Drink Tank

Extra Aqua Vitae Nulla Salus

9.06.2005

Washington post lieing for the man yet again

"NEW YORK In its Sunday edition, the Washington Post quoted a 'senior Bush official' who said that 'as of Saturday [Louisiana Governor] Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency.' This, of course, was meant to make the governor look foolish and spread the blame around for the disastrous response to the disaster, though it was hard to imagine on what grounds the newspaper would quote an unnamed source in this case.

Several hours of blogosphere howling ensued. Later in the day, the Post ran this correction, or rather, 180-degree turn:

'A Sept. 4 article on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina incorrectly said that Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D) had not declared a state of emergency. She declared an emergency on Aug. 26.' "

3 Comments:

At 10:06 AM, Blogger Ivan said...

Interesting.

While showing pictures and video is good, media are predictably bad about this event. That the majority of blame is on Bush, rather than on local & state authorities, is silly. It's even sillier when they are surprised by polls showing that people blame those who had greater responsibility more (in decreasing order: local, state, federal).

Considering studies in the 50s showed that the levies could break, there is no one that should be spared blame.

 
At 10:38 AM, Blogger Miguel said...

Local officials were responsible for an absolutely awful evacuation plan. But the federal government doesn't get off the hook that easily, Ivan. President Bush created a new department of government (DHS) which gobbled up FEMA and staffed it with loser cronies. Every American has expected calamity, the need to evacuate a whole city, and the need to immediately deploy hospital ships, martial law, etc., for almost four years now. DHS was created specifically because of those fears; now that catastrophe has actually struck, the response hs been a serious dissapointment, and is is the President's fault. I'll post seperately about obvious candidates for tarring and feathering, but I'm a little busy right now.

Also, doesn't the Washington Post have suscribers who write in to say that they consider it newsworthy that an official requesting anonynimity spreads fictions to reporters to take heat off the prez? Don't they owe it to their readers to nome the cover-uper or give a good reason why they would continue to protect that source's identity?

 
At 10:56 AM, Blogger Ivan said...

Yah, the DHS response has been pathetic. I remember in "sum of all fears" that they found out the nuke wasn't Russian in less than a day. HA!

I'm really concerned that even after a second huge failure (911 being the first), the response will be the same: an expensive "new approach" that, when tested, will also fail miserably.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home