On the other hand

Richard Roeper

51 Comments so far

  1. John (unregistered) on September 22nd, 2005 @ 2:01 am

    On the surface, I agree with the point of your original post — our response to Katrina can’t be called good (how bad is debate-able), and that, as President, Bush is more resonsible than anyone else for the response. It’s difficult to be ra-ra in the face of thousands of people in hell at the Superdome.

    But, you seem to think we can’t discern the political sub-text of your post, which is that a Democratic administration would have dealt with the disaster better. This is the point I take issue with, and, I suspect, is what fired up the right wingers on this string.

    Whether or not a Democratic administration would respond better or worse is speculation or opinion — there is no truth. And, in the abscence of truth, you cannot have un-truth. Therefore, labeling opposing viewpoints as un-truth is not reasonable.

    If history is any judge, my opinion is that a Democratic administration would not have performed any better during Katrina. As evidence, I again point to the Chicago heat wave of 1995: Democratic local government, Democratic administration, same grade for the response — not very good. More story here: http://www.slate.com/id/2125572/.

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.