This is America
This past week I've spent too much time on Yahoo! News, compulsively hitting the refresh button, hoping I'd see the top headline replaced with something along these lines: Sun Comes Out, Flowers Bloom, Birds Sing.
I went over to the American Red Cross website and made a donation. Every little bit helps, but my little bit didn't make the depressing headlines go away.
And I even have to wonder if my donation is doing any good at all, given that the Red Cross hasn't been allowed into New Orleans. From their web site:
Acess [sic] to New Orleans is controlled by the National Guard and local authorities and while we are in constant contact with them, we simply cannot enter New Orleans against their orders.
The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city.
The editorial in yesterday's Chicago Tribune began with the question: Is this America? Unfortunately, the answer is yes. It is.
Hurricane Katrina exposed the same pathologies in our society that I was horrified to discover in my own home town ten years ago. In the seven days beginning July 13, 1995, Chicago experienced a heat wave in which the temperature hit 106 degrees-F. There were no spectacular floodwaters, no smoldering ruins for TV crews to film. The magnitude of the disaster was nothing compared to Katrina. But over 700 people died -- the poorest, the oldest, the weakest, and often the darkest among us.
As for the current situation in New Orleans, I won't say that President Bush is to blame, but I will say that some of the things he said this past week demonstrate how out of touch he is. At times, I detected some subtle (and inappropriate, in my opinion) hints of conservative themes of limited government and self-reliance. He called for zero tolerance on looting, without making any exception for those who are scrounging for necessities such as food and water.
The catastrophe that is playing out in New Orleans is a prime example of why an effective, well-funded government is necessary. The free market does a pretty good job of making sure economic resources go where they are needed, but in New Orleans, all this has shut down. And we can see that without massive amounts of assistance, it doesn't take long before people start dying. I hate to say, but so there, Mr. Norquist. I wish we didn't have such a vivid example.
posted by Mark M @ 9/03/2005 10:43:00 AM
2 Comments:
Antonio... I think I know who you are, since there's only one Antonio who calls me Mr. Mark. A long response to a long comment...
You wrote:
>But I am sure you are not disagreeing with his statement that there should be a zero tolerance for looting and lawlessness. Or are you?
Actually, yes. I think it was an idiotic thing to say. Think about it -- zero tolerance -- while people are starving, and no help is to be found. If people are going into stores to get basic necessities, I see no problem with it.
You also wrote:
>But what stinks is that all the looting, rioting, rape, fires and shooting are getting international press...
As it should. That's what was happening, and there was precious little good news to offset it. And we should be embarrassed.
You also wrote:
>You will see just how much the rest of the country will pony up to assist - it will be substantial. But of course, that won't get as much press as the photos of hundreds of poor people looting a sporting goods store and setting fire to buildings.
First, I think you were referring to an AP report that said: "Some walked out of a sporting goods store with armfuls of football jerseys." From this you get hundreds? There were also reports of people setting fires, but I never got the impression that this was done by hundreds-strong mobs. I'd like to see the photos to which you refer.
As for private donations for the relief effort, I agree completely that much will be given, and that it will receive relatively little press. But the issue isn't how much assistance will be given in the future. The issue is the ebarrassing failure of government in the hurricane's immediate aftermath.
You also wrote:
>How convenient that it takes a hurricane to prompt all this new conversation about the racial inequalities in the South! What a shocking revelation!
Let me respond to that by quoting from Dawn Turner Trice's column in today's Chicago Tribune:
"I told [civil rights activist Lew Kreinberg] that the storm had uncovered some ugly truths many of us weren't quite prepared for. Lew got my point immediately:
"'During the Great Chicago Fire,' he said, voice raspy, 'when the downtown was wiped out, all of a sudden the folks running the city could finally see under the locks and all the people down there who were living in poverty, the depth of which had been ignored.'" (end quote)
...No Tony, it is not convenient, but these are problems that have been swept under the rug where, for the most part, they could be ignored. The rug's gone. We can see what's under there, and that is what is provoking the conversation.
Antonio...
You wrote:
>Kanye West and other Hollywood whiny Liberals...
Oh really? Kanye West happens to be a Chicagoan. As for the "Hollywood Liberal" libel... I'd have a few things to say about that, but it would take us off topic. We can discuss that offline.
You also wrote:
>HA HAHAHAHAHA!
Umm... I try to maintain a sense of humor, and I have seen Fast Times at Ridgemont High, but you've lost me there.
You also wrote:
>it is just too easy to say the government did not act fairly or quickly enough
It is easy to say because it is so damn obvious. Some of the most vivid images from the disaster are of the large numbers of people who were waiting at insufficiently supplied, unsafe shelters for days on end. They were waiting in plain sight in accessible locations, and for days, no help came.
You also wrote:
>people should stop with the calls for a "Katrina Commission" (Hillary earlier today) and focus on the priority ... rescuing people...
Of course, the immediate priority is to rescue people. But that shouldn't preclude an investigation. There are many questions to be answered -- in some cases, by the President himself. Here are some... Bush, by discontinuing Project Impact a month into his presidency, demoted FEMA to a non-cabinet level of authority. Why? In what ways might this change have adversely affected the response to Katrina? What about FEMA Director Michael Brown -- is he qualified? In what ways might Brown and his organization have responded better to this disaster? Prior to joining FEMA as General Counsel in 2001, Brown had no experience in managing disasters -- he was the unpopular head of an Arabian horse association. Why did Bush appoint him Director? For that matter, why did Bush appoint the inexperienced Joe Allbaugh to be FEMA Director in 2001?
Post a Comment
<< Home