Tomorrow night from Louisiana, on his fourth trip to Katrina-land, President Bush will address the nation on the great storm, the clean-up, and his "vision for the future." The ugliest aspects of Katrina's devastation — that the nation (which ultimately means the federal government) failed the predominantly poor and black "left behind," those who were most vulnerable and least able to help themselves — has left a bitter taste in the national mouth.
Americans were startled and alarmed to find that the poorest segment of our society was, in the grip of nature's indifferent rage and the immediate aftermath, little or no better off than those in similar circumstances in far-flung "third world" lands with grossly inferior "infrastructures" and "support systems" to ours. Similarly embarrassing was the ubiquitously televised and photographed exposure of the naked volume and depth of of the underclass 40 years after the War on Poverty. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said, "maybe now on the heels of New Orleans" we could "deal with the problem of persistent poverty."
White House insiders say Bush's speech will be "explanatory," have the "feel" of an address to the nation, and "lay out a strategy" in an attempt to address these broader themes, including the "racial component of Katrina," a "commitment to rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast," and will "discuss plans to provide health care, education, jobs and housing assistance to flood victims," spending up to $200 billion on the effort over the next two years.
Addressing the question, "given what happened with Katrina, shouldn't Americans be concerned if their government isn't prepared to respond to another disaster or even a terrorist attack," at a White House news conference with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani yesterday, Bush came remarkably close to a mea culpa regarding dissatisfaction with the initial government response to Katrina.
Article comments
1 - NC
Redistribution now! 75% tax rate, baby!
2 - red state
to the left it doesn't matter what bush does during his 2nd term because they are blinded by their hatred for him
bush could bring about peace in the middle east, eliminate poverty in the usa and cure cancer during his 2nd term and the lefties would still find something about him to bitch about
3 - Greg Smyth
Let's face it, though, there's plenty to bitch about - even without going anywhere near Iraq.
Tax breaks for millionnaires. Promotion of the pseudo-scientific, thinly-veiled Christian theory of intelligent design over *proper* scientific theory (my, Church and State sure look cosy...). Blocking stem cell research purely because the Right can't countenance anything involving the word 'embryo', whether they understand the scientific principles or not.
That's for starters...
4 - NC
I'm curious. What does this mean?
What would qualify as "honestly addressing" poverty? Is it enough if he spouts some platitudes about how there sure are a lot of poor folk out there? Should he propose some sort of massive welfare initiative to "solve" the problem?
What if he goes on the air and says, "Lemme level with you. There's poverty in every society. Always will be. We can't eliminate it but we can try to reduce it, provided you people are willing to accept a significant tax hike. Which you aren't." That would be pretty honest.
Naturally, the only "honest" response my friends on the left will accept is solution that involves stripping down the defense budget and allocating that money towards redistribution. They don't give one bit of a fucking shit more about poor people than the right does, but that would accomplish their main goal of crippling America militarily.
Anyway, should be fun TV!
5 - Eric Olsen
yes there will always be poor, but a large permanent undreclass is to no one's benefit, including the overall economy:
finally get serious about education, and coincident with that, do all possible to foster a culture of achievement.
I just heard we are now ninth in high school graduation rate, where we used to be first
6 - NC
"Poor" versus "underclass" sounds like a semantic distinction. Regardless, haven't we been fighting a war on poverty for the past forty years or so? The "Great Society" and all that? How has it been working out so far?
I don't think I'd mind a renewed welfare intiative if it was simply presented honestly. Let Bush go on TV and say, "Here's the deal. We're going to double your tax rates so we can throw a few trillion dollars more down this sinkhole. It won't work, but we'll all feel good about ourselves for trying." Now that's straight-shootin'.
Yes, the culture part is key, and the government's ability to solve that is just about zero.
7 - Nancy
I would settle for Bush just implementing honest and fair taxation of everybody, across the board, and putting an end to his endless charade of tax breaks & corporate welfare for the rich.
8 - NC
Like I was saying.
9 - Scott Butki
I thought about writing a satire piece about what Bush should say as opposed to what he will say.
But right now it's hard to be more unusual than reality so I'll take a pass this time around.
10 - Dave Nalle
>>Tax breaks for millionnaires. Promotion of the pseudo-scientific, thinly-veiled Christian theory of intelligent design over *proper* scientific theory (my, Church and State sure look cosy...). Blocking stem cell research purely because the Right can't countenance anything involving the word 'embryo', whether they understand the scientific principles or not.<<
Well, you got one thing right anyway. There are, of course, no tax breaks for millionaires or any measures to block stem cell research, no matter what your talking points memos are telling you.
The tax breaks are percentage reductions applied equally to everyone. And all that's been done with stem cell research is to cut some federal funding. No regulations have been passed to restrict any private research on any stem cell lines.
But keep repeating the lies. If you do it enough someone will start believing you.
Dave
11 - Greg Smyth
Nice, Dave.
So, obviously the idea of percentage tax reductions benefit everyone equally... much like the currently in vogue myth of a flat tax rate being good for all. Clearly if you start dicking around with across the board percentage tweaking there's only one real group you're trying to help, and it sure ain't Joe Bloggs.
As for cutting funding federally, yes you're right to say that it doesn't affect private research but America is slowly losing the plot (and international standing) with regards to scientific research in a number of areas thanks to the current Anti-Science administration.
12 - Eric Olsen
"Yes, the culture part is key, and the government's ability to solve that is just about zero."
I don't agree with that at all: one of the things government, and a president in particular, can do best is focus the nation's attention, and that can change culture
13 - NC
Those sound like buzzwords to me. Lyndon Johnson "focused the nation's attention" on poverty and here we are, forty years later, still with a huge underclass. Except instead of Martin Luther King as their spokesman, now we've got Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. There's progress for you.
Once again, the hard fact of the matter: people don't give a shit about the poor. If they did, they'd tighten their belts, stop buying luxury goods like iPods and European vacations, and donate the money saved to charity. But they don't. And I don't blame them. Each of us has enough to worry about with our own lives that we don't have much mental energy to spare for some poor bastard living in a trailer home in New Orleans. It's too bad, but that's the human condition.
If we were going to "focus the nation's attention" on the poor, a good time to do it would have been ten years ago when we had shitloads of money and no pressing foreign policy problems to deal with. But we took a pass. Why? Because, in fact, people don't give a shit. So now it's Bush's problem and of course he'll eat boatloads of crap from liberals who don't care a jot more about the poor than conservatives but are touchingly earnest in pretending that they do, and slowly but surely we'll forget about the hurricane and in a few months we'll all be back to openly not caring. Cycle of life, etc.