Objectivity During Crisis

[SheetWise]

The diverse (partisan) opinions I read regarding the current situation in Louisiana make me pause, and wonder if there is any objectivity. I include myself. This and several other issues make me question if our disagreement is really over our form of government.

The United States are not run like a corporation. The States are not subsidiaries of the Federal government. The President does not have 50 Governors who answer to him -- and he did not appoint them -- he has 50 Governors that he answers to. The power structure, as our founding Fathers saw fit, is from the bottom up. It is illogical to think that the President should dictate or unilaterally act in an issue involving a State. The President has more latitude in Afghanistan than he does in Louisiana. It's the residents of Louisiana who have power in LA -- and they have elected their leaders.

So wherever the blame lies, if mistakes were made, it's important to remember that the Mayor and the Governor are on the south end of the State line, closest to the people, and directing the peoples Federal Government.

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
It is illogical to think that the President should dictate or unilaterally act in an issue involving a State. The President has more latitude in Afghanistan than he does in Louisiana.

[/ QUOTE ]

The federal government is deeply involved in issues regarding states, specifically including disaster response and relief, and the president has authority over much of that federal government. So I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from here.

How does the president "answer" to the governors?

[cardcounter0]

Is this the official right wing echo chamber response, or did you change a few of the words yourself?

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this the official right wing echo chamber response, or did you change a few of the words yourself?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought about it and wrote it. It was a two-part process. Your posts needs to focus on part one.

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
The federal government is deeply involved in issues regarding states, specifically including disaster response and relief.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, but it's a lot like my broker being deeply involved in my finances, specifically executing orders. He can advise me, but if he acts without my authorization -- I'll sue.

[ QUOTE ]
... and the president has authority over much of (the) federal government. So I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from here.

[/ QUOTE ]
The President has some authority over some of the Federal goverment.

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but it's a lot like my broker being deeply involved in my finances, specifically executing orders. He can advise me, but if he acts without my authorization -- I'll sue.

[/ QUOTE ]

All sorts of federal agencies do all sorts of things without authorization from the states - the FBI, the IRS, the EPA, the DEA, the ATF, etc.

Regarding disaster relief, from what I understand FEMA and Homeland Security (of which FEMA is now a part) have some degree of automatic jurisdiction if a large enough disaster occurs. For other areas, state and local officials technically have to request help.

[ QUOTE ]
The President has some authority over some of the Federal goverment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever you want to call it. He has authority over the executive branch, which includes the relevant players in this case.

So if I'm following you, is there any reason that the following conversation couldn't happen? The president contacts the mayor of New Orleans and the governor and says, "Listen, I want to help you out. I've got every Federal resource at my disposal. I want to deploy all of them immediately to help you out. May I?"

Do you think for a second that the answer would be no? If you are looking for some objectivity, how about the fact that even many if not most arch-rightwingers are also pointing their finger at Bush.

[newfant]

[ QUOTE ]
So wherever the blame lies, if mistakes were made, it's important to remember that the Mayor and the Governor are on the south end of the State line, closest to the people, and directing the peoples Federal Government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you just say that the Mayor of New Orleans has the power to direct the peoples of the Federal Government? Let me read that again. Yep, you said it.

Let me give you a quick civics lesson: President McChimpleton is responsible for directing the U.S. military (that's why he has the title of Commander-in-Chief) and he is responsible for directing the peoples of the executive branch (which includes FEMA).

Just because Bill O'Reilly or Rush said that the Mayor of New Orleans is commander-in-chief of the U.S. military doesn't make it so. Learn to think critically and stop being a parrot.

By the way, your post has nothing to do with "objectivity" and everything to do with placing blame with anyone but Gee Duh. If Rush or Bill had said that your mom was the Commander-in-Chief would you have come on this board and blamed your mom for the federal government's non-response in New Orleans?

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
The president contacts the mayor of New Orleans and the governor and says, "Listen, I want to help you out. I've got every Federal resource at my disposal. I want to deploy all of them immediately to help you out. May I?"


[/ QUOTE ]
That's fair. And it's why I'm looking for objectivity. We should all understand that a framework exists -- then as the facts come forward we can judge them within that framework. What I see too often here is that the rules change as the facts change. If something similar to what you describe did not happen -- and it was the reason for delayed response -- it's unconscionable.

[cardcounter0]

That conversation couldn't happen. Do you see a phone anywhere?