infrogmation: (Default)
infrogmation ([personal profile] infrogmation) wrote2005-11-03 03:50 pm

Heck of a job

So, is Michael D. Brown, former FEMA head, the most incompetent Bush appointee ever, or is the whole administration pretty much of this caliber, but extrodinary circumstances just made it clear in Brownie's case?

Katrina resulted in disaster scenarios that should have been in the contingency plans of officials at levels of government from local to Federal. They all seemed to have gambled "but not on my watch". They lost, and so did we.

That aside, what the hell was the Bush Administration doing putting this clueless narcisist, who was clearly in over his head at his previous job as a commissioner of the Arabian horse breeder's association, as head of FEMA? Surely, they knew SOME sort of natural disaster &/or a terrorist attack was likely to occur sooner or later.

What do folks think was going on here?

Were the Bushies setting themselves up for failure? If so, why? (To teach people not to rely on the government or something? To create a situation where more federal government funding/power will be demanded?) Or did they know that so much was underfunded and disorganized that they knew that Federal responce to whatever disaster came along was bound to be a compounding disaster, and they set Brownie up as a convenient patsy to take the fall for it? Or were they really so delusional as to think that Brownie and FEMA were up for whatever came along?

The BushCo (Cheney, Rove & Rumsfeld, CEOs) administration: Evil conspiracy and astounding incompetence are BOTH in their m.o. and are perfectly plausible explanations for their actions. Sometimes I can't tell which it is in a particular case.

[identity profile] iayork.livejournal.com 2005-11-04 12:12 am (UTC)(link)
You're missing the point. From their viewpoint, where's the problem? So a bunch of people died. Bush still gets his salary. Cheney still gets his. Their buddies (including Brown, who is still on salary) are get their pay -- hell, with the kickbacks and all, this is going ot be profitable.

So what's the problem with having a bunch of their incompetent pals in charge? Who gets hurt? Oh, yeah, you, but who cares?

[identity profile] ernunnos.livejournal.com 2005-11-04 01:14 am (UTC)(link)
I don't see this as much of an "administration" so much as a "party" thing. There are lots and lots of lower-level appointments that are made at lower levels, and director of FEMA is one of them. I believe Brown got his job on a recommendation from a friend who was a Republican Party flunkie. Doubt anyone at the level of Rove or Cheney even knew him. Certainly not Bush. They just rubber-stamped what came up to them from the lower echelons of the Republican machine. In retrospect the director of FEMA should probably be a position that gets as much attention as the director of the FBI or a SCOTUS justice, but with thousands of appointments to get filled, there's little chance they'll all get that kind of oversight.

[identity profile] jdquintette.livejournal.com 2005-11-04 03:34 am (UTC)(link)
Someone once pointed out that the Bush White House is very good at getting elected, but lousy at governing.

I don't think 'governing' interests them much, really. It's a lot of boring, detail work. These folks see themselves as visionaries. 'Big picture' types.

Why be a policy wonk when you can be a big swingin dick.

Sometimes I think if the cool chicks back in college had been a little more charitable and given these characters a hand job or three, we wouldn't be in this mess.