One would think that in the wake of a horrific tragedy such as Hurricane Katrina the partisan bickering would be put aside. One would be wrong.
The Bush bashers are out in force. According to his many detractors, Bush's mistake this time is that he under-funded Louisiana. I think they are absolutely right. Bush—who is too dumb to speak coherently, at least according to the Democrats—is fully culpable for Katrina. Impeach the man now!
As far as my knowledge, I do not believe anyone has blamed Bush completely for Katrina. But taking the point to it's logical extension illustrates the inefficacy of the attack.
There are several problems with this round of attacks on Mr. Bush. First, in what has become a staple of leftist ideology: money solves problems. This is woefully absurd. Is it unfortunate that Bush allocated less than half of the money needed to guard against this sort of thing—as if Katrina was preventable? Of course. But had he upped the budget threefold American citizens would still have died by the hundreds. The folks in New Orleans died not so much from a lack of Benjamins as a lack of food and water.
It is further interesting to note that liberals have consistently slammed Bush—and I think rightfully so—for the mounting deficit. Well, Bush actually cut spending. Rather than praise the man, he is slandered for not being able to allocate money for everything and simultaneously keep the budget balanced. You cannot always have your cake and eat it too.
Pointing out the speck in Bush's eye only distracts us from the planks—and there are many. In the end, history will probably show that we could have done things better in New Orleans. Yet, last I checked, humans are still held at the mercy of nature and will forever remain so. To say otherwise is, at the very least, bad strategery.
No comments:
Post a Comment