posted
I'm doing this as a separate thread for a variety of reasons.
1. Too many choice gems, like the lack of qualifications of the current FEMA director, are kind of getting buried in general Katrina threads. And there's that whole "delay in asking for relief workers" issue as well.
2. This gives me one more excuse to show why John Kass of the Chicago Tribune is probably my favorite columnist - period. It's not that I agree with him politically. He's much more conservative than I am and a big supporter of the Bush administration and the war in Iraq. But Kass doesn't like incompetence, insensitivity or corruption - and he gets nasty when he writes about it. And he doesn't change his "spin" depending on the party affiliation of the offender. This is rare for columnists on either side of the political aisle.
quote:I was all set to defend President Bush as a guy who really doesn't want poor black people in Louisiana and Mississippi to die of starvation and disease, no matter what the Democrats say.
But then Barbara Bush, the president's mom, went and dusted off the Bush family silver foot Monday. And she used it.
While touring the Houston Astrodome, where thousands of Hurricane Katrina refugees have been huddling, Barbara Bush said they didn't have it so bad because, heck, they were poor to begin with.
"What I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas," she was quoted as saying in an interview on National Public Radio.
Thousands of hurricane refugees were sitting on or near their green army cots, perhaps thinking of lunch, presumably waiting to be fed something hearty.
Anything but cake.
"Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality," Barbara Bush said. And here comes the fastball over the middle of the Democratic plate:
"And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this is working very well for them."
At least she didn't ask them to sing and dance. But I'm sure it's working out very well for them. How often does something nice like a hurricane come by and change your life so you can hang out with thousands of others in the Astrodome and have Barbara Bush say it wasn't so bad, because you were poor anyway?
posted
Well, I have to say I agree with him. I posted in Bob's "mild rant" thread yesterday about this. That is exactly the way I took it, too. I thought I was the only one, but last night The Daily Show came through for me and played the clip as it was going to commercial. If you didn't see The Daily Show last night, you should catch the re-run of it tonight.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
Thanks for the heads up on the Daily Show. I'll try to catch it tonight. But I suspect it won't be the only news show running the clip.
I really do enjoy John Kass. I suspect that sooner or later he'll be making comparisons between the patronage appointments at FEMA and some of the more outrageous patronage appointments by Chicago's Democrat mayor Richard Daley.
I look forward to that column.
I've been searching google regularly and I am pretty shocked that there is no news of a clarification and/or apology from Barbara Bush.
What's that about? Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Apparently, we are the only people in the universe that took it the wrong way. I'm sure she doesn't even have a clue that what she said might be considered inappropriate.
They changed the quote to take out the "scary" part, which seems to be pretty common among the articles I read. Other than reporting what she said, and a sentence with an obliquely raised eyebrow, they seem to move right along like nothing ever happened. I kind of wonder if all the reporters are sitting around wondering if they are the only one that took it out of context and are giving her the benefit of the doubt, while waiting to see if anyone else was upset. It might be a few days before this story takes off. Or it could die a quiet death.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
"Scary" is included in the Editor & Publisher quotation.
I suspect that this will probably simmer. Major papers ran articles on this yesterday - although many combined it with a really stupid remark from Rick Santorum suggesting "penalties" be leveed in the future against people who don't evacuate.
He had to backtrack almost immediately and admit the majority of people who remained in New Orleans were those without vehicles and without money for transportation out of the city.
I want to see what tomorrow brings in terms of editorials and opinion columns.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm so glad to see that I wasn't the only one who thought she was being insulting with that comment. I've been simmering on it for the past day and a half since I first saw the quote in yesterday's Trib trying to decide if I was being overly sensitive (for no real reason since I'm not affected in any significant way) or if she really was that blind to her own statement.
Hey, waitaminnit... the title changed while I was posting! LOL
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: In a segment at the top of the show on the surge of evacuees to the Texas city, Barbara Bush said: "Almost everyone I’ve talked to says we're going to move to Houston."
Then she added: "What I’m hearing is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality.
"And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this (she chuckles slightly)--this is working very well for them."
From another source, but that is what E&P had before. Several things I read were attributed to E&P, making me wonder if anyone had actually heard it or were just running the story they had seen there.
quote: In a segment at the top of the show on the surge of evacuees to the Texas city, Barbara Bush said: "Almost everyone (the victims) I’ve talked to says we're going to move to Houston." (clarification Soto's) Then she added: "What I’m hearing is they (the victims) all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality. "And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this [she chuckles slightly] is working very well for them."
I really think E&P changed it's copy, though. Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
I figured John Kass's name doesn't mean much outside of Chicago and the title was a little dense. So I decided to go for a title that was a little more direct and explicit about the thread content.
So it wasn't just you. It was me, Kayla, you and John Kass.
you mean you think E&P would just change copy instead of telling readers that made a goof and announcing a correction?
I am shocked. (it's similar to the same of shock I have when I realize that Bush hasn't fired FEMA director Michael Brown and found some other supervisor of horse breeding to take his place.)
In other words, I believe you and I am not surprised.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Today on my way back from lunch Barbara Bush's comment was the subject of discussion on News & Notes with Ed Gordon, and all of the panelists on the show had the same take as has been expressed in this thread.
Thanks for the heads up Kayla--I missed the Daily Show last night, but I'll catch tonight's rerun of it.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
noemon, the headline here (at NPR) says Barbara Bush's Comments on Evacuees Cause a Stir, goes on to quote her and then says nothing about the stir.
Pretty much, that's what I've been seeing about it. A headline or a sentence about the uniqueness of the comment and then nothing.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: I suspect that this will probably simmer. Major papers ran articles on this yesterday - although many combined it with a really stupid remark from Rick Santorum suggesting "penalties" be leveed in the future against people who don't evacuate.
He had to backtrack almost immediately and admit the majority of people who remained in New Orleans were those without vehicles and without money for transportation out of the city.
so what do we do with people who can leave, but choose not to?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think this just might be a story on the rise. An hour ago, Scripps-Howard published a column by Bill Straub that's been picked up by two newspapers so far - one in Texas (not sure where) and the Detroit News. I figure columnists Clarence Page here in Chicago will probably write about it - and he's syndicated.
quote: WASHINGTON - A few days after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, President Bush galvanized a fearful nation by climbing atop the rubble of the World Trade Center, draping his arm across the shoulders of a firefighter and declaring, "The whole world hears you."
The president's popularity surged in the aftermath of that disaster, rallying public support and displaying defiance in the face of aggression.
But what Bush has said after Hurricane Katrina, now recognized as the worst natural disaster in U.S. history, has attracted criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike. While his words after 9/11 provided confidence, his statements after the disaster that has befallen New Orleans and other areas have given little solace.
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California told reporters Wednesday that Gulf Coast residents were struck by two disasters - Katrina and the president's failure to lead.
"Instead of unconscionably blaming others, President Bush must take charge and take responsibility, and must get it right, and that is my concern and the message that I will bring to the president: 'Mr. President, you should have taken charge and you should have taken responsibility,' " she said.
Pelosi recounted a conversation with Bush, during which she called for the resignation of Michael Brown, head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency who has been under fire since the outset.
"He said, 'Why would I do that?' " Pelosi said. "I said, 'Because of all that went wrong, of all that didn't go right last week.' And he said, 'What didn't go right?' "
"Oblivious, in denial, dangerous," she said.
and there's more...
quote: Bush also wasn't helped by comments from others. House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., raised questions almost immediately about the wisdom of rebuilding New Orleans, comments he lost no time retracting. Homeland Security Department Secretary Michael Chertoff told Tim Russert on "Meet the Press" that no one envisioned the New Orleans levees breaking, even though the possibility had been discussed for years.
And then there's the president's mother, Barbara Bush, who appeared insensitive to the suffering of residents in her comments.
"What I'm hearing which is sort of scary is that they all want to stay in Texas," she said. "Everybody is so overwhelmed by the hospitality. And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this, this is working very well for them."
posted
Well, thankfully we have something new to bash the Bush's about. I am sure disparging an 80 year old women for comments that could have been said better makes us all better people.
As a question, if 100,000 to 200,000 or more people without jobs, without money, without anything showed up in your town can you honestly say that you would feel completely safe and you would have no fear of anything about the ramifications? Her comment of "so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this, this is working very well for them" is true. Or do you think they would be better off back in NO with no help from the Mayor or Governor? No one did anything back in NO, so YES it is working out much better for them in TEXAS where the people care and are actually doing something to help. Don't you think that the underpriviledged being helped by Texans (but they must be evil, they are Texans, and the Bushes are Texans!) with overwhelming hospitality is a good thing? I guess you would just ship them right back to where they were because NO is such a paradise to be in right now. But no, the more important story here is we found a way to hopefully convince everyone that the Bushes are evil monsters.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:noemon, the headline here (at NPR) says Barbara Bush's Comments on Evacuees Cause a Stir, goes on to quote her and then says nothing about the stir.
Yeah, I haven't heard an actual news story on this from NPR--the show I was listening to has more of a roundtable discussion format. The people on the panel were pretty vocal in their condemnation of the former first lady's "let them eat cake" attitude.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is the latest polling of Bush's job approval rating?
Before Katrina he was at 41%. What do you think he is at now? I'd guess low 30's.
His domestic agenda for the next year is sunk.
And DarkKnight - Do you really think that LIVING at the Astrodome on cots is better than the life they had in NO before the flood? That is what she was saying, that these underprivileged people didn't have much to start with, and that the charity they are being shown is actually an improvement over their previous life. It's sickeningly patronizing.
Furthermore, I think Texas should be commended for their actions. I have family in Houston. My cousin was telling my mom two days ago about how there was a call out for people with wireless enabled laptops to come to the Astrodome to help work the refugee databse to try and reunite families broken up. I've never been more proud of my cousin.
Texans can be coarse, and they can be snooty. But when it comes down to it, they have huge hearts, and don't lack for generosity.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Her comment of "so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this, this is working very well for them" is true.
Right. Those people who have lost parents, sisters, brothers, husbands, children and parents are really sitting pretty. Those people who lost the lives they had - not a privileged life - but a life are really lucking out. (that's sarcasm, in case you need to have it pointed out)
And for your last bit - the conservative columnist I quoted at the beginning of the thread wasn't talking about the Bushes being evil. He was talking about them being insensitive and out of touch. And no one here has said anything more than that.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you, Dark Knight. That's exactly what I was thinking.
100,000 people is a LOT. It's a city. Texas has taken in more than that. Fortunately, Texas also has a lot of resources and will try to absorb all of them.
I have seen people wonder why refugees are being relocated to the midwest and to the east. It's because an entire city needs to be absorbed, and there are 48 other states that will also be able.
I'm a little concerned about Baton Rouge. It just got bumped to the biggest city in Louisiana, and it doesn't have the infrastructure there to be able to expand its population by 50% overnight.
The part of about being better off was tacky, though.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suspect this might stick until the former First Lady says something. The White House had to respond and it didn't respond very adeptly. And, in all fairness, they really can't until she says something to help them out.
quote:WASHINGTON A White House spokesman says Former First Lady Barbara Bush's comments about some hurricane refugees were a personal observation.
The wife of former President George Bush on Monday said poor people at a relocation center in Houston are faring better than before Hurricane Katrina struck.
White House press secretary Scott McClellan today didn't answer directly when asked if the current president agreed with his mother's remarks.
That's actually all of the article except for the quotes we've all seen several times by now.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I imagine Kennebunkport is going to be frosty for more reasons than just the weather for the next few months.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: But no, the more important story here is we found a way to hopefully convince everyone that the Bushes are evil monsters.
No, not in the least. The real story is that a government that prided itself in security, stability, proper leadership and the ability to respond in times of crisis turned out to be slow, timid, and outwardly unfazed by the suffering of those in poverty.
The Bush administration worked hard to create the Department of Homeland Security and bring all of the intelligence and disaster relief agencies under one banner. They were streamlining and making a better bureaucracy to address catastrophic disasters. They were going to have one group of people who would listen to the threat experts and act appropriately.
And when the chips went down, that Department would spring to life and be a superhero.
I'd rather have The Tick watching over us. This wasn't just a national tragedy, it should be a national shame.
And Mr. Bush and his family, have proven how insulated they really are from the sufferings of people below a certain poverty level or voting block. He went to speak to seniors groups in the Southwest and then to an event in San Diego before he ever turned more than a blinking glance at the devastation along the Gulf Coast.
He fiddled while Rome burned.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
I'm confused. I see what you wrote and I don't see much in common with the "straw man" stuff DK wrote.
The generosity of the Texas public and the state's response has been widely recognized as astounding. Last weekend, Al Sharpton surprised Tucker Carlson on MSNBC. (Carlson had earlier announced Sharpton wanted to talk about racial issues related to the disaster, which would be predictable.)
That's not what Sharpton did. He spent his whole time on the air praising the mayor of Houston, the Texas public and the larger faith community in Texas. Considering his usual rap, it looked like he was honestly moved by what he saw. Texans were doing their best to move every available resource to help people whose lives had been devastated.
But that's a separate issue from what Barbara Bush said. I just can't figure out why a politically savvy person like her hasn't issued an apology for sloppy speaking or something like that. The sooner she does it, the likelier it will fade away as more pressing matters take everyone's attention.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was referring to part where it's scary that everyone wants to stay in Texas. I don't think for a second that she meant the people are scary - there are plenty of violent people with guns in Texas already. I think she meant about all the work it will take to absorb a city full of people with no resources of their own. I'm proud of Texas for what they've done so far. Texas can handle it, but it is a big job.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Katie, I don't think people are taking issue with that so much as the "they're better off" part. Which you have already agreed is tacky. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
the "better off" is certainly what set me off about Barbara Bush's statements. That was obviously what bothered John Kass too.
The "scary" part is ambiguous and could be interpreted in a variety of ways. It's probably getting harsher interpretations because of what follows directly after.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love John Kass. I agree that "scary" is ambiguous, and probably related to Texas suddenly getting a HUGE influx of basically indigent people.
But the later quote DOES smack of clueless priviledge (as have a few of the President's quotes/actions over the last week or two).
I'm not saying that the Bushes are classist or even clueless in fact, merely that they look that way. The fact that they have been slow to correct that impression is bad, because ...
If it looks like a banana and smells like a banana people will believe it IS a banana, even if it tastes like a kumquat.
If enough people believe it, in politics, it hardly matters whether-or-not it's true.
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to repost my comments from yesterday on Bob's thread over here.
quote: Living on a cot in the Astrodome is working for them? Because they are poor. I guess when you come from the slums, a cot in the Astrodome, which is filled with 15,000 other people, "works" for you.
You know, I am pretty certain she didn't mean it the way it sounds. I'm sure it was meant as a compliment to Texans, but I sometimes wonder if people ever think about what is coming out of their mouths or if they just talk. (My son is one of those people who doesn't have an edit button, so I understand, but sheesh, the woman has been First Lady and First Mom for quite a while now. You'd think at some point and time, one would have been installed.)
And
quote: To me, when I initially read what she said, thought it could easily be taken poorly by anyone who thinks that the world is racists and out to get them. I mean, we are talking about a large group of people who think the government actually blew up the flood wall near 17th Street Canal to protect the French Quarter.
To those people, what BB said was "It's scary that the black people all want to stay in Texas. I mean, we've been so hospitable that they say they want to stay! They are so poor that a cot in room with 15,000 other cots is better than what they had. Oh my lord, what are we going to do with all these poor black people?" It's almost like she wishes that Texas wouldn't be quite so hospitable so that they would all leave.
Like I said, I'm sure she intended it completely differently, but you'd think that at this particular point and time in history, she'd know that charges of racism are rampant and that the "underprivileged" are wary of government.
Like I said, I'm sure what she meant was totally different than what seemed to come across. I'm sure she meant that she was really proud of her fellow Texans and how generous they were.
But is sure seemed like she thought everyone was going to be happy with a cot in the Astrodome and stay forever because it's better than what they had before the hurricane.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
And for all that they are doing now, I have to say that the Texans are not all that welcoming of outsiders who they feel don't belong there. This is a temporary welcome mat and make no mistake about it. At some point, these people are expected to go home -- especially if they are indigent.
If they have work in Texas, that's a whole other kettle of fish. But people who might swell the welfare roles aren't going to be happily absorbed into ANY community in the US.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
On a side note, I found out that the Center I work in might be working with some evacuees that ended up in the Chicago area. Diane is going to fill me in later.
Note - this is the Center for Independent Living - not the anti-euthanasia organization I do my thing with.
I do not wish to create unnecessary confusion.
We have the administration to do that for us already. Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: And for all that they are doing now, I have to say that the Texans are not all that welcoming of outsiders who they feel don't belong there. This is a temporary welcome mat and make no mistake about it. At some point, these people are expected to go home -- especially if they are indigent.
If they have work in Texas, that's a whole other kettle of fish. But people who might swell the welfare roles aren't going to be happily absorbed into ANY community in the US.
Texas is not the only place that expects the people put out of their homes by Katrina to go home after a relatively short time. Here in California, San Diego has let it be known that the folks they are taking in are expected to be gone again in a month or two.
Fresno, however, is not taking that tack, and for once I can be proud of the city where I live. The mayor has already made statements that any folks dislocated by Katrina who end up being sent here are welcome to stay as long as they want and make a new life here. I think he's even been talking to Habitat for Humanity about getting some houses built for those who'd like to stay. I'm not a big fan of the mayor, for a lot of reasons, but he's on the right page on this one.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Texas is not the only place that expects the people put out of their homes by Katrina to go home after a relatively short time
My understanding is that Texas leaders fully expect that many, many people will cnose to stay. I'm sure they hope not all of them will stay. But then they have taken on a huge number of refugees. If you've seen anything suggesting they aren't welcome to stay I'd like to see it.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, one could certainly get that impression from a myriad of broadcast news reports that talk about Texas officials saying that there is no more room for people from the hurricane zone there (which is understandable; they've taken in a lot of people) as well as comments about sending people on to other states as places are found for them.
I was just trying to say that I haven't heard reports from a whole lot of areas that are visiblly (audibly) talking about welcoming people from the affected areas for as long as they wish to stay and even making affirmative plans to integrate whoever wishes to stay permanently into the community, as Fresno seems to be doing. Perhaps the press is just not covering that aspect of the story. I don't know.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think there is a difference between saying that the capacity for temporary housing of refugees is about reached and saying that people who have arrived are not welcome to stay.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Look...Texans are warm and welcoming people. Don't get me wrong. Those evacuees will never know they aren't wanted there if it ever comes to that.
It's just that no community is going to want a huge influx of the destitute. I like what the mayor of Fresno had to say. I think it's a great thing.
When social services get strapped or taxes increase to pay for the transplants, then we'll hear some grumbling.
Right now, it's just people helping people. As it should be.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree Bob. Texas has been great. But right now, they have a major PR disaster brewing.
You know, when they first started moving people to the Astrodome, back when they thought they'd be able to take 25,000, they said it was clear through December. Today I heard they expect people to be out of the Astrodome by the end of the week.
And by "expect", again, I'm assuming, that they mean they hope to have everyone out of the uncomfortable Astrodome with 15,000 cots and into homes. Not that they expect all of these refugees the hell out the door by the end of the week. Bad PR.
And I also read that part of the reason they are giving "families" debit cards is to encourage people to move out. First they say the debit cards are for families to get "essentials" then turn around on TV and say the real reason is they hope it encourages people to move out of the Astrodome. (And let's face it, lots of people think the reason they are poor is because they mishandle their money. So let's go ahead and give them 2 grand and watch them all bail out of the Astrodome so they can get a decent night's sleep and then we'll close the dome and by the time they run out of money, it won't be our problem anymore. ) Again, bad PR.
Texas is getting $75 million from the Federal government. And suddenly, they are trying to pawn off the evacuees to other states. Bad PR.
The Governor, has been asking other states to take evacuees and they've basically set up weigh stations in Houston and Dallas. They get evacuees of helicopters or planes, give them food, water, take care of the medically and then put them back on planes to other states.
quote: The storm and its aftermath have displaced some 1.5 million people.
Texas officials estimate about 100,000 Louisiana residents are staying in hotels and motels across the state and another 139,000 are being temporarily housed in 137 shelters throughout the state from the Houston Astrodome to El Paso.
And by hotels and motels, they mean that those people are paying for their rooms.
And I'm not saying that Texas hasn't been great. They have. And they deserve a huge pat on the back. But like I said earlier, it's all a matter of presentation. When you see Texas get a Federal grant and then turn around and start shipping people out of the state, it doesn't look good.
Look at the headlines of the stories when you enter Perry and refugees at yahoo news.
It doesn't look good. All the articles say that Texas is strained with nearly a quarter of a million "refugees", but who actually reads all the stories? They see the headlines and it looks like Texas wants them out.
It's bad PR. Just like the First Mom and her comments. Which is all I was talking about. She's been in politics long enough to know better. I can't figure out what these people are thinking. I mean, obviously, they think everyone thinks just like they do. It's amazing.
It would also be interesting to know when schools started in Texas and when they take attendance for Federal money. I know when I grew up that was usually the second or third week of class. There would be some type of official attendance and that number that they submitted to the government was the number they used for the whole year for money for the district. As the cynic I am, I wonder how many of these "homeless" kids are enrolled this week and shipped out to other states with Texas getting the Federal school funding for the year. Again, it's just perception and they should look more closely at the perception of impropriety.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW, this post was mostly spurred on by Dan Raven's other thread "Now lets blame Texas". Just so you know, I'm not sitting at home trying to find conspiracy threads. But I'd read his thread, then this one, and then looked at some stories on the internet. I just posted all of my cumulative thoughts so far here. Sorry.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: If you've seen anything suggesting they aren't welcome to stay I'd like to see it.
quote: It's just that no community is going to want a huge influx of the destitute.
Just to point out the elephant in the middle of the room, a lot of these people are destitute black people. Let's stop and honestly think about how many communities are going to welcome thousands of destitute black people permanently?
Call me pessimistic, but you can bet the welcome mat isn't going to stay out for long not just because they are desitute but because they are black.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
To be honest, most of teh people I know whould ahve a much larger problem with the destitute part of it than the black part.
Any person of any color in this situation would be a drain on our resources, regardless of where they came from. Bt definition the destitute don't have the resourses to care for themseves or their families, and someone will have to foot the bill for that eventually...black or white.
It is more a problem of lack of green, IMO.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe I'm naive and over-innocent. But I read this:
quote:"And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this is working very well for them."
...and was confused at exactly why people were bothered by it. I interpreted her as meaning, "Since they are underpriviledged, they are used to having to deal with difficulty, so they are more likely to be patient in their sufferings (ie: better off) than people stuck in such a situation who are accustomed to priviledge.
I thought, well, I guess that could be considered offensive, to assume that because people have had a hard time all their lives having enough money that they would be better able to handle being displaced like this. Though it seemed a stretch.
It took me reading halfway through the thread until I realized that people are interpreting what she said as saying they have a better standard of living as refugees than they did in their normal lives.
Maybe it didn't occur to me to think that she meant that because I can't imagine someone actually meaning that. Thus we see my naivete. Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like Barbara Bush. I'd give her the benefit of the doubt, personally. But she said something without thinking through the implications and she is a far cry from a politically inexperienced person. That's what suprised me.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: The Bush administration worked hard to create the Department of Homeland Security and bring all of the intelligence and disaster relief agencies under one banner.
Just to clarify, that was a 9/11 commission recommendation that Bush intially opposed. Just for some FYI...ClickyPosts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Giving her the benefit of the doubt, I doubt she meant that sleeping on a cot in the Astrodome was better than their life before.
In the sense that before, the poor and futureless were being ignored and now someone is paying attention and resources will be available, their future will be better (for the people who didn't lose family or friends, of course). The present blows, but the life in general has more hope. It was a horrible way to say it, but I think that's true.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) Again, bad PR. 
