm aware Keith wasn't on during this show!)
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8085423 (Keep reading down, it's the June 22 entry)

    There you have it. Dick Durbin's comments were a big story on Countdown. And it was mentioned more than these two instances, I assure you.

    I won't get worked up either. I stand by what I said earlier. Cox has no right to critcize Keith if he can't tell the truth. JD's response was so selective, I won't either bother to respond.(Instead, I shall sit wondering why he hasn't been offered a job at Fox News.) The main reason why I even tried to reply on here the first plase was to provide an alternative point of view and provide evidence that Keith is not a psycho for anyone who stumbled on this site accidently, but I can see a dissenting opinion is not welcome here.(You may want to check out my Thomas Jefferson quote earlier though) I am a devoted fan of both Countdown and Keith Olbermann, and no silly little web blog is going to change that.

    Your welcome.

    "Lie #1: KO was gloating that Cheney was cursed at. Not necessarily. I'm sure Keith would have played that clip non-stop if someone had been cursing Al Gore out."

    I'd assume that lots of people in crowds HAVE heckled Al Gore. That's the point. Why do you think campaign stops and townhall meetings are micromanaged?

    Someone ranting at Cheney in a crowd is only news if, like Keith, you've argued that the disaster of New Orleans will represent the entire Bush tenure. That it stands for the failure to find Bin Laden, to vaniquish Al Qaida, and for what's happening in Iraq. And a heckler is important if you've argued that New Orleans will bring such approprium on the Administration that it is a turning point.

    If your argument is that over-the-top (and Keith made it) then when the polls show otherwise, you have to latch on some nut in a crowd doing something you wouldn't have paid two seconds worth of attention to, the day before.

    "With that most recent statement in mind, Keith's "gloating" was quite justified in the terms of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth."

    So you're simultaneously arguing that Keith wasn't singling Cheney out politically AND that he was. Interesting logic...

    "Lie #2 Howard Fineman is a shapeshifter to whomever he is appearing with. Now I haven't seen enough Mr. Fineman to judge whether or not you accusation is valid or not."

    You say, you feel Fineman brought up excellent points. Who answered or countered them? Rick Santorium? Was Robert Novak invited on to agree the disaster was mismanaged and to put also fix the blame on Democrats too, as he has done (though Keith didn't mention that)? Did Keith play unbiased devil's advocate with Fineman so both sides could be aired, my friend?

    "Lie #3:Because he criticized Bush, KO now considers Robert Novak a credible journalist. WRONG! Keith never showed any indication of this. He simply was showing that there were Republicans upset with the President's handling of Katrina."

    Judging by your thinking, I'm not surprised you wouldn't see a certain irony in labeling someone the "worst person in the world", berate them for making a deal that Judy Miller did not make (without mention that Tim Russert must have made some sort of deal too) and THEN use them as being a credible ...anything... when it conveniently suits your purposes. But maybe Keith thinks that ALL Republicans are the worst people in the world and therefore it doesn't matter who you designate as having a credible opinion on anything...

    "Lie #4:Being a Republican automatically makes you eligible for "Worst Person in the World." You raise an intresting point that a lot of the nominees are indeed Republican/Conservative. However, the people on this list are on there because they did something that was stupidly self-serving and/or cruel."

    And goodness there's no Democrats who have done anything "stupidly self-serving and/or cruel". Sandy Berger's with documents before he goes before the 9/11 commission is just a card... The head of NARAL's decision to go with an ad linking John Robert's to abortion clinic violence, just an ole silly-billy... Joe Wilson caught in the act of lying about seeing forged documents and chastised by the 9/11 Commission.... just a wild and crazy guy....


    "Lie #4 Hypocrisy #1-I find it intresting that you constantly slaughter Keith for alledgedly not getting his facts right, or targeting certain groups of people. Yet how can you be upset that Coulter, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly made his Worst Person in the World?"

    No, what he questioned is why there are no liberals or Democrats on the list. I think it's interesting too that you have no hesitation in comparing anchorman Olbermann to pundits. And we'll agree with you there... Olbermann IS a mirror-image Rush Limbaugh... He is Anne Coulter's more evil twin... Perhaps a better comparision is Olbermann and Al Franken...which brings up the point about Al and his loans and the head of Air America and money meant for charities...and why NEITHER entity will ever be Countdown's WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD...

    """But rather, it is a JOKE, a light-hearted look at all the corruption and stupidity in this world.

    Mr. Cox, please explain to me. What is your justification for devoting a whole blog to attacking one journalist for not performing up to your standards, when you yourself are not a real journalist, nor do you always have common sense and/or correct facts in your post?""""

    I'll help Bob answer that. There is a blog devoted to Kieth because we too enjoy a light-hearted look at stupidity and corruption in the world. And as long as people like you are around to write illogical and intentionally obtuse responses, we'll have plenty of fodder for both outrage and laughter.

    Um, D-Day, thanks for proving my point.

    Your first link goes to a Countdown show that took place a week AFTER the comments were made. That was the FIRST time Countdown even mentioned them. Meanwhile, they were reported in the NY Times, the Washington Post, ABC News--heck, even Al Jazeera! But Countdown was too busy protecting Durbin to take note of his comments until well after he was forced to apologize.

    Your second link goes to a CYA blog entry Olbermann did, which is instructive because it shows he was aware of the story (how could he not have been, it was all over the papers). Yet he still kept it off the air for all that time. Countdown was not allowed to report on the story until well after Durbin apologized--a week after the other news services were all over the story. Why?

    "I can see a dissenting opinion is not welcome here."

    Well, if you mean that when dissenters post nonsense and fiction that we have the unmitigated gall to disagree and point out the truth, then you may have a point. If you require that everybody swallow anything you hand out without questioning it, then you have come to the wrong place.

    Durbin's comments were NOT "a big story on Countdown". They weren't even covered on Countdown until a week after all the other major media had been all over the story, and then only in an attempt to minimize Durbin's statements. He never got named "worst person in the world", did he?

    Oh, and I'm STILL waiting for all those Democrat Congressmen who made Olby's "worst person". You know, the list that is devoted to Republicans, conservatives, and anyone who works for Fox News--but not Democrats.

    PS: We're all happy to read your comments, D-Day, but you don't have to post them twice. I will delete one of your duplicate posts.

    D-Day,

    You just called Bob a liar (lie #1,2,3,4...), accused him of having lapses in commonsense, and questioned his maturity... NOW you say that you can see that "dissent is not welcomed here"?!

    Did you write more insults that were censored from the site or something? Or is it that you're the one who can't handle dissent in that you were countered.

    We didn't censor any of the name-calling, insults, or personal attacks. They are so revealing we let them stand for all to see.

    Top Ten List Of Non-Republican/Non-Conservative Candidates For Countdown's Worst Person of In The World:

    10. Bill Moyers for blantant log-rolling and profiteering as head of the Florence and John Schumann Foundation.

    9.Ted Kennedy-- for being so tin-eared as to be unaware of the irony of his talking about "leaving people in the water".


    8. Howard Dean-- As Al Sharpton pointed out, Dean did not have one black member of his administration when he was governor of Vermont. But that didn't stop DNC Chairman Dean from saying "You know, the Republicans are not very friendly to different kinds of people. They're a pretty monolithic party. Pretty much, they all behave the same, and they all look the same. It's pretty much a white Christian party."

    7. Sandy Berger--as someone wrote "A little song,a little dance, a little classified document down your pants".

    6. Dick Durban-- for reasons stated.


    5. Air America CEO Mark Walsh-- for taking grant money that should have gone to a children's charity.

    4. Paul Ruditis-- author of The Rainbow Party, a book for adolescents, it explores teen attitudes about oral sex. It's really just titilation for dirty old men with passages like "Gin took the slender shaft of the tube in her palm. She gave a gentle tug along the base and watched as the lipstick extended to its full length. Her eyes darted to the sides, making sure no one was watching as she tilted the ruby red tip to her lips."


    3. Kofi Anan--for sitting back and closing his eyes to the Oil for Food corruption.


    2.NARAL President Nancy Keenan for NARAL's ad linking Roberts and abortion clinic violence.


    And NUMBER ONE for Non-Republican/Non-Conservative Candidates For Countdown's Worst Person of In The World:

    ***Keith Olbermann** (and anyone else capable of a freudian slip concept like Worst Person In The World)

    People, I'm not a prude and could probably teach everyone here a few new cuss words, but the blog is starting to sound like one of those hideously foul-mouthed liberal boards.

    JD,

    If you're serving as the insult meter here, any idea of KfK's? Every post is laced with several.

    Actually, having gone back and caught the "KKK" remark that escaped my attention earlier, I've changed my mind about the language.

    It's such a cheap shot, Paul, we need to grant Krazy a bit of license.

    I'm just a guest in this house. Mr Cox sets the rules, and he hasn't authorized me to do any censorship. So people say what they like and take responsibility for their words.

    Just read this on Drudge.

    Wonder if Keith will find the heckling of THIS guy significant...

    'THE BIG BOO' CROWD HISSES KANYE WEST
    Fri Sep 09 2005 10:30:28 ET

    The chart topping hip hop rapper star who used a network hurricane fundraiser to charge "George Bush doesn't care about black people" was loudly and lustily booed during last night's NFL kickoff show.

    The appearance of Kanye West, who was beamed into the Boston stadium via remote from Los Angeles, received a strongly negative response from the crowd.

    "The boos were thunderous and lasted for much of his number," reports the BOSTON GLOBE.

    Developing...

    I quite enjoy saying whatever I want. In fact, I enjoy hearing people say whatever they want. Let the insults fly, but try to pepper the insulting posts with facts and references.

    Just saw Dr. Dean with Wolf Blitzer tonight. Dean is the "worst man in the world." Hateful talk about the "racial nature" of Katrina from a white race baiter. He of course attacked the Federal government (FEMA sucks, etc.). However, Wolf actually asked a few REAL QUESTIONS of Dean -- he asked (paraphrased) "do you really think the president doesn't care about all Americans equally / doesn't care about blacks?" Dean said yes. He asked if the State and local authorities did anything wrong. Dean squirmed, then blamed Bush saying the National Guard was in Iraq. Of course this is irrelevant, as there were plenty of other troops available and they were not called in. In addition, only the COMBAT troops (1/3 of the N. Guard Louisiana total) are in Iraq. The MP's etc. (the people you need in these situations) were all right at home. In addition, neighboring States were NOT ASKED to contribute troops. In fact, the Governor had no ability to control the situation. Wolf even asked about the botched evacuation. Dean responded 20/20 hindsight is not useful! What the Hell is he doing if not using his hindsight! At a point in the interview, Dean accused Wolf of parroting "Republican attack points!" WOLF BLITZER! What a joke.

    I'm sure Olby will be all over this . . . .not.

    C,

    You've read my posts long enough to know I don't condone the KKK reference. I do, however, understand it and to be honest, it occured to me before it popped up here. KfK's hard to like, at least for me. I didn't use the KKK thing because it goes against my grain. Insults and slurs get us nowhere. Were the roles reversed, however, I suspect that KfK'd be all over it.

    KfK's extremely caustic. Even though I've chosen to ignore him, he continues to insult me. I must admit that the Latin's a little pretensious but we all have our peccadilloes.

    I disagree on most levels with Mr. Cox, you, JD and all of the old conservative Olbywatch regulars. You also know that I hold no blind allegience to KO. I do my best to be fair.

    Even though things got heated in here in the past, there was a shred of mutual respect that surfaced regularly. I'm not seeing that now.

    In my opinion, y'all could lighten up a whole heck of a lot. But of course, that doesn't count for much here in the Keith Kill Zone, where mine are merely the self-serving, bizarro ramblings of a holier-than-thou, grotesque idealogue--a pathetic hack, suffering from Krugmanesque dementia.

    We can debate or toss turds. One gets us somewhere. The other just gets us dirty.

    To Paul

    "I don't condone the KKK reference. I do, however, understand it" What the Hell do you mean? Nice liberal doublespeak.

    "Were the roles reversed, however, I suspect that KfK'd be all over it." WRONG

    "we all have our peccadilloes" POOR WORD CHOICE

    Definitions of peccadillo on the Web:

    * indiscretion: a petty misdeed
    wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

    "that doesn't count for much here in the Keith Kill Zone, where mine are merely the self-serving, bizarro ramblings of a holier-than-thou, grotesque idealogue--a pathetic hack, suffering from Krugmanesque dementia." CORRECT!

    You had to look up pecadilloes?

    An alternate def is "small flaw"

    "But of course, that doesn't count for much here in the Keith Kill Zone, where mine are merely the self-serving, bizarro ramblings of a holier-than-thou, grotesque idealogue--a pathetic hack, suffering from Krugmanesque dementia."

    Not a bit of it, Paul. But you've nicely summed up the host of Countdown.

    Paul

    I decided to provide the definition of peccadillo to avoid further debate on the subject. Unfortunately, even that didn't work.

    Using Latin phrases is pretentious. I believe you were looking for a word in that vein:

    Definitions of pretentious on the Web:

    * making claim to or creating an appearance of (often undeserved) importance or distinction; "a pretentious country house"; "a pretentious fraud"; "a pretentious scholarly edition"
    * ostentatious: intended to attract notice and impress others; "an ostentatious sable coat"
    * ostentatious: of a display that is tawdry or vulgar
    wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

    By the way, you could address the issues and avoid all the insults. If you look back to the origin of all of this, it started with one nasty quip:

    "Bon Voyage... Be sure you pack sun screen."

    Holy Cow...

    In referring to your pretentious use of Latin as a "peccadillo," I was being KIND. "Pretensious" was misspelled, not misused. But thanks for the pedantic exercise of supplying the definition. Are you going to now supply the definition of "pedantic?" I didn't realize spelling was so important here.

    That you consider my comments insults is noteworthy. Compared to yours, they're compliments. Let's be honest about what started this tedious exchange. To be precise, I reacted to YOUR comment "I now must demand that a consensus occur on this thread, or I will be forced leave you all to create my own Island Domain." Since I disagreed, I merely asked you to make good on your offer. Yes, I was snide. I though it was funny. Unfortunately, that lapse of judgment on my part sparked this tedious exchange (for which I deeply apologize to readers). And in retrospect, it was as "unfunny" I suppose, as Keith can be when he attempts humor.

    The main reason I disagree is that you presented opinions based on hypothetical arguments, which I don't argue. I also think some of your conclusions premature and that we need time to get to ones that are more informed. In the heat of the moment is no time to decide. Hmmm...I believe this is consistent with what I'm hearing from the White House. How could a self-serving, bizarro, holier-than-thou, grotesque ideologue--a pathetic hack, suffering from Krugmanesque dementia--actually AGREE with the White House on something?

    While there are few absolutes, there's a wealth of info out there on what happened and when. The product of Katrina's analysis could eventually fill entire buildings. DailyKos summarizes a Wikipedia timeline but realizing that some of you may not want to spend time there, I'm including its source.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Hurricane_Katrina

    As C noted, there will be plenty of "blame" to go around in Katrina's aftermath. (Not that we want to play the "Blame Game," right? ;D). I agree with C that FEMA's culpability will likely be significant. I think you're also right to suspect the state and local government responses. Still, I think it premature to speculate on where they erred or how much.

    K--I'm sorry we got off on the wrong foot. But again, if you want to go at it with me, you'll have to stop with the insults already.

    Your'e obviously a smart fellow. I'll bet you can be civil, too if you make the effort. If you find the prospect unappealing, I'm cool with that--there are plenty of other folks here who seem quite comfortable with your approach. My abstinence shouldn't inhibit your participation in any way.

    BTW, C, Thanks, but these are K's words, not mine. In my opinion, KO's flawed, (as are we all) but not the demon this site paints him to be.

    "In my opinion, KO's flawed, (as are we all) but not the demon this site paints him to be."

    Olbermann is not a demon. He's merely an obnoxious and petty partisan, with that drive for kicking the easy target that's always found in elitist prigs. And just like all elitist prigs, he sees himself as self-effacing and wry.

    OK, enough of the joking around.

    The problem between you and me is your inability to address basic facts. Nothing is hypothetical about evacuating a city or following emergency plans. If you choose to waste words dancing around solid evidence, then what is left but idle banter. Perhaps you should not post on any subject unless they have been analyzed by committees? Or better yet, pretend you are on a committee and respond to something.

    How about we discuss Sandy Berger? His trial is over. Or maybe the 9/11 commission -- although they seemed to have neglected to inform us of Able Danger's activities, didn't they?

    Just stick to the facts. My original post on this site remains unanswered. Why don't you start with that. If you do not plan on answering, spare me the long-winded reasons as to why you will not.

    I enjoy your posts, by in large, Krazy. I'm glad you found this site.

    But frankly you bait the sort of response that you get. If it's just a matter of "sticking to the facts" and discussing them, then why do you also add, "stupid liberals" and "dummycrats" (Frankly, the dummycrats and repugs names are so juvenile.)

    Again, I don't mean to come off as your mother, because I've seen people be far and away more incendiary here and much less eloquent. But I think honesty is in order, and that would mean your admitting that you love a good World Federation of Wrestling match and generally try to provoke one.

    Dear C.

    Ontday lowbay my overcay!

    Now we have to contend with pig latin.

    Here's a fine peccadillo.

    I got a couple of things in the mail today from a friend who has been lurking here at Olbermann Watch and enjoying the fireworks.

    She sent me snippets from Bloggerman, Keith's MSNBC blog.

    I had managed to miss both of these editions and have gotten a kick out of these sterling examples of Bloggerman's reasoning abilities and his objectivity.

    Concerning the Newsweek retraction of their story about the Koran and Abu Ghraib-- you might be interested to know that allowing the media to shoot itself in the foot is tantamount to treason:

    "Or would somebody rather play politics with this? The way Craig Crawford reconstructed it, this one went similarly to the way the Killian Memos story evolved at the White House. The news organization turns to the administration for a denial. The administration says nothing. The news organization runs the story. The administration jumps on the necks of the news organization with both feet � or has its proxies do it for them.

    That�s beyond shameful. It�s treasonous."


    My friend also sent a Bloggermann where Keith concludes that Lance Armstrong is very likely guilty of taking steroids because he once told striking members of Screen Actors Guild that he wouldn't make a commerical while they were striking about pay rates for actors in non-speaking roles, and then later changed his mind and filmed an ad anyway.

    THIS from a guy who concluded that the big story about Sandy Berger sneaking classified documents out of the national archive wasn't that a former Clinton staffer had stolen and destroyed classifed documents before he testified in a congressional investigation. Rather, it was the WH leaking of the investigation of Berger.

    THIS from a guy who defended is still defending Dan Rather by saying he was set-up by the WH.

    "I hope I�m damned wrong about Armstrong", Olbermann concludes.

    Yeah. We can tell.

    K,

    You say: ?Can we agree that the FIRST RESPONDERS (the Gov. of Louisiana and Mayor of New Orleans) are primarily to blame here?" (Sounds like you want to play the ?Blame Game?. Be careful?you don?t want to jeopardize your ?Great American? status).

    -->I can?t. The reason is the word ?primarily?. It?s too early to decide. In certain areas, state and local leaders erred, but the disaster quickly grew beyond their resources/abilities/authority to respond, them FEMA and the feds are culpable. Subjective analysis will determine the relative gravity.
    While evacuation plans were in place, they were flawed. (See links at bottom of this article?which also makes good points re criticism of Nagin, et al):

    http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Controversy_over_whether_New_Orleans_Mayor_failed_to_follow_hurricane_plan).

    For years, articles documented that were a serious hurricane or other calamity strike N.O., hundreds of thousands of its poorest residents would be stranded.

    http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/0905/01edwitt.html

    Nagin knew there was no way the poorest residents could get out, even if ordered. He publicized this. The city didn?t have the resources to move that many that quickly. Buses he could have commandeered quickly became inaccessible, but it?s unclear if he even knew of them the schools aren?t under his supervision--and FEMA, who SHOULD have known, may not have. If they did, they hadn?t reacted, so the busses sat idle until high water rendered them useless. So in this specific case, any one of several government agencies could have reacted but didn?t for reasons that will surface. This is but ONE factor of many.

    You say: ?These points are not debatable:
    #1. If Mayor Nagin and Governor [sic] Blanco evacuate the City before the hurricane AS PER THEIR OWN PROTOCOL, nobody in New Orleans dies.?

    -->First, this is Hypothetical?and thus, impossible to prove. Next, the evacuation plan for New Orleans was admittedly woefully inadequate.

    ?Nothing is hypothetical about evacuating a city or following emergency plans.?

    -->I agree, so long as the plans in question are viable. N.O.?s were not (see previous links). While local leaders ultimately answer for such plans, they involve a consortium of entities, each with its process. When emergency plans fail to address evacuation of a large population segment, concluding that no one will die when visited with a catastrophic event is way more absurd and dismissive than merely arguing a hypothetic premise. ?No one dies?? Now, that would be something.

    LA Gov Blanco declared LA disaster area on 8-26 BEFORE Katrina hit landfall in Ft. Lauderdale.

    http://gov.louisiana.gov/2005%20%20proclamations/48pro2005-Emergency-HurricaneKatrina.pdf

    When the White House responded by issuing IMPENDING disaster area order, it omitted parishes on the Gulf of Mexico.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html

    ?#2. If the New Orleans police force remains on duty instead of looting and running away, there would be MORE LAW AND ORDER!"

    -->Perhaps, but could they have PREVENTED the crimes? Probably not. Even now we don?t know the scope of the crimes that occurred. Many were unreported, and others remain unconfirmed. This also assumes that all of those who were AWL were ?looting and running away?. You have no inkling, nor does anyone at this time, how many NO cops ?ran away? or ?looted.? Of those unaccounted for, no one knows how many of NO?s finest are among the flood?s victims, how many lost everything and didn?t want to risk their lives (as deplorable, given their oath of office as this is) saving others.

    ?Another word problem: Police protect people against crime. There are 1000 police officers normally. If a third of the officers don't show up, and some officers decide to loot ((or ask British tourists on rooftops surrounded by water to "show us what you got,"?I hadn?t heard this one. You have record of such a thing? --)) Will overall crime and looting be greater??

    -->If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? Sure, this sounds logical, but since we don?t know how much crime there was, and there?s no control to show how it would have been affected if all NO?s police reported for duty, it?s opinion, period?again based on a hypothetical. Send me a link on the Brit tourists, will you? I hadn?t seen that one.

    -->New Orleans has roughly half the number of police per thousand residents of other comparable American Cities.

    "#3. If the criminal element of New Orleans had been properly addressed BY THE MAYOR IN THE PAST, less looting and killing would have occurred. True/false problem: Being tough on crime decreases the criminal element at large in a city?

    -->This, from the right-wing blog American Spectator: According to the New Orleans Police Foundation, most murderers get off -- only 1 in 4 are convicted -- and 42 percent of cases involving serious crimes since 2002 have been dropped by prosecutors.

    http://www.americanprowler.com/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8684

    Enforcement is but one prong. National studies mirror the observation made in this article. It matters not if police are tough on crime when the courts are permissive. This problem is further exacerbated by prisons full far beyond capacity due to aggressive enforcement. Due to overcrowding, today?s prisons don?t rehabilitate. They merely isolate criminals for the extent of their terms. While in prison, they learn how to be even better criminals. Crime is symptomatic of a much deeper problem, one rooted in poverty.

    http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9608/opinion/diiulio_response.html

    NO Mayors in the past HAD addressed crime. Between 1994 (when it was dubbed ?Murder Capitol of the World?) and 1999, the murder rate fell 63 percent, assaults dropped 60 percent, and armed robberies were down 49 percent.

    http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=119&subsecID=213&contentID=2155

    It's true that 2003, crime in NO HAD risen. Ray Nagin, elected in May 2002, launched a $15M anti-crime program that included adding cops to the force, security cameras in ?hot spots?.

    http://www.bestofneworleans.com/dispatch/2003-08-12/commentary.html

    By 2004, the number in New Orleans had crept back up to 265, or 10 times the national average--but still FAR below its peak ion 1994. The city has a tough time recruiting cops. The department has a reputation for corruption, and the courts as lenient. The pay for police in NO is comparatively low.

    http://www.freep.com/news/nw/neworleans22e_20050822.htm

    New Orleans only has 3.14 officers per 1,000 residents, while the rate is double in many big cities, such as Washington D.C. Experts say that a police force of less than 1,700 is trying to do a job that calls for at least 2,200 officers.

    http://www.bayoubuzz.com/articles.aspx?aid=4790

    "#4. Governor Blanco was responsible for the initial call-up (and lack thereof) of the National Guard. This is a fact."

    -->Indeed she was. She summoned troops. (I had the number but can?t find the page?it was in the thousands, I think it was 4k. I apologize for not being able to recover this--I've got a lot of saved links). Her counterpart in Mississippi summoned forces equivalent to what was needed during Hurricane Camille, (which was from the same article?I think in the 1k range). There was a dispute about federalizing the guard, which she refused to do because she needed them to provide security. When the levee broke, many of the guard had to curtail their security details to rebuild it.

    ?#5. Once the flood occurred, the people were screwed, and catch up was the name of the game. The Federal Government is a SECOND RESPONDER and is supposed to BACK UP local authorities.?

    -->Once the president declares a disaster, as it had done well before the levee breaches, the feds become primary. It was FEMA?s responsibility at that time and they were still dragging their feet.

    ?#6. Louisiana is a STATE with LOTS OF STUFF IN IT AND PEOPLE AND COPS AND FIREMEN AND EQUIPMENT AND BUSES AND NATIONAL GUARD, all of which were inadequately mobilized by Blanco.

    -->This is a dramatic oversimplification. Communications were impossible in most of the affected areas. Impact was impossible to determine and changed rapidly. Coordination among agencies and levels of government created havoc. Many first responders, in some cases, who came in to help from other areas and states were turned away or forced to sit through a day-long training session by FEMA only to be deployed as props for administrative photo ops.
    Nagin and Blanco are democrats.
    I can?t speak on KO?s mental/emotional state.

    "No one could have anticipated" the levee would be breached, when years of documentation prove otherwise"[/quote] is just plain stupid, and a LIE. Bush said, [quote]"I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees--
    Of course nobody anticipated the levee breach.?

    --> Forget about my misqote, just address the real one. WHAT??? It had been predicted for YEARS. You gotta? be KIDDING!

    http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70711FE3F550C718CDDA00894DD404482

    ?Congress apportions money for levee maintenance. Bush just signs the bills. By the way, he HASN'T VETOED ANYTHING (something which I find ridiculous). How could he cut funding for levees when all he does is rubber stamp what congress throws his way?"

    Yeah, right. THis is straight from the rightie playbook. Bush reduced requested funds every time they came his way. Congress, many of whom now how perilous the situation was, revised the figures and resubmitted them?THEN Bush signed them. The Bush administration and Congress in recent years have repeatedly denied full funding for hurricane preparation and flood control.
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requested $27 million for this fiscal year to pay for hurricane-protection projects around Lake Pontchartrain. The Bush administration countered with $3.9 million, and Congress eventually provided $5.7 million. This echoes a pattern prevalent the past 4 years.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0509010170sep01,1,6275508,print.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

    I apologize for the length of this response, but you covered a lot of ground. Thanks for finally being civil.

    JD,

    Can you please delete the prior version of this post? I wrote it in Word and pasted it here, all the quotation marks became question marks and other gobbledegook. It's hard enough to get through without a punctuation irritant. Also, I don't know how to hyperlink, so I apologize for all of the URLs.

    Thanks,
    -p

    -------------------------------------------

    K,

    You say: "Can we agree that the FIRST RESPONDERS (the Gov. of Louisiana and Mayor of New Orleans) are primarily to "Blame Game". Be careful--you don't want to jeopardize your "Great American" status).

    -->I can't. The reason is the word "primarily". It's too early to decide. In certain areas, state and local leaders erred, but the disaster quickly grew beyond their resources/abilities/authority to respond, them FEMA and the feds are culpable. Subjective analysis will determine the relative gravity.
    While evacuation plans were in place, they were flawed. (See links at bottom of this article--which also makes good points re criticism of Nagin, et al):

    http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Controversy_over_whether_New_Orleans_Mayor_failed_to_follow_hurricane_plan).

    For years, articles documented that were a serious hurricane or other calamity strike N.O., hundreds of thousands of its poorest residents would be stranded.

    http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/0905/01edwitt.html

    Nagin knew there was no way the poorest residents could get out, even if ordered. He publicized this. The city didn't have the resources to move that many that quickly. Buses he could have commandeered quickly became inaccessible, but it's unclear if he even knew of them the schools aren?t under his supervision--and FEMA, who SHOULD have known, may not have. If they did, they hadn?t reacted, so the busses sat idle until high water rendered them useless. So in this specific case, any one of several government agencies could have reacted but didn't for reasons that will surface. This is but ONE factor of many.

    You say: "These points are not debatable:
    #1. If Mayor Nagin and Governor [sic] Blanco evacuate the City before the hurricane AS PER THEIR OWN PROTOCOL, nobody in New Orleans dies."

    -->First, this is hypothetical--and thus, impossible to prove. Next, the evacuation plan for New Orleans was admittedly woefully inadequate.

    Later you said "Nothing is hypothetical about evacuating a city or following emergency plans."

    -->I agree, so long as the plans in question are viable. NO's were not (see previous links). While local leaders ultimately answer for such plans, they involve a consortium of entities, each with its process. When emergency plans fail to address evacuation of a large population segment, concluding that no one will die when visited with a catastrophic event is way more absurd and dismissive than merely arguing a hypothetic premise. "No one dies?" Now, that would be something.

    LA Gov Blanco declared LA a disaster area on 8/26 BEFORE Katrina hit landfall in Ft. Lauderdale.

    http://gov.louisiana.gov/2005%20%20proclamations/48pro2005-Emergency-HurricaneKatrina.pdf

    When the White House responded by issuing IMPENDING disaster area order, it omitted parishes on the Gulf of Mexico.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html

    "#2. If the New Orleans police force remains on duty instead of looting and running away, there would be MORE LAW AND ORDER!"

    -->Perhaps, but could they have PREVENTED the crimes? Probably not. Even now we don't know the scope of the crimes that occurred. Many were unreported, and others remain unconfirmed. This also assumes that all of those who were AWL were "?looting and running away." You have no inkling, nor does "?ran away" or "looted." Of those unaccounted for, no one knows how many of NO's finest are among the flood's victims, how many lost everything and didn't want to risk their lives (as deplorable, given their oath as this is) saving others.

    "Another word problem: Police protect people against crime. There are 1000 police officers normally. If a third of the officers don't show up, and some officers decide to loot -- or ask British tourists on rooftops surrounded by water to "show us what you got," -- I hadn?t heard this one. (You have record of such a thing?) ...Will overall crime and looting be greater?

    --> Sure, this sounds logical (If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?), but since we don't know how much crime there was, and there's no control in this exercise to show how it would have been affected if all NO's police reported for duty, it's opinion, period -- oncw again, based on a hypothetical. Send me a link on the Brit tourists, will you? I hadn?t seen that one.

    "#3. If the criminal element of New Orleans had been properly addressed BY THE MAYOR IN THE PAST, less looting and killing would have occurred. True/false problem: Being tough on crime decreases the criminal element at large in a city?

    -->What follows comes from the right-wing blog "American Spectator": According to the New Orleans Police Foundation, most murderers get off -- only 1 in 4 are convicted -- and 42 percent of cases involving serious crimes since 2002 have been dropped by prosecutors.

    http://www.americanprowler.com/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8684

    Enforcement is but one prong. National studies mirror the observation made in the linked article. It matters not if police are tough on crime if the courts are permissive. This problem is further exacerbated by prisons full far beyond capacity due to aggressive enforcement. Due to overcrowding, today's prisons don't rehabilitate. They merely isolate criminals for the extent of their terms. While in prison, they learn how to be even better criminals. Crime is symptomatic of a much deeper problem, one rooted in poverty.

    http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9608/opinion/diiulio_response.html

    New Orleans' Mayors in the past HAD addressed crime. Between 1994 (when it was dubbed "Murder Capitol of the World") and 1999, the murder rate fell 63 percent, assaults dropped 60 percent, and armed robberies were down 49 percent.

    http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=119&subsecID=213&contentID=2155

    It's true that 2003, crime in NO HAD risen. Ray Nagin, elected in May 2002, launched a $15M anti-crime program that included adding cops to the force, security cameras in "hot spots"?.

    http://www.bestofneworleans.com/dispatch/2003-08-12/commentary.html

    By 2004, the number in New Orleans had crept back up to 265, or 10 times the national average--but still FAR below its peak in 1994. The city has a tough time recruiting cops. The department has a reputation for being corrupt -- and as we saw, its the courts are lenient. The pay for police in NO is comparatively low.

    http://www.freep.com/news/nw/neworleans22e_20050822.htm

    New Orleans only has just 3.14 officers per 1,000 residents. Half the rate of many big cities, such as Washington D.C. Experts say that a police force of less than 1,700 is trying to do a job that calls for at least 2,200 officers.

    http://www.bayoubuzz.com/articles.aspx?aid=4790

    "#4. Governor Blanco was responsible for the initial call-up (and lack thereof) of the National Guard. This is a fact."

    -->Indeed she was. She summoned troops. (I had the number but can't find the page--it was in the thousands, I think it was 4k. I apologize for not being able to recover this--I've got a lot of saved links. I'll keep looking). Her counterpart in Mississippi summoned forces equivalent to what was needed during Hurricane Camille, (which was from the same article--I think in the 1k range). There was a dispute about federalizing the guard, which she refused to do because she needed them to provide security. When the levee broke, many of the guard had to curtail their security details to rebuild it.

    "#5. Once the flood occurred, the people were screwed, and catch up was the name of the game. The Federal Government is a SECOND RESPONDER and is supposed to BACK UP local authorities."

    -->Once the president/federal govt. declares a disaster, as it had done well before the levee breaches, the feds become primary. It was FEMA's responsibility at that time and they were still dragging their feet.

    "#6. Louisiana is a STATE with LOTS OF STUFF IN IT AND PEOPLE AND COPS AND FIREMEN AND EQUIPMENT AND BUSES AND NATIONAL GUARD, all of which were inadequately mobilized by Blanco."

    -->This is a dramatic oversimplification. Communications were impossible in most of the affected areas. Impact was impossible to determine and changed rapidly. Coordination among agencies and levels of government created havoc. Many first responders, in some cases, who came in to help from other areas and states were turned away or forced to sit through a day-long training session by FEMA only to be deployed as props for administrative photo ops.

    Nagin and Blanco are democrats.

    I can't speak on KO?s mental/emotional state.

    "No one could have anticipated" the levee would be breached, when years of documentation prove otherwise"[/quote] is just plain stupid, and a LIE. Bush said, [quote] "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees--
    Of course nobody anticipated the levee breach."

    --> Forget about my misquote, just address the real one... WHAT??? It had been predicted for YEARS. You gotta' be KIDDING!

    http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70711FE3F550C718CDDA00894DD404482

    "Congress apportions money for levee maintenance. Bush just signs the bills. By the way, he HASN'T VETOED ANYTHING (something which I find ridiculous). How could he cut funding for levees when all he does is rubber stamp what congress throws his way?"

    Well, at least you're on target about Bush not vetoing anything. This is straight from the rightie playbook. Bush reduced requested funds for levee improvements every time they came his way. Congress, many of whom know how perilous the situation was, revised the figures and resubmitted them -- THEN Bush signed them. The Bush administration and Congress in recent years have repeatedly denied full funding for hurricane preparation and flood control. For example, The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requested $27 million for this fiscal year to pay for hurricane-protection projects around Lake Pontchartrain. The Bush administration countered with $3.9 million, and Congress eventually provided $5.7 million. This echoes a pattern prevalent the past 4 years.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0509010170sep01,1,6275508,print.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

    I apologize for the length of this response, but you covered a lot of ground. Thanks for finally being civil.

    Here's an article that speaks to the legal and political concerns that had to be addressed after it became clear you could put a fork in Louisiana.

    The piece is a few days old but significant in light of the fact that Gov. Blanco refused to turn operations over to the feds after a request from Bush, as late as Friday after the disaster.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The New York Times
    September 9, 2005
    Political Issues Snarled Plans for Troop Aid
    By ERIC LIPTON, ERIC SCHMITT
    and THOM SHANKER

    This article was reported and written by Eric Lipton, Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker

    WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 - As New Orleans descended into chaos last week and Louisiana's governor asked for 40,000 soldiers, President Bush's senior advisers debated whether the president should speed the arrival of active-duty troops by seizing control of the hurricane relief mission from the governor.

    For reasons of practicality and politics, officials at the Justice Department and Pentagon, and then at the White House, decided not to urge Mr. Bush to take command of the effort.

    Instead, the Washington officials decided to rely on the growing number of National Guard personnel flowing into Louisiana, who were under Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco's control. The debate was triggered as officials began to realize that Hurricane Katrina exposed a critical flaw in the national disaster response plans created after the Sept. 11 attacks. According to the administration's senior homeland security officials, the hurricane showed the failure of their plan to recognize that local police, fire and medical personnel might be incapacitated and unable to act quickly until reinforcements arrive on the scene.

    As criticism of the response to Hurricane Katrina has mounted, one of the most pointed questions has been why more troops were not available more quickly to restore order and offer aid. Interviews with officials in Washington and Louisiana show that as the situation grew worse, they were wrangling with questions of federal/state authority, weighing the realities of military logistics and perhaps talking past each other in the crisis.

    To seize control of the mission, Mr. Bush would have had to invoke the Insurrection Act, which allows the president in times of unrest to command active-duty forces into the states to perform law enforcement duties. But decision makers in Washington felt certain that Governor Blanco would have resisted surrendering control of the military relief mission as Bush Administration officials believe would have been required to deploy active-duty combat forces before law and order had been re-established. While troops can conduct relief missions without the legal authority of the Insurrection Act, Pentagon and military officials say that no active-duty forces could have been sent into the chaos of New Orleans on Wednesday or Thursday without confronting law-and-order challenges.

    But just as important to the administration were worries about the message that would have been sent by a president ousting a Southern governor of another party from command of her National Guard, according to administration, Pentagon and Justice Department officials.

    "Can you imagine how it would have been perceived if a president of the United States of one party had pre-emptively taken from the female governor of another party the command and control of her forces, unless the security situation made it completely clear that she was unable to effectively execute her command authority and that lawlessness was the inevitable result?" asked one senior administration official, who spoke anonymously because the talks were confidential.

    Officials in Louisiana agree that the governor would not have given up control over National Guard troops in her state as would have been required to send large numbers of active-duty soldiers into the area. But they also say they were desperate and would have welcomed assistance by active-duty soldiers.

    "I need everything you have got," Governor Blanco said she told Mr. Bush last Tuesday, when New Orleans flooded. In an interview, she acknowledged that she did not specify what sorts of soldiers. "Nobody told me that I had to request that. I thought that I had requested everything they had," she said. "We were living in a war zone by then."

    The governor illustrated her stance when, overnight Friday, she rejected a more modest proposal for a hybrid command structure in which both the Guard and active-duty troops would be under the command of an active-duty, three-star general - but only after he had been sworn into the Louisiana Guard.

    Also at issue was whether active-duty troops could respond faster and in larger numbers than National Guard soldiers.

    By last Wednesday, Pentagon officials said even the 82nd Airborne, which has a brigade on standby to move out within 18 hours - could not arrive any faster than 7,000 National Guard troops, which are specially trained and equipped for civilian law enforcement duties. In the end, the flow of thousands of National Guard soldiers, especially military police, was accelerated from other states.

    "I was there. I saw what needed to be done," Lt. Gen. H Steven Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, said in an interview. "They were the fastest, best-capable, most appropriate force to get there in the time allowed. And that's what it's all about."

    But one senior Army officer expressed puzzlement that active-duty troops were not summoned sooner, saying that 82nd Airborne troops were ready to move out from Fort Bragg in North Carolina on Sunday, the day before the hurricane hit.

    But the call never came, in part because military officials believed National Guard troops would get there faster and because administration civilians were worried that there could be political fallout if federal troops were forced to shoot looters, administration officials said.

    Lt. Gen. James T. Conway, the director of operations for the military's Joint Staff, said that the Pentagon in August streamlined a rigid, decades-old system of deployment orders to allow the Northern Command to dispatch liaisons to work with local officials in advance of an approaching hurricane.

    The Pentagon is reviewing events from the time the hurricane reached full strength and bore down on New Orleans and five days later when Mr. Bush ordered 7,200 active-duty soldiers and Marines to the scene.

    After the hurricane passed New Orleans and the levees broke, flooding the city, it became increasingly evident that disaster response efforts were badly bogged down.

    Justice Department lawyers, who were receiving harrowing reports from the area, considered whether active-duty military units could be brought into relief operations even if state authorities gave their consent - or even if they refused.

    The issue of federalizing the response was one of a number of legal issues considered in a flurry of meetings at the Justice Department, the White House and other agencies, administration officials said.

    Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales urged Justice lawyers to interpret the federal law creatively to assist local authorities. For example, federal prosecutors prepared to expand their enforcement of some criminal statutes like anti-carjacking laws that can be prosecuted by either state or federal authorities.

    On the issue of whether the military could be deployed without the invitation of state officials, the Office of Legal Counsel, the unit within the Justice Department that provides legal advice to federal agencies, concluded that the federal government did possess authority to move in even over the objection of local officials.

    This act was last invoked in 1992 for the Los Angeles riots, but at the request of Gov. Pete Wilson of California, and has not been invoked over a governor's objections since the civil rights era - and before that, to the time of the Civil War, according to administration officials. Bush administration, Pentagon and senior military officials warned that such an extreme measure would have serious legal and political implications.

    Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has said that deployment of National Guard soldiers to Iraq, including a brigade from Louisiana, did not affect the relief mission, but Governor Blanco said her state troops were missed. "Over the last year we have had about 5,000 out, at one time," Governor Blanco said. "They are on active duty, serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. That certainly is a factor."

    By Friday, National Guard reinforcements had arrived, and a truck convoy of 1,000 Guard soldiers brought relief supplies - and order - to the convention center area.

    Homeland Security officials say that the experience with Katrina has demonstrated flaws in the nation's plans to handle disaster.

    "This event has exposed, perhaps ultimately to our benefit, a deficiency in terms of replacing first responders who tragically may be the first casualties," Paul McHale, the assistant secretary of defense for homeland security, said.

    Michael Chertoff, the secretary of homeland security, has suggested the active-duty troops be trained and equipped to intervene if front-line emergency personnel are stricken. But the Pentagon's leadership remains unconvinced that this plan is sound, suggesting instead that the national emergency response plans should be revised to draw reinforcements initially from civilian police, firefighters, medical personnel and hazardous-waste experts in other states not affected by a disaster.

    The federal government rewrote its national emergency response plan after the Sept. 11 attacks, but it relied on local officials to manage any crisis in its opening days. But Hurricane Katrina overwhelmed local "first responders," including civilian police and the National Guard.

    At a news conference Saturday, Mr. Chertoff said: "The unusual set of challenges of conducting a massive evacuation in the context of a still dangerous flood, requires us to basically break the traditional model and create a new model, one for what you might call kind of an ultra-catastrophe. And that's one in which we are using the military, still within the framework of the law, to come in and really handle the evacuation, handle all of the associated elements. And that, of course, frees the National Guard up to do a security mission."

    Mr. McHale, while agreeing with the problem, offered different remedies. "It is foreseeable to envision a catastrophic explosion that would kill virtually every police officer within miles of the attack," he said. "Therefore we are going to have to reexamine our ability to back-fill first responder capabilities that may be degraded or destroyed during the initial event."

    He continued, "What we now have to look toward is perhaps a regional capability, probably within the civilian sector, that can be deployed to a city when that city's infrastructure and first responder capability has been destroyed by the event itself."

    Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker reported from Washington, and Eric Lipton from Baton Rouge, La., for this article. David Johnston contributed reporting.

    I just spent an hour Fisking Paul's post. I hit "post" and BLAMO -- nothing was posted and all was lost. I think my session timed out for some reason.. I blame Johnny Dollar.

    Paul, I ain't gonna spend another hour on your post -- I am sorry. I will provide the links that refute what you say:

    http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/

    Read the Katrina-related posts.

    http://www.blindmanphoto.com/images/Stop-Blaming-FEMA.jpg

    look at all the pretty buses waiting to be used by local officials, and all the exit roads, clearly mapped

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050903/ap_on_re_us/katrina_national_guard

    Even the liberally biased AP has to admit the Guard was improperly handled, and admits Blanko is the one in charge of the guard.

    One thing I will comment on. You have a poor grasp of what State Government does. The Feds can not commandeer a State. They need permission to do so. Blanco did not grant that permission.

    As far as FEMA knowing where local resources are (like buses), why would FEMA know when the LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES don't? FEMA isn't run by David Copperfield! The Feds don't keep track of every bus in the United States! That is what a local Government does. I think part of our disconnect is that you have no idea what State and local government does! Don't you pay taxes? Doesn't your State have a "Homeland Security" department? Isn't your State supposed to help you in the event of a disaster? I think so! Relying on the FEDERAL Government for everything is naive, and it betrays a lack of understanding of your Governmental structure which is frightening.

    By the way, with only 197 deaths, blaming the Feds may backfire. I want to see how many of the 197 dead were MURDERED, by the way.

    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050912/D8CIM1K80.html

    Nagin crowed about 10,000 dead, and he had NO IDEA of how many were killed. Nice irresponsible behavior, Mayor!

    By the way, the Feds were FASTER THAN EVER with relief this time:

    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05254/568876.stm

    Let the commissions begin! I bet the people who kept the Red Cross and Salvation Army away from the Superdome and Convention center (the same ones who DIDN'T EVACUATE their citizens and DIDN'T PLAN FOR THE WORST) will look the worst. This time, the commission won't be a 9/11 style whitewash, 'cause Bush has learned his lesson.

    The worst is over for Bush, but the worst is just beginning for Democrats, Blanco and Nagin.

    "The worst is over for Bush, but the worst is just beginning for Democrats, Blanco and Nagin."

    There's already a bit of mission creep in those circles.

    In venues other than those steered by Keith Olbermann (who will never allow any reporting deeper than a blog entry on Democratic Underground), you're starting to see a shift in focus from blaming the feds for being unprepared, to blaming the feds for the socio-economic dynamics exhibited in New Orleans.

    C,

    That discussion (of eco. cond. in the region) preceeded the disaster. It's getting more play now BECAUSE of Katrina, but that it's now a focal point doesn't suggest a shift. It was certainly discussed in in LA and in Washington before Katrina.

    K, thanks for your response, I hate when TYPEKEY times out--we've all had that happen. That's why I write longer posts in Word, but then the "paste" comes out crappy. Wish I know a better way. Any advice JD?

    I'll investigate your links and respond when I have a bit more time. I can say that I don't think the worst is over for anyone, except a fortunate few on the Gulf Coast.

    K,
    Thanks for the links. I appreciate your response but am a bit disappointed by it. I know you lost your post, but it's tough to decipher what you meant to prove without the benefit of your commentary. Let's examine the 1st:

    http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/

    I had mentioned that the NO plan was flawed and included a URL. Had they executed it to the letter, many people would STILL have died, BECAUSE the plan was inept. This undermines your hypothetical conclusion that if they'd adhered to the plan in place, no one would have died. Here's want many who DID heed the warning faced upon their evacuation. Please note, this isn't a "lefty" URL.

    http://www.acadiananow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050905/NEWS05/509050320/1075

    If you provide URLs, especially without telling what point they reinforce, PLEASE make sure they support your argument and I've not already sent you the original sources of their pertinent links. I got a kick out of the Palm Springs community giving advice to NO on the basis of their hurricane experience. Hardly "apples to apples," now is it? However, it does dovetail nicely with Barbara Bush's comments on the evacuees in the Astrodome "What I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality. And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway," she said, "So this is working very well for them." One might ask, "Do you have any Grey Poupon?" Now, for the other 2...

    http://www.blindmanphoto.com/images/Stop-Blaming-FEMA.jpg

    "Look at all the pretty buses waiting to be used by local officials, and all the exit roads, clearly mapped-"

    I mentioned the busses. Yes, there is a local state security office. And yes, if busses are part of an evacuation plan, they should know where the busses are. Nagin didn't. The schools aren't in his purview. He can't order Greyhound to move in. The Governor may have been able to mobilize some, but had no communications. They did have some buses (not nearly enough) that COULD have been used (before they became flooded) but a number of drivers (many of them female) were too scared to drive with all the looting, etc. that was going on. The bridge you mention was blocked by the Police Chief of Gretna, LS, Arthur Lawson, whose employees cordoned it off and turned back evacuees who had been told by the NOPD to use it to evacuate NO.

    "We shut down the bridge," Lawson confirmed to United Press International, adding that his jurisdiction had been "a closed and secure location" since before the storm hit.

    "All our people had evacuated and we locked the city down," he said. The bridge in question -- the Crescent City Connection -- is the major artery heading west out of New Orleans across the Mississippi River.

    http://washtimes.com/upi/20050908-112433-4907r.htm (Yes, the Washington Times).

    NOW, about that picture. You provide a satellite photo with no attribution. I had addressed the bus issue in my prior post. You suggest this photo refutes that explanation. I don't see it. Now, you see that Nagin didn't cause the bridge debacle either, nor did Blanco, since NO ONE WAS COMMUNICATING. The phones were down. I debated not even addressing this picture because it fails basic tests for proof. Who knows where it came from or where it's been? Please consider that in the future. If you've got it, please provide it.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050903/ap_on_re_us/katrina_national_guard

    "Even the liberally biased AP has to admit the Guard was improperly handled, and admits Blanco is the one in charge of the guard."

    Blanco is ONLY in charge of the LA National Guard. "Liberal-biased AP"? -- Kudos for working in yet another hackneyed GOP talking point. I'll ignore your comment about my knowledge deficit re state government. Once a governor asks for FEDERAL troops, the pres can send `em in. Your AP article says: "both parties traditionally defer to governors to deploy their own National Guardsmen and request help from other states when it comes to natural disasters." Federal troops could have been called up. Remember, FEMA was on site well BEFORE the hurricane (not that one would know it by what they accomplished). Please don't forget how crippled communications became. AP adds: "In addition to Guard help, the federal government could have activated but did not, a major air support plan under a pre-existing contract with airlines. The program, called Civilian Reserve Air Fleet, lets the government quickly put private cargo and passenger planes into service."

    Blanco DID ask Bush for troops. She refused to hand over control of the LA National Guard (which was significantly diminished due to service in Iraq) to Bush. As I said earlier, she wanted them for security but eventually, they responded when the levee broke. But the fact is, she emphatically asked Bush for "everything he's got". I suppose it's easy to see how this could have been mmisconstrued.

    "The Feds cannot commandeer a State. They need permission to do so. Blanco did not grant that permission."

    Did Bush/FEMA ask for such permission? Please show me where.

    "As far as FEMA knowing where local resources are (like buses), why would FEMA know when the LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES don't? FEMA isn't run by David Copperfield! (Hello?) The Feds don't keep track of every bus in the United States! That is what a local Government does."

    Of COURSE, they don't. And right now, a surrogate runs FEMA. But FEMA, through its state offices, works with local authorities to compile complete inventorirs of all available local resources and responsible parties. I provided a clear explanation of this last time. Please refer to it. Oh another thing, I know your trying, which I dearly appreciate, but PLEASE refrain from inferring I?m stupid, etc.

    You ent on with:

    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050912/D8CIM1K80.html

    "Nagin crowed about 10,000 dead, and he had NO IDEA of how many were killed. Nice irresponsible behavior, Mayor!"

    Nagin wasn't alone in this. Of course, you don't care about others ?even other government officials -- who quoted casualty estimates as high or even higher.

    "By the way, the Feds were FASTER THAN EVER with relief this time:"

    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05254/568876.stm

    Right. This article's a tad premature. I'll wait until I hear what investigation yields. Which is what I recommend for the rest of you. Don't be so quick to point fingers. Suspect something? Jot it down. See evidence of something? Keep a journal. Don't waste your time and ours doing knee jerks just because this is all so difficult to fathom. There will be an investigation. And I'm convinced it'll be independent or bipartisan.

    This is too big, too tragic and too important to our nation's future to let politics interfere. Jeez, I almost sound republican.

    Fine Paul � I'll address most of it. It's gonna take two successive posts. If there are other points you want me to address, tell me. Quite frankly, it was more fun to yell at you.

    Your first post:

    You state: "While evacuation plans were in place, they were flawed." See my response later

    You state: "Nagin knew there was no way the poorest residents could get out, even if ordered. He publicized this. The city didn't have the resources to move that many that quickly."

    He PLANNED on making a DVD telling the people they were screwed, but never got around to it. As far as he "didn't have the resources," that is baloney. He had buses � people go to work and school in New Orleans on buses with drivers. The State has buses too. They never BOTHERED to evacuate in the past and it was their intention not to bother even if a CAT 5 hurricane came through. Is that good governance? Who makes that decision? That�s right, the State and local Govt. The Feds don�t evacuate cities. By the way, if I run a movie theater and post a sign saying "there are no fire exits," does that exonerate me from blame when people burn? Can I then say "the fire department didn�t get here fast enough?"

    I said: "If Mayor Nagin and Governor [sic] Blanco evacuate the City before the hurricane AS PER THEIR OWN PROTOCOL, nobody in New Orleans dies." You say this is hypothetical. OK. I don�t think I can get through to you on that one!

    In your "defense" of the N.O. PD you state: "New Orleans only has just 3.14 officers per 1,000 residents. Half the rate of many big cities, such as Washington D.C. Experts say that a police force of less than 1,700 is trying to do a job that calls for at least 2,200 officers."

    You are right! The local and State government didn�t prioritize, so they have too few cops, they are poorly paid, and they are corrupt. Are you prosecuting or defending Paul. Most big cities have learned their lesson. They recruit cops, pay more if they need to, etc. It is the fault of local government in N.O. and Louisiana that they don't have enough cops.

    BREAK HERE -- TO NEXT POST

    Second post

    You state "I had mentioned that the NO plan was flawed and included a URL. Had they executed it to the letter, many people would STILL have died, BECAUSE the plan was inept."

    WHAT! The plan called for an EVACUATION UTILIZING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION! LOOK AT IT:

    http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:_je6xBAh_AgJ:www.ohsep.louisiana.gov/plans/EOPSupplement1a.pdf+southeastern+louisiana+hurricane+evacuation+and+sheltering+plan&hl=en

    QUOTES FROM DOCUMEMNT:

    Page 13, under Part II-B
    ""The primary means of hurricane evacuation will be personal vehicles. School and municipal buses, government-owned vehicles and vehicles provided by volunteer agencies may be used to provide transportation for individuals who lack transportation and require assistance in evacuating."

    Part III-B, 1.a.7-8
    7. "Local transportation resources should be marshaled and public transportation plans implemented as needed."

    8. "Announce the location of staging areas for people who need transportation. Public transportation will concentrate on moving people from the staging areas to safety in host parishes with priority given to people with special needs."

    They had a stated goal. The buses were there. The leadership wasn�t. To say "many may still have died" is justifying inaction. Say they just evacuated the elderly from Nursing Homes? Would that not help? Give me a break. You seem to think FEMA�s "plan was flawed." I guess they�re off the hook too?

    Again, take a look at this:
    http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005417.php#trackbacks

    How you then manage to jump to Barbara Bush is beyond me. I�ve seen such opportunistic reasoning before, and it never fails to amaze me.

    As far as your objection to a satellite photo timed and dated, all someone did was point out where buses were and where the Red Cross was barred from entering the City. How about you get the original photo and see for yourself? I did. It's all there. I doubt that mobilized buses would be stopped from leaving the city if ordered by the Governor! After all, she stopped the Red Cross from coming in. It stands to reason she could get buses out. Have a look at it all for yourself with GOOGLE EARTH http://maps.google.com/maps?q=New+Orleans,+LA&ll=29.968598,-90.089189&spn=0.006110,0.009958&t=e&hl=en

    As far as "no communication" goes, the Governor controls the National Guard. They can communicate and coordinate quite well. Getting buses on the road is not an insurmountable task. The problem was the Governor didn't even KNOW she had buses. As the lovely NY Times mentions, she was running around screaming "where are the buses." The pictures tell us where they were. Of course if people were EVACUATED BEFORE ALL HELL BROKE LOOSE as per protocol, none of this would be an issue.

    I said: "The Feds cannot commandeer a State. They need permission to do so. Blanco did not grant that permission." You said: "Did Bush/FEMA ask for such permission? Please show me where."

    OK, How about proof from NAGIN HIMSELF:

    "Mayor Nagin: Gov. Blanco Delayed Rescue"
    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/9/5/234033.shtml

    QUOTE: "After reviewing the crisis with Gov. Blanco, Bush summoned Nagin for a private chat - where, according to Nagin, Bush explained: "Mr. Mayor, I offered two options to the governor. I said . . . I was ready to move today. The governor said she needed 24 hours to make a decision.""

    You state: "FEMA, through its state offices, works with local authorities to compile complete inventorirs [sic] of all available local resources and responsible parties." So the Feds need to tell the State where their buses are? Does the State have to tell the Governor where her ass is? Which link are you referring to?

    The rumors of numbers of deaths started with Nagin. He was the first to give figures to the press.

    The bottom line is that FEMA is no great shakes. It is a branch of the Federal Government. The Feds bring us the IRS and other wonders. Of course they won�t be efficient in a crisis. We rely on local and State officials to guide us in emergencies. They are on the spot in emergencies. They are the FIRST responders. Feds need to mobilize and are the second responders. You need BOTH. The State and local governments can NOT abdicate responsibility WITHOUT giving up control to the Feds. I don't look for miracles from State or local government. However, they need to at least try!

    Bush could have ripped control from Blanco when she dawdled based on the "insurrection act" (http://matewan.squarespace.com/journal/2005/9/7/the-insurrection-act.html). If he had, the disaster would have been better controlled, but you would be here yelling and screaming that Bush ripped control of a State from a Democrat Governess. The people elected her. Such is the consequence of voting for a jackass.

    Pertinent TRACKBACKS:

    http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005416.php#trackbacks

    http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005417.php#trackbacks

    http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005418.php#trackbacks

    Pissing match Round X:
    "You state, "I had mentioned that the NO plan was flawed and included a URL. Had they executed it to the letter, many people would STILL have died, BECAUSE the plan was inept. WHAT? The plan called for EVACUATION UTILIZING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION! LOOK AT IT:" I had, remember? I posted it. See this -- "The primary means of hurricane evacuation will be personal vehicles." This was flawed, for reasons I explained earlier. Too many didn?t have vehicles--and getting out seemed to have less to do with race than with car ownership.

    http://ti.org/vaupdate55.html

    If my math's right, the 2000 census reported that 90,930 people in NO had no cars. While the Evacuation Plan says what it says, NO knew it was FUBAR, preparing a DVD telling residents that those without transportation were basically "on their own."

    http://pjnet.org/weblogs/pjnettoday/archives/000778.htm

    When the University of New Orleans surveyed the city's residents about their personal hurricane evacuation plans last year, it found that many people had no plan at all. More than one in five of those surveyed said they would stay at home, even during a major storm. Researchers estimated that at least 100,000 New Orleans residents had no means to evacuate: no car, not enough money for airfare or a bus ticket, no friends or family to help them leave town.

    http://www.ajc.com/today/content/epaper/editions/today/news_3471df9ad2fb401c00ac.html

    "They had a stated goal"--They had failed to meet that goal in drills. They were trying to address their shortcomings. One may question their methods.

    "The buses were there." Yes, but many were rendered useless. "The leadership wasn't." Leadership is indeed questionable. To what extent Nagin, Blanco and others contributed to the chaos is to be determined. "To say, "many may still have died" is justifying inaction. Say they just evacuated the elderly from Nursing Homes? Would that not help?" Yes, it would have. That they didn't is disgraceful. "Give me a break. You seem to think FEMA?s "plan was flawed." I guess they're off the hook too?" Absolutely not--FEMA has been nearly decimated under the Bush administration. Its power greatly diminished, its leadership scattered hither and yon, they've been replaced by cronies with no real emergency management experience. A once effective government agency is compromised. FEMA needs to be made viable again. "How you then manage to jump to Barbara Bush is beyond me. I've seen such opportunistic reasoning before, and it never fails to amaze me." It's not reasoning at all. It was a barb--a low blow. You must admit, given the backdrop of Astrodome evacuees all around her, it was a poor choice of words. You're right; it has nothing to do with this. I just couldn't pass it up. But I digress. My apologies...

    "As far as your objection to a satellite photo timed and dated, all someone did was point out where buses were and where the Red Cross was barred from entering the City. How about you get the original photo and see for yourself? I did. It's all there." Perhaps it?s authentic, all I said is I didn't know. Perhaps it will provide the evidence/answers you suggest. Time will tell.

    "I doubt that mobilized buses would be stopped from leaving the city if ordered by the Governor!" Again, we agree--but to issue such a command SHE WOULD HAVE TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON! Remember, no one was communicating, of few were--and those who could, weren't doing it well.

    "After all, she stopped the Red Cross from coming in. It stands to reason she could get buses out. Have a look at it all for yourself with GOOGLE EARTH?" And FEMA stopped firefighters and subjected them to PR training. I'm sorry dude, but showing me those aerials is like showing me a cave painting. Thanks for the effort. It must be a perspective thing--I'll have to leave that to the more educated.

    "As far as "no communication" goes, the Governor controls the National Guard. They can communicate and coordinate quite well." So you're telling me that communication wasn't problematic? Guard or no guard, EVERYTHING I've read says it was a severe problem. Prove me wrong. No, better still, don't -- as I've repeatedly suggested, let's wait until experts can devote "quality time" to this via an investigation.

    "Getting buses on the road is not an insurmountable task. The problem was the Governor didn't even KNOW she had buses." This is true. I think both she and Nagin should have had that aspect of the evacuation figured out. That they didn't indeed indicates poor leadership. Does this negate culpability elsewhere? Noop.

    "Of course if people were EVACUATED BEFORE ALL HELL BROKE LOOSE as per protocol, none of this would be an issue." And if monkeys flew out my butt, it would matter not if I wore boxers or briefs at the time--Hypothetical.

    "I said: "The Feds cannot commandeer a State. They need permission to do so. Blanco did not grant that permission. You said: "Did Bush/FEMA ask for such permission? Please show me where. OK, How about proof from NAGIN HIMSELF: "Mayor Nagin: Gov. Blanco Delayed Rescue?

    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/9/5/234033.shtml?"

    This article refers to a conversation between Bush and Blanco that Nagin didn't witness, one that I saw him describe, saying that since he hadn't been present, he preferred not to speculate on what was said re the two options. I'd want confirmation of this quote, and I'm always suspicious of quotes that contain ellipses.

    "You state: "FEMA, through its state offices, works with local authorities to compile complete inventorirs [sic] --it's a TYPO-get over it (I've been correcting yours)--of all available local resources and responsible parties." So the Feds need to tell the State where their buses are?" No. Reread what I wrote. FEMA, through its state offices, compiles INVENTORIES of available resources and who controls them. Then, they coordinate use of those people and resources once they're called in. "

    Does the State have to tell the Governor where her ass is?" And you complain about me bringing up Barb Bush!

    "Which link are you referring to?" http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Controversy_over_whether_New_Orleans_Mayor_failed_to_follow_hurricane_plan

    According to WWLTV, during a news conference on Sunday before the hurricane struck, Mayor Nagin claimed he "could and would commandeer any property or vehicle it deemed necessary to provide safe shelter or transport for those in need". However photos circulated appear to show unused school and privately owned busses left stranded in flood waters. It is unclear whether Mayor Nagin knew these particular buses existed, since the Orleans Parish School Board is not under his jurisdiction and his office would not normally know the location of OPSB bus yards or be able to contact the drivers of those buses to place them into service. Normally it is the job of FEMA to coordinate between the various local jurisdictions such as the OPSB and the City of New Orleans in this case. That is, under the rules of prior hurricane responses, FEMA would ask all local jurisdictions for a list of resources under their control. Then FEMA would have taken a request from Nagin for buses, relayed it to the Orleans Parish School Board or other local jurisdictions which had buses, and at that point the OPSB would have provided the buses to Nagin. That coordination did not happen here, but it is unclear whether Nagin ever made such a request prior to the hurricane and after the hurricane they were underwater and useless. However, if he had known about them, the declaration of a state of emergency on August 26 gave him the right under Louisiana law to commandeer them for the duration of the emergency. The failure to issue a timely evacuation order in effect made it physically impossible to evacuate the nursing homes, hospitals, and those without automobiles.

    "The rumors of numbers of deaths started with Nagin. He was the first to give figures to the press." I heard and saw 2,500, 4,500, 10,000 quoted and FEMA, of course, ordered 25,000 body bags. MANY were guessing, on the record. If they all were FOS, so be it. This is far from the least of their faults.

    "The bottom line is that FEMA is no great shakes. It is a branch of the Federal Government. The Feds bring us the IRS and other wonders. Of course they won?t be efficient in a crisis. We rely on local and State officials to guide us in emergencies. They are on the spot in emergencies. They are the FIRST responders. Feds need to mobilize and are the second responders. You need BOTH. (AND I AGREE) The State and local governments cannot abdicate responsibility WITHOUT giving up control to the Feds (THIS IS TRUE). I don't look for miracles from State or local government. However, they need to at least try!? So LA's state and local governments didn?t even try, eh? Interesting.

    "Bush could have ripped control from Blanco when she dawdled based on the "insurrection act" (http://matewan.squarespace.com/journal/2005/9/7/the-insurrection-act.html)" So why didn?t Bush invoke the Insurrection Act? He says he prizes "crisp decisions". Let's see some.

    "If he had, the disaster would have been better controlled, but you would be here yelling and screaming that Bush ripped control of a State from a Democrat Governess." You have NO IDEA of what I may or may not say given this hypothetical situation.

    We can trade URLS until our fingers bleed and resolve nothing. I submit we pursue better use of each other's time and leave the second-guessing to those better qualified. BTW, this is my last post on Katrina. There's no percentage in this. But I do appreciate your willingness to be civil in order to allow me to participate. Have fun on the site, Krazy.

    Pissing contest? No wonder it is impossible to get through to you.

    What part of this don't you understand?

    "Part III-B, 1.a.7-8
    7. "Local transportation resources should be marshaled and public transportation plans implemented as needed."

    8. "Announce the location of staging areas for people who need transportation. Public transportation will concentrate on moving people from the staging areas to safety in host parishes with priority given to people with special needs."

    Do I have to draw you a freaking diagram? READ THAT. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION -- NOT PRIVATE CARS. I can't bear to go through this with you any longer.

    You then go into how the local and State authorities had no plan, as if that EXONERATES THEM. That IMPLICATES THEM. We can't discuss anything if you think that being totally unprepared exonerates local and State officials, but any unpreparedness at the Federal level is a horrific sin.

    Quite frankly, arguing with you about this is pointless. I personally think your arguments are weak at best. You have one standard for FEMA, another for the State. Lack of a plan exonerates Nagin and Blanco, and implicates FEMA. Excuses for words from Nagin's own mouth abound. Frankly, I stand by my original statement (which you quoted earlier). We would need a third party to determine who is correct.

    I can see why you like Olbermann. You two are alot alike.

    I find this tedious at this point. If anyone wants to attempt to impartially determine a victor in this fiasco please do so.

    "If anyone wants to attempt to impartially determine a victor in this fiasco please do so."

    We don't have the resources for that here. All Bob Cox can do is provide you with a place to sit your butts down. We need the federal government to come in for anthing more involved than that.

    Unfortunately, Bob doesn't trust the feds not to come in here, take over the place, and ultimately make out like he's the reason for ya'll's hard spot. So he's been a little slow to the horn, if you know what I mean.

    There's a contingent of impartial judges (just ask them) holed up at Johnny Dollar's place because Bob won't give them the thumbs up to come on in.

    As Bob always says___There may be a Santa Claus, but there's no such thing as Tinkerbell.

    Hey, if all it takes is a winner to end this, I forfeit. You da man,K... Venite Adoramus, Goo Goo Ga Joob.

    I think we need to stick to a single point. Try this one on for size:

    http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/D8CJLE9G0.html

    La. Nursing Home Owners Charged in Deaths
    Sep 13 6:47 PM US/Eastern

    By DOUG SIMPSON
    Associated Press Writer

    BATON ROUGE, La.

    "The husband-and-wife owners of a nursing home near New Orleans were charged Tuesday with negligent homicide in the deaths of 34 people during the flooding unleashed by Hurricane Katrina."

    If not evacuating people is a crime, and these citizens can be charged, who is to blame for the people that weren't evacuated from New Orleans housing projects? Spin Paul, Spin

    Cecelia,

    I said I was through with Katrina but I'm not through with you! ;D

    I apologize for not replying to your posting of the Sept. 9 NY Times article, which I should have read more thoroughly. I was so busy trying to find right-wing or other sources in my pointless exchange with Krazy that I not only neglected the Times, I neglected your post.
    I should know better than to dismiss something you consider significant. While areas of agreement between us are small, your take time to weigh alternative input and willingly acknowledge it when it makes sense.

    The Times article revealed things I was trying to get at much better than I did. Thanks again for posting it.

    Consider this... The administration and Pentagon were painstakingly aware of the potential political ramifications of taking charge in a state with a democratic governor. The other governors hit by Katrina are republicans. With such sensationally tragic, non-stop images bombarding us from the very beginning of this, (the media had no trouble getting in) I find it even more tragic that politics MAY have delayed the federal reaction. If true, this points to Washington's overriding priority. When something like this happens, we need a "damn the torpedoes" response. And once we get through this, I suggest we keep that attitude until all those who should have behaved better are identified. I don't care which office they hold or which party they're in.

    Interesting that the White House and FEMA now echo a theme that appeared in the Times article, one they weren't voicing at the time, that Katrina pointed out huge holes in our emergency preparedness tarpaulin. What a difference a few days make.

    As deplorable as this is, when a primary role of government at all levels is to protect its citizens, a bigger scandal may be how insurance companies will try to weasel out of their responsibilities in restoring lives broken by Katrina.

    Paul, I didn't take any offense at your not commenting on the article I posted. I've been enjoying your posts to Krazy.

    I agree with your remarks about the WH concern over political fall-out. That seems to be going around.

    Here's an article that refers to Gov. Blanco's self-serving CYA tactics that are not in the best interests of her constituents. The article does contain a correction that is just over the headline.

    washingtonpost.com
    Correction to This Article
    A Sept. 4 article on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina incorrectly said that Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D) had not declared a state of emergency. She declared an emergency on Aug. 26.
    Many Evacuated, but Thousands Still Waiting
    White House Shifts Blame to State and Local Officials

    By Manuel Roig-Franzia and Spencer Hsu
    Washington Post Staff Writers
    Sunday, September 4, 2005; A01

    NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 3 -- Tens of thousands of people spent a fifth day awaiting evacuation from this ruined city, as Bush administration officials blamed state and local authorities for what leaders at all levels have called a failure of the country's emergency management.

    President Bush authorized the dispatch of 7,200 active-duty ground troops to the area -- the first major commitment of regular ground forces in the crisis -- and the Pentagon announced that an additional 10,000 National Guard troops will be sent to Louisiana and Mississippi, raising the total Guard contingent to about 40,000.

    Authorities reported progress in restoring order and electricity and repairing levees, as a hospital ship arrived and cruise ships were sent to provide temporary housing for victims. As Louisiana officials expressed confidence that they had begun to get a handle on the crisis, a dozen National Guard troops broke into applause late Saturday as Isaac Kelly, 81, the last person to be evacuated from the Superdome, boarded a school bus.

    But there remained an overwhelming display of human misery on the streets of New Orleans, where the last 1,500 people were being evacuated from the Convention Center amid an overpowering odor of human waste and rotting garbage. The evacuees, most of them black and poor, spoke of violence, anarchy and family members who died for lack of food, water and medical care.

    About 42,000 people had been evacuated from the city by Saturday afternoon, with roughly the same number remaining, city officials said. Search-and-rescue efforts continued in flooded areas of the city, where an unknown number of people wait in their homes, on rooftops or in makeshift shelters. Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced by the flooding -- 250,000 have been absorbed by Texas alone, and local radio reported that Baton Rouge will have doubled in population by Monday. Federal officials said they have begun to collect corpses but could not guess the total toll.

    Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.

    The administration sought unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law. Some officials in the state suspected a political motive behind the request. "Quite frankly, if they'd been able to pull off taking it away from the locals, they then could have blamed everything on the locals," said the source, who does not have the authority to speak publicly.

    A senior administration official said that Bush has clear legal authority to federalize National Guard units to quell civil disturbances under the Insurrection Act and will continue to try to unify the chains of command that are split among the president, the Louisiana governor and the New Orleans mayor.

    Louisiana did not reach out to a multi-state mutual aid compact for assistance until Wednesday, three state and federal officials said. As of Saturday, Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency, the senior Bush official said.

    "The federal government stands ready to work with state and local officials to secure New Orleans and the state of Louisiana," White House spokesman Dan Bartlett said. "The president will not let any form of bureaucracy get in the way of protecting the citizens of Louisiana."

    Blanco made two moves Saturday that protected her independence from the federal government: She created a philanthropic fund for the state's victims and hired James Lee Witt, Federal Emergency Management Agency director in the Clinton administration, to advise her on the relief effort.

    Bush, who has been criticized, even by supporters, for the delayed response to the disaster, used his weekly radio address to put responsibility for the failure on lower levels of government. The magnitude of the crisis "has created tremendous problems that have strained state and local capabilities," he said. "The result is that many of our citizens simply are not getting the help they need, especially in New Orleans. And that is unacceptable."

    In a Washington briefing, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said one reason federal assets were not used more quickly was "because our constitutional system really places the primary authority in each state with the governor."

    Chertoff planned to fly overnight to the New Orleans area to take charge of deploying the expanded federal and military assets for several days, he said. He said he has "full confidence" in FEMA Director Michael D. Brown, the DHS undersecretary and federal officer in charge of the Katrina response.

    Brown, a frequent target of New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin's wrath, said Saturday that "the mayor can order an evacuation and try to evacuate the city, but if the mayor does not have the resources to get the poor, elderly, the disabled, those who cannot, out, or if he does not even have police capacity to enforce the mandatory evacuation, to make people leave, then you end up with the kind of situation we have right now in New Orleans."

    New Orleans City Council President Oliver Thomas acknowledged that the city was surprised by the number of refugees left behind, but he said FEMA should have been prepared to assist.

    "Everybody shares the blame here," said Thomas. "But when you talk about the mightiest government in the world, that's a ludicrous and lame excuse. You're FEMA, and you're the big dog. And you weren't prepared either."

    In Baton Rouge, Blanco acknowledged Saturday: "We did not have enough resources here to do it all. . . . The magnitude is overwhelming."

    State officials had planned to turn to neighboring states for help with troops, transportation and equipment in a major hurricane. But in Katrina's case, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida were also overwhelmed, said Denise Bottcher, a Blanco spokesman.

    Bush canceled a visit with Chinese President Hu Jintao that had been scheduled for Wednesday and made plans to return to the Gulf Coast on Monday. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice scheduled visits to the region, as troops continue to pour in.

    Top Bush administration officials met at the White House with African American leaders amid criticism that the federal response to Hurricane Katrina has neglected impoverished victims, many of them black.

    Chertoff, Housing Secretary Alphonso Jackson, White House domestic policy adviser Claude Allen and Pentagon homeland security official Peter Verga met for two hours with NAACP President Bruce Gordon, National Urban League President Marc H. Morial and Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), the former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus. The caucus's current chairman, Rep. Melvin Watt (D-N.C.), participated by phone.

    "I think they wanted to make sure that the leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus, the Urban League and the NAACP knew that they were very sensitive to trying to make sure that things went right from here on out," Cummings said, according to his spokeswoman, Devika Koppikar. "And I think they wanted to try to dispel any kind of notions that the administration did not care about African American people -- or anyone else."

    Caucus Executive Director Paul A. Brathwaite said Bush officials promised to keep black leaders informed. He credited the administration with reaching out to the caucus for the first time to solve a national problem.

    In New Orleans on Saturday, smoke from several fires that have burned for days swirled over the French Quarter. Outside the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, the stench and heat worsened the long wait of the thousands of evacuees lining up for buses. Many of them said they had no idea where they would go.

    Columbus Lawrence, 43, a landscaper, shambled down St. Joseph Avenue searching for the end of the line. He pushed a cart piled with packets of dry, chicken-flavored noodles. "It's like a chip," he said hopefully, putting another handful into his mouth.

    Others have been here since the day of the storm, the early part of the week made increasingly awful because there were no toilets, no water, no food.

    Herbert J. Freeman arrived in a neighbor's boat with his mother, Ethel M. Freeman, 91, frail and sick, but with an active mind. She kept asking him for a doctor, for a nurse, for anyone who could help her. Police told Freeman there was nothing they could do. She died in her wheelchair, next to her son, on Thursday morning.

    It was half a day before he could find someone to take away her body, he said. "She wasn't senile or nothing," he said. "She knew what was going on. . . . I kept saying, 'Mom, I can't help you.' "

    Next to Freeman, Kenny Lason, 45, a dishwasher at Pat O'Brien's, a French Quarter restaurant famous for its signature "Hurricane" cocktail, took a long slurp out of a bottle of Korbel extra-dry champagne. He broke a store window to get it, and he is not ashamed. "They wasn't giving us nothing," he said. "You got to live off the land."

    Outside New Orleans, frustration boiled over among the boatmen who spontaneously left their homes in central Louisiana to rescue stranded residents in the first hours after reports of flooding hit the airwaves. For the past two days, many have been turned away because of security concerns in a city that had turned violent and chaotic.

    "It's a tragedy that's unfolding now," said Moose Billeaud, a former New Orleans prosecutor who is now in private practice in Lafayette, La. "It is not organized at all."

    The boatmen who made it in came back with harrowing memories. Kenny, who did not want to disclose his last name, said friends were shot at by stranded people who wanted to steal their boats. "It's total chaos," he said.

    Isaac Kelly, the last to depart from the Superdome, said "it feels good" as he boarded the bus. A young guardsman put an arm around the stooped Kelly and said, "Good luck and God bless."

    The dome, which once housed more than 20,000 evacuees, became a symbol of the chaos that gripped New Orleans, with television network cameras capturing scenes of filth and misery.

    Just before Kelly stepped aboard, Isaiah Bennett, leaning heavily on a wooden cane, was helped onto the bus. "It was hell," said Bennett. "I don't like this kind of mess," he said. "I never thought it would be this bad.

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has said that it will take as long as 80 days to remove the water from New Orleans and surrounding areas.

    Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) sent a letter to Bush Saturday urging him to provide cash benefits and transportation assistance to stranded people and to use federal facilities for housing. They wrote that they "are concerned that rescue and recovery efforts appear to remain chaotic and that many victims remain hungry and without adequate shelter nearly a week after the hurricane struck. Clearly, strong personal leadership from you is essential if we are to get this effort on track."

    The administration said that 100,000 have received some form of humanitarian aid and that 9,500 have been rescued by the Coast Guard. The administration said it is providing funds to employ displaced workers and has arranged for Amtrak trains to help in the evacuation. The rail service expects to remove 1,500 people daily. In addition, the Energy Department reported that 1.3 million customers were without electricity, down from 1.5 million Friday.

    The 7,200 additional troops announced by Bush on Saturday are scheduled to arrive within three days. They will come from the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C., the 1st Cavalry Division at Food Hood, Tex., the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Pendleton, Calif., and the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Lejeune, N.C.

    The decision to employ active-duty ground troops and Marines was particularly significant given the administration's initial desire to limit ground forces largely to Guard units. Regular military troops are constrained by law from engaging in domestic law enforcement. By contrast, Guard troops, who are under the command of state governors, have no such constraints.

    At a Pentagon news conference Saturday, Lt. Gen. Joseph Inge, the deputy commander of the Northern Command, said the active-duty ground forces would be used mainly to protect sites and perform other functions not considered law enforcement.

    The Air Force is repatriating 300 airmen from Iraq and Afghanistan so they can assist their families back in their home base in Biloxi, Miss.

    Law enforcement officials said order is beginning to be restored in the city. A temporary detention center has been set up in the city to house those arrested for looting and other crimes after the hurricane, and the city's court personnel have been relocated to neighboring jurisdictions unaffected by Katrina, said New Orleans U.S. Attorney Jim Letten. Trials are expected to begin within two weeks, he said. "We're going to bring these guys to justice," he said.

    Members of federal law enforcement agencies are in the city, he said. More than 200 Border Patrol agents have been sworn in to reinforce New Orleans police, and state police officials said hundreds of law enforcement agents from other states are expected in the coming days.

    Hsu reported from Washington. Staff writers Justin Blum, Dana Milbank, Jacqueline L. Salmon and Josh White contributed to this report.

    � 2005 The Washington Post Company

    Hey Paulie,

    See Governess Blanco caught in a lie by (wait for it) CNN! I think Blanco voted for troops. . .before she voted against them!

    http://thepoliticalteen.com/video/blancoday8.wmv

    >>>> BTW, this is my last post on Katrina.

    What about this statement do you fail to grasp?

    Oh . . . Sorry Paul! Are you at home with your fingers in your ears shouting "la lala la la I can't hear you?"

    I didn't see your judgement regarding Katrina discussion. I guess now that you have rendered an opinion, "Stare Decisis" is in play!

    It's things like that -- your haughty self-important Krugmaniacal inanities -- your Politbureau-style decrees -- your violent verbal mandates "in the manner of Genghis Khan (pronounce "Jennjiss" Khan") -- that render you both comedic and horrific.

    Paul, I dub the a "Knight of the Olberrian Round Table." You have all the qualities required: devotion to insane causes, efforts on behalf of illogic, and profound efforts to condone a lack of leadership

    As you wish. I've "said my piece and counted to three".