Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
View Poll Results: Is it right to politicize the aftermath of katrina?
Everything that happens in this country has a political component.
I believe raising questions about the Federal Gov'ts preparedness, response, and actions have a direct impact on the situation, for they are the ones who are incharge of dealing with these issues.
The fact that politicians and elected officials are responsible for securing the money to either prepare or react to a situation such as this already requires politicization.
It is completely ligitmate to question Bush and other members of the Gov't as to what they should have, could have, or will do as long as that criticizm or politization stays on point.
Now, if the disaster is used by either side of the spectrum to further an unrealated agenda then that is wrong.
If it means "seaching for responsible parties and demanding accountabilities for failures of preparedness and judgement", then "yes." How could you be against it?
If it means "seaching for responsible parties and demanding accountabilities for failures of preparedness and judgement", then "yes." How could you be against it?
Agreed. It seems like if anyone dares criticize this administration, it is called politicization.
If it means "seaching for responsible parties and demanding accountabilities for failures of preparedness and judgement", then "yes." How could you be against it?
Nothing is wrong with yer definition...but the timing of the approach is when it becomes politicizing an event. Searching for answers is one thing.....using the media machine to take politcal shots is another.
I do think its ok to question why things are so bad there and who failed to prevent this kinds thing. Now again thats questioning... not politicizing there is a major difference.
For example Ms Pelosi was talking to reporters on CSPAN and was politicizing the disaster that happened.
She blamed everyone in the other party when during this time of need -when everyone should be pulling together. She is doing just the opposite for partisan political motives and that is just sad.
The most imprtant thing right now is helping people.
When there is a failure to do what is expected then yes it becomes fair. Lets face it, people have died because this adminstration has been so slow reacting to this disaster.
__________________ Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach that person to use the Internet and they won't bother you for weeks.
Nothing is wrong with yer definition...but the timing of the approach is when it becomes politicizing an event. Searching for answers is one thing.....using the media machine to take politcal shots is another.
I do think its ok to question why things are so bad there and who failed to prevent this kinds thing. Now again thats questioning... not politicizing there is a major difference.
For example Ms Pelosi was talking to reporters on CSPAN and was politicizing the disaster that happened.
She blamed everyone in the other party when during this time of need -when everyone should be pulling together. She is doing just the opposite for partisan political motives and that is just sad.
The most imprtant thing right now is helping people.
What did she say?
Is it irrelevant that "the other party" is in control of all three branches of the federal government? That "the other party" placed hacks and friends in the decision-making positions who were utterly unqualified?
...Is it irrelevant that "the other party" is in control of all three branches of the federal government? That "the other party" placed hacks and friends in the decision-making positions who were utterly unqualified?
See above for an example of politicizing an event.
See above for an example of politicizing an event.
So it's "politicizing" to point out that the director of FEMA, appointed by the President, was utterly unprepared to manage an emergency--which, BTW, is pretty much his job description?
So it's "politicizing" to point out that the director of FEMA, appointed by the President, was utterly unprepared to manage an emergency--which, BTW, is pretty much his job description?
So it's "politicizing" to point out that the director of FEMA, appointed by the President, was utterly unprepared to manage an emergency--which, BTW, is pretty much his job description?
How so?
By ignoring the fact that there are people to be rescued.
Yer a college student - not a politician. You have the right to scream all you want...our politicians (imo) should have that moment of clarity to lead. Not divide.
As soon as a disaster hits is when we as a country should unite to help those in need - our politicans is our elected leaders. Instead of leading by example some have chosen to take their shots through the media.
By ignoring the fact that there are people to be rescued.
Yer a college student - not a politician. You have the right to scream all you want...our politicians (imo) should have that moment of clarity to lead. Not divide.
As soon as a disaster hits is when we as a country should unite to help those in need - our politicans is our elected leaders. Instead of leading by example some have chosen to take their shots through the media.
Nobody is forcing Bush to listen to anyone, though. He doesn't read the papers, anyway.
So it's "politicizing" to point out that the director of FEMA, appointed by the President, was utterly unprepared to manage an emergency--which, BTW, is pretty much his job description?
How so?
This whole thing doesn't say much for the Harvard MBA program, does it?
By ignoring the fact that there are people to be rescued.
Yer a college student - not a politician. You have the right to scream all you want...our politicians (imo) should have that moment of clarity to lead. Not divide.
As soon as a disaster hits is when we as a country should unite to help those in need - our politicans is our elected leaders. Instead of leading by example some have chosen to take their shots through the media.
When does that "moment of clarity" end? Does Bush get a free pass on his continuing self-created crisis in Iraq? It's five days after Katrina (not counting the days when we knew it was coming), and help is just now arriving.
And yet this guy should be absolved of all criticism for getting caught with his pants down?
If this were an isolated incident, it would be one thing. But how long are we supposed to sit in silence waiting for people to do their jobs? Should we sit by while thousands of people needlessly die and tell Bush that he's doing a great job, and should stay in Crawford?
When does that "moment of clarity" end? Does Bush get a free pass on his continuing self-created crisis in Iraq? It's five days after Katrina (not counting the days when we knew it was coming), and help is just now arriving.
And yet this guy should be absolved of all criticism for getting caught with his pants down?
If this were an isolated incident, it would be one thing. But how long are we supposed to sit in silence waiting for people to do their jobs? Should we sit by while thousands of people needlessly die and tell Bush that he's doing a great job, and should stay in Crawford?
No one should be above criticism.
But the delivery of the criticism to create a perspective that the hurricane disaster is a collection of events created by the president is very misleading and really politicizing the tragedy.
You blamed him for 9 disasters and now yer going on number 10. You create another cynical illusion by saying folks are congratulating Bush fer doing a great job and tieing the disaster with his vacation.
btw...Yer doing a very good job in illustrating my points.
Linear Mode
