From Arianna Huffington:
-----
After an interminable week of silence on the administration's shockingly inept handling of the Katrina tragedy, Democratic leaders finally spoke out, with Harry Reid questioning whether the president's vacation hindered relief efforts and Nancy Pelosi labeling him "oblivious, in denial, dangerous."
But missing was a direct critique of Bush's greatest vulnerability -- the tens of thousands of men and women and the hundreds of billions of dollars that he is squandering in Iraq instead of using them to really protect the homeland, including from Katrina and its aftermath.
In a stinging Wall Street Journal analysis of the administration's lethally slow
response, the first two reasons given for "why the U.S. didn't adequately protect and rescue its citizens" were 1) "the absorption of FEMA into the gargantuan -- and terrorism-focused -- Department of Homeland Security" and 2) "a military stretched by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which made commanders reluctant to commit active-duty units nearby."
That's the major, big picture point Reid and Pelosi should be making, instead of picking nits over whether Bush would have made better decisions in D.C. instead of Crawford. Pelosi called him "dangerous," but didn't tell us why he's really dangerous. He's dangerous not just because he's in denial about the job Brownie is doing but because his policies are making this country less secure with each passing day.
Did the Dems learn nothing from 2004? Bush won because he had a double-digit lead on the question of who was going to keep us safer.
Well, Katrina shoots that idea straight to hell, doesn't it? And Democrats should make clear once and for all just how illusory the president's purported strength, leadership, and steely-eyed resolve really are.
The debacle in New Orleans contains all the elements necessary to show how Bush's misguided priorities -- especially his obsession with Iraq -- have left us far more vulnerable, unsafe, and insecure. It's the perfect opportunity to redefine national security in a way that would ironically -- by putting America first -- most appeal to the red states.
So how come the Democrats are not making the "We will protect you better" case?
-----
[Read more.]
No comments:
Post a Comment