Obama Marks Katrina Anniversary and Plans Trip to the Big Easy This Year

The man is ALL mouth. This is just an excuse for another trip.

I see some trends here:
America should STOP looking back to 9/11 , it’s time to forget about all that and look FORWARD and make 9/11 a day of service.
Not so much with Katrina.

Even more wasted taxpayer money. Obama must realize that the government HAS no money; it belongs to the people. Why are we putting a cent into an area that shouldn’t have been built in the first place. Totally insane. Totally racist. I venture that the only reason why he would throw around our money like confetti is because of the high proportion of African people that live in the area. There isn’t any RATIONAL reason !

Too little, too late. He should have gotten his tail here today, the fourth anniversary of the tragedy. Instead, he does what this country always does, says a few nice words on the anniversary, makes a few promises that may ot may not happen, and them forgets us. The Gulf South is rebuilding with VERY little help from their own government on any level. USA? What is that?

really do not want to see Mr. Obama in action when his reelection is approaching closer in 2012. I will be embarassed by his fake actions. He is so afraid to be known as a one-term Black President, instead of the first Black President.
Posted by: young_voter | Aug 29, 2009 9:19:26 AM
Correction the 1st bi-racial president

“President Obama wants the American people to take responsibility for their COLLECTIVE future by giving the federal government the apparatus necessary to turn the nation into a nanny state.”
James did you have a domineering manipulative mother? You seem a bit neurotic about this.
President Obama has spoken strongly and repeatedly about the need for parents to take responsibility for involvement with their children, for individuals to take responsibility for themselves and for involvement with their communities and for people to get involved in the political processes to make those processes more accountable. Perhaps you need to listen.

“in the wake of Katrina”
Actually, our outfall canal floodwalls fell down without even being overtopped (at less than half their design loads) because of negligent engineering in the design of those floodwalls’ foundations by engineers employed with the US Army Corps of Engineers as reported in the official levee failure investigation reports and reported to Congress by Corps leadership in June of 2006 and as decided by US District Judge S. Duval in 2006.
The levees did not fail because they were ‘overwhelmed’. Federal engineers made lots of big stupid mistakes. Our disaster was the worst engineering catastrophe in the history of North America and the engineers that designed and built and were responsible for those failed levees are the same engineers tasked to rebuild our storm surge protection system. And, the federal government gives us no choice (and never did), but to accept the Corps’ work.
Did you know that 90% of the metro area evacuated before the storm? It was the most successful evacuation of a metropolitan area in this country’s history. Did you know FEMA doesn’t let cities use un-air-conditioned school busses without seat belts for evacuations?
Did you know that the Lower Ninth Ward is but only 2 of the 140 square miles (in just Orleans Parish) that flooded when flood control structures fell down.
Did you know that 70% of New Orleans home owners had flood insurance? – a rate higher than almost anywhere else in the country.
Did you know that the flood, proportionally, killed just as many rich, middle class and poor as well as black, white, Hispanic and Asian New Orleanians? The only demographic that suffered more than the rest were our elderly who suffered the worst, by far. Did you know many thousands of New Orleanians died in the months after the storm from stress and depression, and are still dying?
The levee failures and subsequent flooding were NOT because of our corrupt local levee boards and politicians or because of weak soil, barges, wind, rain, land elevation, budgets, democrats, republicans, violent crime, an act of God, school busses, our culture, environmentalists, neighborhood groups. It wasn’t even caused by FEMA, our Sewage and Water Board or our state’s Department of Transportation, or our culture, poverty, lack of education or any of the other red herring issues very successfully promoted by so many. It was not the fault of flood victims.
Did you know that 50% of New Orleans is above sea level? Did you know ships must travel 96 miles upriver from the Gulf to reach New Orleans? – we are not a ‘coastal’ city. Did you know the Corps is mostly responsible for the losses of our wetlands that use to serve as a storm surge buffer?
Did you know that New Orleans has a higher percentage of residents that remain lifelong residents of their home town than any other major metropolitan area in the US?
My family home marinated in salt water up to the ceiling fan blades for weeks. It took us 27 months, but we rebuilt our home elevated above the Katrina flood line. My neighborhood is 60% re-inhabited. We keep life jackets on the coat rack and a pirogue on the porch. My family moved here from Nova Scotia in 1765 and will live here for another 250 years. I feel like a fish out of water anywhere else. I’d be willing to live on a houseboat if necessary. This is the only place I own property and cannot afford to move elsewhere even if I wanted to. My work is here. My life is here. We ain’t leaving.
Make no mistake, the USACE caused our losses. We do not trust the Corps’ competence, honesty or reliability.

Alyson wrote: “I agree with Baker that cons love the nanny state as long as its designed to moving money upwards. The problem with liberals and Democrats is that they believe in fairness and equal opportunity.”
Liberals and Democrats believe in fairness and equal opportunity? That’s their rhetoric, but who has controlled the nation’s largest urban school districts over the past 50 years? They talk a great game, but only to keep the issue for the next election. They would rather talk about education reform for 50 years and continue to get re-elected rather than actually improve the education of their students. THUS these students are not given an equal opportunity as students in private schools.
Vouchers are not the solution to public education. HOWEVER they are the answer for those parents who want to get their children out of a school that is failing to educate their children and do not have the money to pay for private schooling. Vouchers give HOPE to students who want a better education–and an equal opportunity to the American Dream.
YET, it’s the Liberals and Democrats who oppose vouchers!

The “Big Easy” qualifies as a microcosm of Obama’s vision for the U.S. and the globe. Everything government and on the edge of destruction.

Handing out vouchers to the privileged is a failure.

It’s the TYPE of intervention and who it benefits that gets repub/cons goat.
Posted by: Alyson
excellent point Alyson, shame that the ‘media’ doesn’t show how this actually works in america..
Jake….. there’s a whole 1/2 hour show for you to spend illuminating Alyson’s point

Maybe it is the Republican party you are thinking of.
Posted by: VincentAquilae | Aug 30, 2009 1:19:01 AM
***
If you’re a conservative libertarian and don’t vote for Republicans and their government interventions, then it wouldn’t apply to you and I’d see more of an ideological consistency, sure.

“As president, Barack Obama will ensure that New Orleans has a levee and pumping system to protect the city
against a 100-year storm by 2011, with the ultimate goal of protecting the entire city from a Category 5 storm.
Obama will also direct revenues from offshore oil and gas drilling to increased coastal hurricane protection.”
- from Obama ’08

Alyson wrote: “Nice cherry picking of which point to argue.”
Well wasn’t Julieterra cherry picking in singling out Arizona to “prove” that the voucher program is a failure?

THAT’s how you stimulate the economy!
Posted by: James Danley | Aug 30, 2009 10:47:52 AM
*****
heh, heh. James, everything you’ve supported on these boards has been of the trickle down-ilk, a theory which has been shown to shrink the middle class. As you told me once, you’re a self-proclaimed member of the vast right wing conspiracy. Let’s start with something simple. Who created more jobs, Clinton or Bush?

Obama flies all over the country campaigning for government-run health care, and to NYC on date night.
He can’t go to New Orleans on the 4th anniversary of Katrina?

Obama should have gone to New Orleans by now. He certainly should be in New Orleans to mark Katrina’s anniversary.
Obama is such a major disappointment.
Hillary 2012.

“Hillary 2012.”
Nonono: Dr. Howard Dean in 2012.

“He can’t go to New Orleans on the 4th anniversary of Katrina?”
But … New Orleans is uncomfortably warm in August. Besides, there might be a, you know, storm or something.
Maybe for Christmas, when it’s cold in DC.

Alyson wrote: “Who created more jobs. Clinton or Bush?”
The last six years of the Clinton Administration Congress was lead by the Republicans. AND they had a surplus! During the Bush Administration from Sept 2003 to Dec 2007, 5 million jobs were created due to the Bush tax cuts. Nearly two million jobs were lost during the last year of the Bush Administration when Congress was controlled by the Democrats.

So it’s just a coincidence that President Clinton’s forecasts of deficits as far as the eye could see in 1993, were turned around with surpluses in 1999 and 2000, while the Republican held majorities in both houses from January 1994 through December 2000! And the Democrats had no effect of the economy in 2007 and 2008!
If the Democrats had made the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent in 2007, we could have avoided much of the crash that took place during 2008. THAT crash, while due mostly to the flexible subprime mortgage fiasco, was exacerbated by the Democratic campaign rhetoric of raising taxes on the wealthy, raising capital gains taxes and letting the Bush tax cuts expire for those making over $250,000. THAT caused the wealthy to change their spending habits–including pulling their money out of the stockmarket–which resulted in the loss of nearly 2 million jobs in 2008.
Just compare the unemployment rise and the stockmarket drop during the 2008 campaign.
GDP grew the first two quarters of 2008. With the unemployment rate holding between 4.9% and 5.0% until May 2008 when it rose to 5.5%–DJIA was 13,058.20 on May 2, 2008 and was 12,390.48 on Jun 4, 2008. It was not a coincidence that Hillary Clinton dropped out of the presidential race in May.
Then in August and September 2008 the unemployment rose to 6.2%–DJIA was 11,715.18 on Aug 28, 2008 (the day Sen. Obama won the nomination). The assurance of and the eventual nomination of Barack Obama was not a coincidence.
THEN as the election of Barack Obama became more likely the unemployment continued to rise to 6.6% in October 2008–DJIA was 8,175.77 on Oct. 27, 2008.
The continued rise of the unemployment following the election of Barack Obama was not a coincidence: 6.8% in November 2008–DJIA was 9,625.28 on Nov 4, 2008 (Election Day) and 7,552,29 on Nov 20, 2008.
There was a substantial DJIA gain between Nov 20, 2008 and Nov 26, 2008 (a 4-business day gain of 1,174.32 points).
The unemployment rate was 7.2% in December 2008;
The unemployment rate was 7.6% in January 2009–the DJIA was 9,034.69 on Jan 2, 2009; and 8,281.22 on Jan 16, 2009; and 7,949.09 on Jan 20, 2009 (a one day loss of 332,13 points)–Inauguration Day.
THIS can all be traced to Obama’s rhetoric of wealth redistribution and his massive spending programs during the campaign. From May 2008 to Election Day, Nov 4, 2008 the unemployment rate rose from 5.5% to 6.8%. The DJIA dropped during the same time period from 13,058.20 to 9,625.28.

James Danley – sorry but Alyson’s detailed facts far outweigh your ‘theory’ that Democratic campaign rhetoric caused all the greedy, rich people to start firing people, sell off all their stocks, drive their businesses into bankruptcy, crash banking, financial and auto industries and crash the entire global economy.

James Danley – sorry but Alyson’s detailed facts far outweigh your ‘theory’ that Democratic campaign rhetoric caused all the greedy, rich people to start firing people, sell off all their stocks, drive their businesses into bankruptcy, crash banking, financial and auto industries and crash the entire global economy.
Posted by: julieterra | Aug 30, 2009 8:00:05 PM
***
But you have to admit, Julie, that he has a very good imagination. Wow. I’ve said before that he should write movies– horror flicks.

Alyson, first of all President Bush inherited a recession when he took office (the Dot Com bubble burst of 2000-01). The Bush 2001 tax cuts were just taking affect when the attacks of 9/11 jolted our economy. The 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts limited the economic effects of 9/11. In case you don’t recall, all air travel was halted for three days. Even when air traffic resumed the American people greatly changed their travel plans and that nearly killed the tourist industry. And then we began the War on Terrorism. You can argue all you want about why we went to war–Afghanistan in October 2001 and Iraq in March 2003. But the fact is we did go to war–and still are at war.
Yet in spite of the war our economy was booming from Sept 2003 through December 2007–contrary to the claims by the Democrats and Liberals and some in the media. There were 52 consecutive months of job growth–5 million jobs created. The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed from 7,591.93 on July 1, 2002 to 14,164.53 on Oct 9, 2007. Federal revenues reached all-time record highs. GDP was up 7.2% in the 3rd Quarter of 2003; up 4.0% in the 4th Quarter of 2003; up 3.1% for all of 2004; up 4.4% for all of 2005; up 3.2% for all of 2006;
In spite of the continued war; in spite of the downturn in the housing market in 2007; in spite of the skyrocketing energy prices in 2007; GDP was up 3.2% for all of 2007. And GDP grew during the first six months on 2008–up .09% in the 1st Quarter of 2008; and up 3.3% in the 2nd Quarter of 2008.
THOSE ARE GREAT ECONOMIC NUMBERS! Could they have been better? Absolutely! The Republicans failed to continue the retraint they had during the six years they controlled both Houses during the Clinton Administration. The Republicans abandoned their Conservative principles. Many of us were furious with both the Republicans in Congress and President Bush for not cutting federal spending. In fact, had the Democrats nominated a moderate in 2004, a candidate who believed in FIGHTING the War on Terror (like Sen. Lieberman) instead of one advocating defeat by arbitrarily pulling out of Iraq, many Conservatives would have stayed away from the polls in November 2004. And Bush would have been a one-term president. Instead the fear of what Sen. Kerry might do in the White House attracted just enough Conservatives to defeat Sen. Kerry.
Then in 2006, many Conservatives DID stay away from the polls. Their disgust with the Republicans in Congress gave control of both Houses of Congress back to the Democrats. NOTE: My disgust with the Republicans didn’t keep me away from the polls. Because I knew that pro-spending Republicans were still better than tax-and-spend Democrats.

Pssssst. I’d add many economists to the list of Dems, libs, and some in the media who rightly saw what an economic disaster the Bush years were. I’d also thrown in my stock portfolio, and business costs. But hey, those things don’t really matter, so bygones.

Also, James, as you know, I’d point you back to Bruce Bartletts piece regarding the GOP’s misplaced rage and recommend books by Dean Baker and Paul Krugman.