I am going to buck the trend, and say a few things about the response to Hurricane Katrina that I would venture few if anyone else has said: The responsibility for response in a time of natural disaster, does not start at the top, it starts, it must start, at the bottom.

So let's start there.

Personal Responsibility. . .

The person with primary responsibility for your safety is you.  Period.

Every person must take primary responsibility for their own circumstances, for their own safety and well-being.  You are always the person in the best possible position to protect yourself--and your family and loved ones.  You know where you are.  You know what your own resources are.  You know what you can do and what you cannot do.  There is no one else on this planet who is more invested in, who has a greater interest in your own well-being, that you.  If you fail to take responsibility for your own well-being, you can name no one else with a greater interest in that well-being.

As a practical matter, your ability to provide for yourself, to look out for yourself, and to take steps to insure that well-being, is one-to-one.  One person's resources, knowledge, intelligence, abilities, devoted to preserving the safety and interests of one person.  In all other circumstances, the odds get slimmer that your interests will be as well looked after.

The responsibility that you bear for yourself is a legal, a societal and a moral one.  It cannot be shirked.  Those who shirk this responsibility, history and common sense has shown, will only suffer.

In New Orleans, those with primary personal responsibility for the safety of the city's residents were the residents themselves.  No one knew better than the city's residents the peril in which they existed, living day to day in the "bowl."  Decade after decade, though there have been a number of very serious hurricane's to hit at or near the city, New Orleans had time and again dodged the so-called bullet that--until the levees broke--everybody thought it had again dodged.

Katrina was no doubt very destructive in its own right.  Be it category three or four or five, it was clear before it hit that Katrina was the real deal, extremely dangerous.  The residents of the city were warned long before it hit to get out.  The President's federal disaster declaration the day before it hit should have been something of an additional hint to N'orleaners that they had better evacuate.  The mayor called early on for a voluntary evacuation of the city, which by and large was heeded by the majority of residents both in the city and in the outerlying communities.  In fact, the evacuation, when compared to projections of what could be accomplished within a given time period, it was a huge success.  Well over a million people took to the roads, and got out of the city and its environs before Katrina came ashore.

Nevertheless, as of landfall, estimates circulated that perhaps as many as 100,000 persons chose not to leave.   (*We can only speculate as to the real number of persons who stayed behind, as official estimates, for example of the number who are believed to have died in and after the storm, have been proving to be wildly unreliable.  A recent body count of about 250 pales in comparison to the 10,000 or more that Mayor Nagin ranted lost their lives to federal inactivity.  More on that later.)

Well, what of these perhaps 100,000 "hardy" souls who chose to stay and ride out the storm.  A number of things can be said.  First, we can play the game that a shocking number of leftist politicos, Democratic activists, and mainstream journalists are playing: The Race Game.  There really is no factual basis cited for any of their claims that New Orleans residents were "left to die" in the storm by President Bush because they were (a) black and (b) poor.  Claims such as these have come to be standard political plays executed under almost every circumstance by those in the extreme left wing of the Democratic Party.  (A party, mind you, that is almost all left "wing" and no real meat.)  It is impossible to take these almost psychotic rantings seriously.

Nevertheless, the claim centers about a specious scenario that likewise has little or no factual support.  That those who stayed behind to weather Katrina in their homes, did so because they were simply too poor to have escaped.  On so many levels, this is sheer fantasy.  Let's look closer.

• First, when asked about why they chose not to evacuate New Orleans as Katrina approached, many, if not the majority, have responded that they believed they could successfully weather the storm.  Long-time N'orleaners had been through it all, they believed, many times before--they made it then, they would make it now.  In other words, they stayed because they did not believe that it was necessary for them to leave.  In terms of the exercise of personal responsibility, these residents (many of those who chose to remain) evaluated their own needs, and found that staying was an acceptable response.
   
• Second, quite a few residents, long timers and old timers, and maybe some who were just too in love with New Orleans for their own good, could not bear to part with their beloved town.  They took the view that for better or worse, they would stay, and if it turned out that this was the Big One, then this was the Big One.  Whatever will be. . .will be, they believed.  Again, personal responsibility was exercised, and the choice made.  They took a gamble.  Many one that gamble.  Some lost.
   
• Next, were a significant number of persons who chose not to leave, again--come what may, because they wished to protect what they owned; not necessarily from the storm, for that was not really possible, but in the aftermath, from looters.  For those not intimately familiar with New Orleans, know that it is a heavily crime-stricken city; not as bad as Number One Detroit, but pretty bad.  Bad enough to make quite a few risk their lives (assuming that they didn't also fall into the first category of those who believed it was not necessary to leave) to protect their homes and property from looting.  (Message to Jesse Jackson: Contrary to you and your cohorts' venomous spewings, many who stayed behind, such as most of those in this category, were not poor.)
   
• Finally, we turn to a category whose membership may number in the hundreds or several thousand, we have no idea.  This is the category of native criminals who chose to remain behind for the purpose of availing themselves to goods and materials that they expected would become amazingly available in the storms aftermath, in the absence of the rightful owners.  In order words, the looters.  (Looting caveat: Everyone else make's this caveat, so I will as well: I am not referring to those many people who, having mistakenly believed that they could ride it out, and that everything would be alright when the storm passed--and who afterward "took" food and water and the necessities of life to survive.  I mean the villains who saw Katrina as an opportunity to profit by stealing things such as major appliances, plasma tv's, jewelry. . .you name it, whatever wasn't nailed down.  I can only hope that as many of these vermin as possible made it into the "didn't make it" category.  But based upon the video of the worst of the looting, not enough of these criminals croaked.)

You may have noticed that the one category omitted from the above is the one crafted by the Left to connote those allegedly abandoned by the evil Bush Administration to die in the squalor of this Democratic bastion: Those who were poor and black and who just could not escape.  The notion of personal responsibility, which appoints the individual as the person most primarily responsibly for their own safety, rejects the existence of this person.  Why?  In addition to what was stated at the start of this discussion, the objective facts reject their existence.  No one who remained in New Orleans to "weather" the storm were without options, nor should they have been:

• First, living in the "bowl," every resident had the personal obligation to have some kind of plan for getting out of the city.  It is not acceptable to simply sit back on one's derrière, do nothing, and expect someone else to come along (city or state or feds) and pluck you from the abyss.  For those who live in more inland circumstances, where the likelihood of a catastrophe such as hurricane or massive flooding is not substantial, it is perhaps understandable that one may have never considered the need to flee under exigent circumstances.  But in New Orleans, no one can claim that the potential for a "flooding out" of the entire town was unconsidered.  Everyone knew to a certainty that such a potential was substantial.  Those who had no plan, chose to have no plan.
   
• Second, despite the hundreds of city-owned and school buses that we have now seen adrift in the flood, untouched and untouchable because city officials failed to act to use them, there were actually many other buses in service prior to the storm and its aftermath, to take people out of harms way to an evac center or shelter--and these buses went largely unused by the hangers-on.  Again, they had made a choice to stay.  They were not unable to leave, at least not until after the levees broke.
   
• Third, New Orleans, according to mainstream media reports, may have been 80% African-American, and was allegedly mostly "poor"--though there is little insight provided as to what this means in terms of dollars and cents, in terms of standard of living, and in social terms in this Democratic city in this Democratic state, run part and parcel for decades by Big-L, Big-D, Liberal Democrats--however, that does not mean, as we are supposed to believe, that the people are careless.  In fact, watch the coverage as the water is pumped from the city and it recedes to reveal the masses of abandoned and now lifeless automobiles strewn all over the city.  Again (again!), people chose not to evacuate, they chose not to get into theirs or a family member's or a friend's or a neighbor's automobile, and evacuate the city.
   
• Finally, if push came to shove, few of the residents supposedly stranded before the storm were incapable of simply putting on a pair of shoes, tossing a few things into a backpack or duffel bag, and hoofing it over to either the Superdome or convention center, or one of the other available shelters on higher ground.  If your life depends upon it, you can do it.  Again, if anyone was at this level of last resort, they chose not to leave.

The concept of personal responsibility lays bare the Big Lie being told by the anti-Bush crowd, who sees every instance of the pain and misery of their fellow citizens as simply an opportunity to make political inroads against their enemies.  Most of the 100,000 or so (if this number is any more authentic than any other Katrina statistic) who chose not to evacuate actually do understand the concept of personal responsibility, and that they sit at the top (not the bottom) of the heap in terms of making their own disaster response.

Once the levees broke and most of the city found itself quickly under water, many of those who chose to stay before the storm hit, may then have decided it better to get the heck out of Dodge, but it was then too late.  Not because they were poor and black, and not because they didn't own their own means of transportation, and not because they couldn't afford to buy a bus ticket--but because the city was flooded so completely that nothing could move in or out.  It was not a matter of race.  It was not a matter of poverty.  It was not a matter of being unable to evacuate before the storm hit.  It was a matter of choice.  Had Katrina ended like most of the city's past hurricanes, passably, no one would be questioning any of these choice.  But it didn't.  People made their choices--some fared well, other did not.  The consequences of those choices must lie with those who made them.  (Jesse Jackson and his gaggle of despicably ceaseless race-baiters notwithstanding.)

Liberals talk a good game about freedom and personal determination, but they don't mean it.

To Liberals, people must always be looked after and taken care of. . .and not by other people, but by the government.  This is why the notion of personal responsibility is not only totally alien, but utterly repugnant to them.  This accounts for their belief that the utter lies and distortions about those left in New Orleans at the time of Katrina's landfall as being "trapped" and unable to "escape" on their own, would get traction, and somehow resonate with the public.  If the government didn't get them out, the D's reason, then they must be trapped, because they could not have gotten out on their own, and because they certainly could not have decided for themselves to stay.  As usual, they got it wrong.

Those who did not evacuate when it was recommended that they do so made a conscious choice about their future.  They chose to stay in the face of warnings, urgings, recommendations and, finally, orders to leave.  They chose to stay in the face of mounting evidence that New Orleans and its levees just might not be able to withstand the Big One--whatever that was, whenever that was.  Some 100,000 or so (very approximately) chose to chance their all and ride out the storm.  Another million or more chose to evacuate, and they did so successfully.  Those who did evacuate, survived.  As it turns out, most of those who chose to stay, likewise survived, although many had a really tough time until rescue was effectuated.  Some, of those who chose to stay, died.  Some died in the storm itself, and some more died in the flooding after the levees gave 'way.  Is that regrettable?  Certainly.  Was it unanticipated.  Certainly not. 

But does any of this mean that the individuals who made certain choices should be permitted to abdicate those choices.  Positively not.

The City and the State. . .

Gov. Kathleen Blanco (D-La.)

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin (D-La.)

Books--perhaps not widely-distributed bestsellers, but books nonetheless--will be written about the actions taken by the two most incompetent public servants, by an extraordinarily wide margin, involved in the saga of Hurricane Katrina: New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, and Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco.  It is difficult to decide which of the two was the most criminally incompetent, history will be left to decide.  It is hard to know, likewise, how many deaths each was personally responsible for.  Mayor Nagin, for one, should be extremely gratified that his dire prediction of 10,000 or more dead in the city appears at this time to have been just so much nonsense.  Nonetheless, Nagin bears personal responsibility for the deaths of many of his residents.

While, as discussed above, the individual must bear the ultimate responsibility for his or her own safety and security, government, particularly state and local governments, do owe certain responsibilities to their citizens.  The primacy of the individual in the scheme of disaster recovery does not quite remove the role of governments entirely.

Certainly the city and the state governments are responsible for those aspects of disaster response and recovery which could not possibly be managed by individuals.  While the individuals must take primary responsibility for getting and keeping themselves safe and secure in the face of impending and predicable disaster, their local officials must be at the ready to deal with the large scale details: Such as where people are to shelter in the days and weeks post-evacuation and post-disaster, and to help the masses of evacuees with day-to-day subsistence once they are out of harm's way.

Both the state of Louisiana and the city of New Orleans had written and detailed disaster response plans.  Pretty hard to believe, huh? 

The Hurricane Emergency Plan of the City of New Orleans is a particularly detailed document, which sets forth a plan describing what the city and its agencies will do before, during and following a hurricane including, of greatest interest here, plans for Warning, Evacuation and Sheltering up to and including the entire population of the city.  Part of the hurricane plan is given below:

One might conclude, from even this small fragment of the overall emergency response plan of New Orleans, giving its generalities, that the city had concluded that it bore at least some modicum of responsibility to prepare for and provide the initial responses and support to its own citizenry. . .instead of, as played by the Mayor, demanding to know what other governments and other agencies were going to do for New Orleans.  Nagin's own Hurricane Emergency Plan appears to put a quick end to any of his squawking about the initial governmental responses to Katrina in the New Orleans area.  The responsibility was Nagin's and his government's, and among the city, state and feds, the first response was Nagin's alone.

It is almost eerie to read how accurately the Plan describes precisely everything that Nagin failed to do.

The Feds and President Bush. . .

One of the many lies being bandied about by the Left and the media, about the response of the Federal government and President Bush to Hurricane Katrina, is that too much time passed between the "event" (and this gets a bit blurry) and the fed's "response" (this too is a bit blurry in definition).  The "event" might be when Katrina's landfall was predicted by the weather services, when Katrina actually hit the Gulf coast areas, when the hurricane had passed, or when the New Orleans levees gave 'way.  Which of the "events" really doesn't matter for this analysis.  The next ambiguity in the charges by Lefties is when the federal response began to take place.  For our purposes here, this too doesn't matter, as we'll discuss.

The clarity with which the potential for disaster all along the U.S. Gulf coast from the growing threat of Hurricane Katrina was understood by almost everyone is beyond dispute.  What may be debated is the degree to which many felt, deeply believed they were immune to such a disaster.  To be sure, many recent hurricanes have been hugely destructive, with some significant localized losses of life, but none have been the much prophesied Big One that Katrina has, arguably, become.  But the final analysis remains the same: People made choices about what to do, and whether to heed warnings and orders to evacuate.

Had the levees not failed, and the city then and only then suddenly submerged, our discussion of Katrina would have ended within a week.

The authority for the federal government to become involved in relief efforts in the states is provided by statute.  Without the legislative authority provided by Congress, the President would have no legal authority to involve the feds in such local efforts.  Two statutes provide the President with this authority.  The first related to "Major Disaster Assistance Programs," 42 U.S.C. §5170, and provides:
 

The second statute, 42 U.S.C. §5191, deals with "Emergency Assistance Programs," and provides:
 

Under both sections, the law (that is, the Congress) requires that the governor of the state (here, Ms. Blanco) do certain, specific things, in order to provide the federal government with the legal authority to provide a federal response to the state's disaster needs.

First, the Governor of the state must request of the President, that he declare that either a major disaster or an emergency exists in that state -- and that request must be based upon a finding by that Governor that the disaster or emergency is of such severity and magnitude that effective response is beyond the capabilities of the State and the affected Local governments -- and that because of this, federal assistance is needed.  That is, the Governor (here again, Kathleen Blanco) is obligated to specifically request assistance, and verify that the needed response is beyond the abilities of the state and local authorities.

Second, as part of the request for federal help, the Governor must take appropriate action under State law and direct execution of the State's emergency plan.  Along with this, the Governor must outline what state and local efforts have been and will be taken under their emergency plans to respond to the disaster, and must also define the type and extent of Federal aid required.  This means, Ms. Blanco, along with her state and local assets, was obligated to perform their part in remediating the disaster, as specified under their state and local disaster plans.

Further, Ms. Blanco was obligated, in view of the knowledge and understanding of her own state and local plans, resources and capabilities, to specify what Louisiana and New Orleans required from the federal officials to help with the disaster.

The President, and federal authorities and resources, are then and only then to be allocated and dispatched to assist in dealing with the disaster.

As to the first of Ms. Blanco's duties under the law, it was her obligation to have requested of President Bush a disaster or emergency declaration, and to have provided him with her findings that the response needed to Katrina was such that it was beyond the capabilities of the state and local officials.  While it appears that at some point Ms. Blanco made such a request, it is not clear that it was timely.  A review of her statements and interviews reveals someone more akin to a deer-in-the-headlights than the chief executive of a state.  Blanco was almost completely paralyzed when her people needed her to be making decisions and taking action.

Next, and both the state and New Orleans itself failed this task: Blanco was required to take all emergency measures which were provided for in her own disaster plans, and which were within the ability of Louisiana and New Orleans to have taken.  Again, they failed miserably to do this.  Even Louisiana's own National Guard forces, under the command of the Governor as in any state, were not called out by her until much later on.  In conjunction with assessing what her own state was to be doing to remediate the disaster, Governor Blanco was supposed to defined for federal officials, based again on what her state was supposed to be doing as the primary first responders to the disaster, what else needed to be done--what needed to be done that the state wasn't doing and could not do.  It appears that other than panicking, assuming the fetal position and blubbering (oh, and perhaps cursing other people), Blanco failed to do much.  She left her own citizens to founder, both before and after Katrina struck, and she did little to define--as the law requires for her to do--the assistance that she wanted of the federal government.

The federal statutes which permit the federal government to become involved in assisting state and local authorities in responding to emergencies and disasters are abundantly clear as to what a state's Governor must do: The Governor or a state must, in effect, cede certain of their state sovereignty to the federal government in such a crisis to permit the feds to operate in that state.

Unless a states wish to grant carte blanche to the Federal Government to determine on its own when it should act to supersede the sovereignty of a state in a time of emergency, then this process--of state responds first, state requests of the feds, state defines its needs, feds respond--must be followed.  But be very clear about this: No state is going to want to relinquish its sovereignty in such a manner.  In other words, it would be up to the Federal chief executive--the President, George W. Bush--to decide when a need arose, what that need consisted of, and when to barge in with Federal forces, and not the state's chief executive--here, Louisiana's, Kathleen Blanco.  The President decides, and the President acts.  State sovereignty is suspended for the duration of the emergency, and state and local officials sit on their thumbs.

I'd like to see a show of hands of all Governor's who wish to cede their state's sovereignty in this manner--rather than made such decisions for themselves.

. . .

I thought so.

Following his June announcement that he was establishing an exploratory committee to consider a run for the U.S. Senate, Maryland's Lt. Gov. Michael Steele was made the target of an intensive "research" investigation by operatives at the DSCC.  Senate Democrats are eager to retain the seat being vacated by the retirement of Democrat Paul Sarbanes, and have noted the possible candidacy of Kweisi Mfume.  Michael Steele, who delivered an address at last years Republican National Convention, is Maryland's first African-American elected to a statewide office.  Democrats--who traditionally attempt to lay claim to the civil rights movement--are loathe to have African-Americans in positions of power and responsibility. . .if they dare to be registered Republican.

According to the FBI and sources cited by the Associated Press, Katie Barge--Research Director for the DSCC, and Lauren Weiner, obtained Steele's social security number from court documents, and used it to obtain his credit report.  Barge and Weiner have since resigned from the DSCC, although, according to Phil Singer, a spokesman for the DSCC, they had originally been placed on paid leave.  DSCC officials have attempted to distance themselves from their actions, alleging that they were acting without authority.

The United States Attorney's Office's fraud and public corruption division, in conjunction with the FBI, is investigating the incident.  Lt. Gov. Steele's office is calling for a vigorous prosecution.

Pursuant to federal law, it is a crime to fraudulently access consumer credit information, and the access of Steele's credit report by operatives of his Democratic opposition, certainly falls within the rubric of fraudulent access.  According to the federal "Fraudulent Access to Financial Information" act, 15 U.S.C. §6821:

Barge and Weiner, if prosecuted and convicted solely of obtaining Steele's credit report fraudulently, may face up to five years in prison, according to 15 U.S.C. §6823(a):

Sen. Upchuckie Schumer's minions at the DSCC are surely upholding the best traditions of the Democratic Party.  I wonder how far up the ladder this one will go.

More ==> AP | Newsday | NY Post | Wash Post | Wash Times

But Mayor Thomas isn't waiting for President Bush to nudge her along, to tell her that now it is time to get her people out.  She's doing what any rational-minded, clear-thinking, intelligent public official should do: She's taking action on her own authority, without a federal invitation, without federal hand-holding, and without a lot of whining about what someone else is going to do for them.  She's the someone doing something.

It is said that one picture is worth a thousand words.  How about two pictures?  They've got to be worth at least a couple thousand words.  They certainly speak for themselves:

Galveston, Texas:  Now this is the way to run an evacuation.  On Wednesday, several days before the expected late-Friday, early-Saturday landfall of Hurricane Rita, getting the people out of harms way.

New Orleans, Louisiana:  Hundreds of useless, sunken school buses, sit untouched by local authorities, before, during and after Hurricane Katrina devastated the city, and the levees failed, while locals such as Nagin complained that thousands of residents had no way out.

Unlike Mayor Nagin--who unfortunately did not take Katrina as seriously as he should have in view of the imminent and constant peril that is New Orleans--Mayor Thomas, and the people of Galveston, clearly learned the lessons taught by the Galveston Hurricane of 1900, a category four storm with winds of "only" 135 mph, which virtually destroyed the island, and killed an estimated 6,000 to 12,000 persons.

Galveston is taking no chances. . .they are evacuating now.

Unfortunately, Nagin seems to have learned little, if anything from Katrina.  While Gen. Honore seems to have his end of the New Orleans-Hurricane Rita evacuation well in hand, Mayor Nagin's actions are incomprehensible.  Two days after Nagin was finally forced to admit things were getting too dicey for the city's continued "repopulation"--the city's web site contains a "Situation Report" dated yesterday which states:

So, according to the City, there is a suggested "mandatory evacuation order" in effect which, "if possible," Mayor Nagin would like residents, who had returned to New Orleans at his urging, to follow.

More==> The Galveston Hurricane of 1900

From a Press Conference this evening--allegedly conducted by Mayor (come...no go...no stay...no get out!) Nagin--concerning the current planning for New Orleans evacuation redux, as Hurricane Rita makes her way across the Gulf. . .

The Press Gaggle assembled to receive information concerning the plans, so that they could do their job of getting the information out to the thousands of residents who have already returned to the city, began to get completely out of control. . .

Lt. Gen. Russell Honore, who is in command of the U.S. forces still helping out there, had had enough of the nonsense of the First Estate, and set them to rights.  No mere description suffices.  You have to read this for yourself:

Now that's they way to run a disaster response.

Watch a video snippet of the last exchange between Honore and a reporter, who is "stuck on stupid."
Listen to the entire exchange quoted above.  Its going to be a classic.

The New York Times Co. announced today that it would be cutting an enormous 500 jobs from its payroll over the next six months, including some 45 newsroom positions at the Times and 35 at its sister paper, the Boston Globe.  Another 200 jobs were cut in a similar move earlier this year.  Officials at the Times appeared to express confusion and uncertainty in discussing the hastily-announced move, the specifics of which have yet to materialize.  What does appear to be clear, however, is that the mounting financial woes of the giants of yesterday's mainstream media are continuing unabated in the face of intensifying, and ever more successful competition from the new media.

Similar industry moves of late have included the elimination of a hundred positions through attrition by Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc., publisher of the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News.  Likewise, layoff rumors and buyout offers at the San Francisco Chronicle have led to the loss of another 200 job so far, with more likely to come.  In August, the Houston Chronicle eliminated about 7% of its workforce, not including editorial staff.  Massive budget cuts beset the Boston Herald in May, a hundred jobs were lost at the Seattle Times in January, and only a spate of buyouts spared employees the axe at Newsday, last December.

Circulation figures for most of the formerly-prime names are down, as are ad revenues almost across the board.  The old dinosaurs, such as the Times, have made attempts to "keep up" with the changing editorial atmosphere, but so far have proven clueless.  Many, such as the Times, have created online presences with significant editorial and news content, but often lag behind even their own print editions, and impose roadblocks to their use.  An increasingly-popular ploy is the "Requires free registration" scam, in which users are forced to "register" and then log in with a username and password each time the site is visited.  The intent is to track user habits, and solicit targets for e-mailing lists, but the effect is to discourage visits to their sites. 

The Times, just this past week, announced the implementation of a fee-based partition to their site, in which users will be made to pay for access to opinion content.  When the Wall Street Journal, several years ago, changed to a fee-for-access model for its site, readership collapsed, and it has since seen fit to reopen portions of its content on a no-charge basis, at OpinionJournal.com.

Why do so many woes betide the "mainstream" media these days?  If you have to ask, you've probably been asleep since the Reagan Administration.  Cable news.  Talk Radio.  Internet.  Independent news sources. Alternative media out the wazoo.  The failure of the old guys to understand that they're no longer the only game in town, and the arrogance to think that they can continue to get away with the abuses that have embodies the Liberal Media for generations.

A recent "performance" by embittered ex-newscaster Dan Rather, in which he soils himself whining over the effects of competition in the modern age of journalism, which bleating about the "atmosphere of fear in newsrooms," as well as anything else, demonstrates the hopeless plight in which the mainstream media finds itself.  They just don't get it.  And probably never will.  As I noted last month, and Times' own Executive Editor Bill Keller made clear, the mainstream journalist looks for more than simply reporting the news, they "think they can made the world better."  And in so doing, the First Rule of Journalism (at least as it was taught when I attended journalism school)--be objective--is abandoned completely, in favor of the avid pursuit of personal (and overwhelmingly liberal) ideologies.

So as the Far Left Liberalism has fallen out of favor from the real, mainstream of America, so too the voice of the Olde Media is falling upon deaf ears, and falling advertising rates.

More ==> AP | AP | E&P | E&P | E&P | Reuters | WNBC |

The National Weather Service has issued hurricane warnings from the Bahamas through northern Cuba, Southern Florida and the Keys, due to the progress and strengthening of Tropical Storm Rita.  Throughout the Florida Keys and some parts of Southern Florida, mandatory evacuations have already taken place.  Rita is moving at about 14 mph in a west-northwesterly direction, with maximum sustained winds of 70 mph.  Though still technically a tropical storm, the NWS is predicting that Rita will likely become a hurricane by late Monday.

This is just how Hurricane Katrina began.

Since Nagin revealed his, shall we say "ambitious" plans for the "repopulation" of hurricane devastated New Orleans, Coast Guard Vice Admiral Thad Allen--who took over for ex-FEMA head, Michael Brown--has been strenuously warning the Mayor to go slow in bring people back.  The city has not yet been dried out, its literally coated with the mucky biological hazard that weeks of standing water has brought, there is no drinkable water supply, few areas with very limited electricity or sewers, and no food supply, other than the little people have brought with them.  Yes, the enormous levee breaches which turned the city into a virtual Atlantis have been "plugged up," not unlike the boy with his finger in to dike, the repairs are largely temporary in nature, and the levees are still fragile.  Allen has warned that they may not be up to the test of another near-term storm or assault by heavy rains.

Nonetheless, Mayor Nagin has expressed his confidence in his "plan" to bring as many as 180,000 residents back to New Orleans over the next week.

President Bush weighed in on Nagin's plans today, and at a press conference this morning, expresses skepticism about bring residents back into the city at this early date:

The message to Mayor Nagin was about as clear as clear can be: You're taking a gamble, a big one. . .and if you're wrong, You're wrong!  Given Nagin's pathetic track record with his handling of Hurricane Katrina, can further disaster be far behind?

This morning, at the continued insistence that his plans for the repopulation of New Orleans were premature, Nagin accused Thad Allen of being "the new crowned federal mayor of New Orleans."  Nagin reacted to comments made by Allen, as recently as this morning, in which he noted further that "without potable water and a 911 system, the public will not be protected, and we would not recommend anyone going back."

Curiously, among Nagin's more recent comforting statements, made to his returning residents, was "You are entering at your own risk."

Inspired by the courageous pronouncements of their Mayor, New Orleaners appear poised to repopulate their crumbling city in droves.  At least, many of those who will not be living in newly-purchased homes, way out of harm's way, in places such as Dallas, Texas.  Oh, where, by the way, Mayor Nagin has sent his family to live.

Update:  Even a blockhead as thick as Mayor Ray Nagin eventual gets the message, as even he could no longer ignore Tropical Storm Rita bearing down on the Gulf, and a possible date with the Louisiana coastland perhaps New Orleans.  Late this afternoon, Nagin called for a halt to the city's repopulation, and warned those who have already returned, that they may be asked to evacuate by some time on Wednesday.

Perhaps this time, it won't be too late to assure the safety of the New Orleaners who heeded Nagin's hot-head call to immediately repopulate the city.  They--at least if they choose to--have a chance to get out of Rita's way.

More ==> ABC News | AP | Intl Herald Trib | LA Times | Miami Herald | Nola.com | NYT | Wash Times

ABC News reporter, Dean Reynolds, not unlike many of his comrades-in-propaganda, saw a golden opportunity in President Bush's New Orleans speech yesterday, in which he set forth his grand vision for the restoration and revitalization, not only of a city and its infrastructure, but its cultural history, and of its people.

The Golden Opportunity in question?  Why, getting a bunch of New Orleans' downtrodden and dispossessed on camera rubbishing the President, and disparaging his plan for the city, with the speech still fresh in the minds of his interviewees.

It's a tried-and-true, classic Plan "A" for liberal journalista.  Only problem. . .it blew up in Dean's face.  I mean, he tries, he really tries, to get his interviewees to go south on George W., but they just won't cooperate.  First, Reynolds wants to know if they believe what Bush said in his speech.  They do.  Then, Dean asks if they're angry that the federal response was too slow.  No, they aren't.  But they are angry with their city and state, and in particular, Mayor Nagin.  And they tell Dean this repeatedly.

Still, Dean tries to re-direct their anger back to the President.  He tries to tell these "foolish" people who don't quite seem to get it, that George W. Bush is the devil, that he wants them to suffer. . .that his speech was just so many words, so much fluff.  But they refuse to bite.  Dean finds "very little skepticism" among his flock.

So, then he wants to know whether the President could have done something to get them out quicker than they did.  One woman tells Dean that it was really her fault, because she didn't want to leave, and then it was too late.  Another woman says that she did get out in time.  But what about the flooding afterward?  Who do they blame for that?  (Surely, it must be the President.)  Again. . .not the President.  The local officials, the Mayor.  They were given lots of money for the levees, but didn't use it.

But, read the exchanges for yourself.  It is fascinating to watch Dean's act of self-immolation:

Finally, Dean has had enough, and beats a hasty retreat.

I guess everyone can't hate the President all the time.  Better luck next time, Dean.

Jefferson was one of the numerous local and national African-American politicians and activists who have been quick to cry race and class in the Federal government's handling of the response to Hurricane Katrina, while ignoring the sheer incompetence of local officials.  But Rep. Jefferson's personal actions speak much louder than words, in defining him as just another Leftie hypocrite.

ABC News reported earlier today that the U.S. Rep. whose Congressional district includes New Orleans, and which his pricey home in a ritzy neighborhood are located, William Jefferson, commandeered National Guard troops engaged in rescue efforts to take him to his water-logged home so that he could "rescue" some of his own personal possessions.  According to the report, which was confirmed by Lt. Col. Pete Schneider of the Louisiana National Guard, Jefferson convinced troops to "ferry" him on a "tour" of flooded areas of the city in five ton truck, a so-called "high water vehicle," with six guardsmen, after which he suggested a detour to his home.  After keeping the soldiers waiting on his front porch for about an hour, Jefferson returned to the truck with three suitcases, a large box of unknown contents, and a laptop computer.

To further complicate matters, the heavy truck got stuck in the mud of Jefferson's lawn, and was eventually pulled free by a second Guard truck called to the scene.  In the meanwhile, a rescue helicopter, diverted from other rescue operations, spent the better part of an hour attempting to "rescue" Jefferson, although he refused to board the 'copter.

Jefferson has recently been the subject of an FBI investigation concerning financial dealings in an international telecommunications deal.  According to the Times-Picayune, the FBI is interested in Rep. Jefferson's involvement with Atiku Abubaker, the Vice President of Nigeria--whose Maryland home was also searched by the FBI--and Aliyu Mahama, the Vice President of Ghana.  One area which the FBI is reportedly investigating is whether Jefferson made illegal payments to government officials in Ghana and Nigeria, to further a deal allegedly on behalf of a high-tech startup company, iGate, Inc., located in Virginia. 

Both Jefferson and his daughter, Jamila E. Jefferson, are reported to be board members and investors in another startup company, Gridline Communications Corp., a broadband supplier out of Texas.  According to the Washington Post, the FBI's investigation of Rep. Jefferson has been ongoing for about a year.

Both Jefferson's New Orleans and Washington homes, as well as that of his accountant, were the subjects of an FBI search.  One report states that a large amount of cash was found secreted in a freezer in Jefferson's home.  In the wake of Jefferson's unorthodox Guard visit to his home, officials are now interested to know whether his visit was for the purpose of removing materials related to their investigation.

More==> ABC News | The Advocate | allAfrica.com | Amsterdam News | AP | AP | AP | Daily Ind. (Nigeria) | Times-Picayune

Although U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah Robinson significantly increased (from $10,000 to $50,000) the fine which Sandy ("I-forgot-I-had-documents-in-my-pants") Berger must pay for stealing, and later destroying, several copies of a key terror-related memo from the Clinton Administration--Berger's sentence let him off shockingly easy.  In addition to the fine--which will likely be covered one way or the other by Democratic sources--Sandy will lose his security clearance for three years.

Excuse me?  You mean to say that after three years this now-convicted criminal--who stole and destroyed documents which might have been key to certain charges which might have ended up embarassing his former boss, Bill Clinton; who blatantly obstructed the 9/11 Commission's investigation into pre-9/11 and Clinton-era security lapses; who lied to federal investigators about what happended to copies of documents; and who has yet to completely 'fess-up about his role in the scam, and give an honest accounting of his actions--will actually get his security clearance back!?

How can the doofuses at the Department of Justice--who agreed to the deal--and the doofus on the bench (herself a Reagan appointee), be so stupid.  While I certainly applaud Judge Robinson for departing upward on the amount of the fine imposed, permitting Berger to ever regain his security clearance is simply irresponsible.  Fool me once, shame on you. . .fool me twice, shame on me.  Well, shame on all of us for time and again making the wrong choices when dealing with those, like Clinton-loyalist Sandy Berger, who is willing to sabotage the security of his own country, in fealty to a higher allegiance (all bow before the ex-Presidential Perv), the "Honorable" William Jefferson Clinton.

The notion that someone who sticks it to his own country, who sabotage's to any degree efforts to make his own country safer, who holds his personal allegiances to a higher importance than his national allegiances--should never be permitted access to any classified documents, information or facility; nor should he be again welcomed in the halls of our government.

Just how far does the criminal incompetence of Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco and her administration extend?  Only time will tell.  But we now know, according to officials in the Red Cross, who were operating in New Orleans during and following Hurricane Katrina, that it extends to the thousands of filthy, starving, dehydrated evacuees stranded in the Superdome.  While the locals (including Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin), as well as every squalling, writhing Democratic opportunist within a thousand miles, were demanding to know why President Bush and FEMA failed to provide for the evacuees, it turns out that they were provided for, and by FEMA, through its arrangements with the Red Cross.

Read the following exchange, between Fox News Channel's Brit Hume and correspondent Major Garrett, from yesterday's Special Report, about FEMA and its interaction with state officials and the Red Cross, and what happened at the Superdome.  Read it all the way through. . .it starts slow, with a good explanation of what FEMA really does, but then drops the bombshell:

Hume's last comment, that the "the state will have much to answer for" as the aftermath is investigated, is an enormous understatement.

The Red Cross' own web site contains a recently-posted "FAQ" concerning Hurricane Katrina, titled "Why is the Red Cross not in New Orleans?"  It seems to have been hastily-posted in the wake of the yesterday's revelations from Major Garrett: