We're fortunately a little further down the road than we were when Katrina hit. People have begun waking up (thanks in no small part to Katrina), and so perhaps are more on guard for the "snow job".

This is the second time in as many days that I have read something to this effect: A natural disaster finally hits an area populated by white Republicans. This time I can't let it go by without correction, especially since it bears directly on the subject of this blog.

The focus of the media has been on New Orleans, so people tend to forget that the Mississippi Gulf Coast was ground zero for Katrina. The Gulf Coast was wiped out by a thirty-foot storm surge (that's a thirty-foot tsunami) as well as massive tornadoes. I mean "wiped out" literally. I was living there at the time so have firsthand knowledge. It goes without saying (but I'll say it anyway), Mississippi is among the reddest of the red states.

People suffered there in the days right after Katrina and are still suffering. That's several hundred thousand people on the Mississippi Gulf Coast whose lives were totally disrupted by a major natural disaster. Having Bush-buddy Haley Barbour as governor didn't do a heck of a lot of good in the first days after the storm, and IMO it isn't doing a heck of a lot now. Some people there have woken up to the truth, but incredibly, a lot still think Bush walks on water. (Pardon the unfortunate pun there.)

The aftermath of Katrina and the total inability of our governmental entities to handle it (on all levels, from local to federal) affected liberal as well as conservative areas, rich, middle class, and poor people, across the board. I am still not sure what conclusions to draw from it all.

Sorry to nitpick, but Kansas has a Democratic governor, not a Democrat governor. Same goes for the congresswoman, etc.

How come you are living "in exile"?

From a fifth-generation (for all intents and purposes) Oregonian exiled in Kansas:

To judge by the papers, I suspect that Gov. Sebelius, to her credit, rarely passes up any opportunity to assert publicly that the Kansas Guard needs to come home, stay home, and get re-equipped... but for Iraq.

And Dubya's in Kansas for a photo op today, while from the looks of it the recovery work is being undertaken by firefighters and Red Cross volunteers from all over. Apart from the photo op the only mention of the federal government's assistance (that I can find) addresses applications for funds. In summary, Greensburg's good enough for publicity but not good enough to throw in some help. Okayhmmyeah.

I'd be angry, except that I'm far too jaded anymore.

Shauna, I am a native Kansan. I notice in your column that you claim the Bush administration was using the same "blame the governor approach" with the Greensburg tornado as they did with the Katrina disaster. That is not what happened here. You need to get your story straight on both disasters. Kathleen Sebelius is the one who started the blame game here, and that's how I remember the situation with Louisiana's governor too. There are more than a few people out here that are upset at the way our Democrat governor made this a political issue to get political brownie points from her party. We don't need that crap here! Yes, there were Republican senators and congressmen there too. But, I didn't here or see them point out blame. Lets not make it political!

Given the events to which Randy M and I have referred obliquely, it appears that the feds are absent because Sebelius hasn't asked¹ them to show up with bells on. Okay, fine... but I don't think that oversight was a deliberate attempt to score political points at the expense of the White House, if only because she would get skewered were that the case. If the Feds really wanted to be there, they'd be there.

Instead the feds are settling for the photo op, so the recovery personnel who are there got to hassle with having the frackin' President of the United States underfoot all afternoon. I'm sure that did just tons of good. </sarcasm>

¹  See the THOMAS summary of Public Law 93-288, which implies strongly that any request for Federal involvement in disaster response must originate with the governor of the state in which any number of affected areas are located.

Sigh. Bush always has an excuse for why it's not his fault.

Did the people of Iraq ask for us to be there? Are they asking for us to stay - or is Bush doing that on his own initiative?

As always, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I've read news accounts that make it clear that a) the feds are there - FEMA is on the scene, b) Sebelius did ask the federal govt repeatedly for more national guard equipment, and that C) she doesn't suggest the lack of equipment caused any problems with the disaster response (unlike the completely different situation after Katrina). I was flippant about W's state of mind, but didn't mean to be flippant about the situation in Kansas or in the Gulf. I don't believe Kathleen is making this sad occasion political, merely pointing out the obvious that she'd like her Guard troops to be properly equipped, whether for war or for natural disaster.

It's disturbing to see the subtle insult of "Democrat" substituted for "Democratic" on this blog by persons who are obviously sympathetic to the Democratic Party. Folks, the use of "Democrat Party" and its derivatives is a subtle way to rob Democrats of the ability to choose how they are called.

It is a subtle, insidious insult dreamed up by right-wing mass communicators.

As for the rest of the article, right on. You'd think they would learn, but incomptence seems to be a core GOP value. Or at least a significant byproduct...

Shauna, thanks for referring to news sources that speak in more detail for the federal response. I haven't been going out of my way to look, so kansas.com is pretty much my single stop for this stuff; the Journal World has been fairly silent since the weekend, but that's far from unusual given the circumstances.

Point is, if you've got links, please post 'em here. Unless it's against site policy to point out when the Administration does something right.

...And after posting my last comment, I read in another source that applications to FEMA for assistance are out of the question unless a disaster is declared, which per the last comment is out of the question unless a state governor declares a disaster. Later I realized that I got tripped up by the Snow quote in the Eagle article to the effect that Sebelius hadn't asked. In other words, <strong<tony snow="" was="" going="" out="" of="" his="" way="" to="" be="" disingenuous<="" strong=""> and, um, a flaming asshole. Which is, of course, the implication of the title of this post. D'oh.

So I figured that I'd let someone else set the earlier comment straight, which you did more or less.

And now, for a Copyediting Moment:

"governor declares a disaster" in the last comment should read "governor requests a disaster declaration." D'oh twice.

Shauna, Go to wcbstv.com. There was an interview of Mike Swigart on that website. Please read what he says about the response and about Katleen Sebelius's remarks. He and his family were amoung the survivors at Greensburg. There was no shortage of response personel, and the response time was very fast in his words.

I don't know why you complain about Bush visiting Greensburg. I'm sure you would have had a complaint had he not done so. Would Bill Clinton have done anything different? I don't think so. It's what presidents do. It's what they are expected to do. But, if Bill Clinton would have done the same thing in the same situation, I doubt there would be any words of disaproval from you. So yes, you are making it political, and yes, Katleen Sebelius made it political with her remarks.

To each his own - not only in the second person, but the third. Why do I point this out?

All the cred Bush built up over Sept. 11th evaporated after Katrina, so now, as a citizen of the Republic, I want to see actions speaking louder than words.

What is the federal government doing in Greensburg beyond throwing money at problems? If that's all, is it enough?

Clinton suffered from the same dynamic after the Sudan cruise missile attack - everybody accused him of ordering it not only in retaliation for the Nairobi embassy bombing, but because it would distract everybody from the fallout of his deposition to the independent prosecutor. And on it went; until he avoided impeachment, Clinton's policy announcements were scrutinized in the context of how much distraction it would provide from the Whitewater and perjury issues.

I didn't see that as unfair skepticism at the time, nor do I now, and guess what? The Republicans shouldn't consider their man immune to the same skepticism.

...And no, I don't object to the idea that Bush went, just that he showed up even before everyone was accounted for and at the same time that his press secretary was slinging shit at Gov. Sebelius.

"...at the same time that his press secretary was slinging shit at Gov. Sebelius."

Because Democrat Sebelius used a tragedy to further the leftist Bush-bashing agenda. She's full of shit and Snow was calling her out.

"Swigart says the general feeling around the town is that residents were overwhelmed by the immediate response, and that the governor's fuss was for her own good. White House press secretary Tony Snow responded to Sebelius by saying that there was no request by Kansas officials for extra equipment, and that if there is anyone to blame, it's her."

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_129130446.html

Tell me what's worse; the President touring a devastated area, or a governor using a natural disaster to push an agenda.

A few responses:

I don't have time to scour the news either, but my source for saying that FEMA was on-hand right away was this story: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/09/kansas.bush/

Don't believe everything you read. Sebelius HAS declared the county a state disaster area, and Bush HAS declared the area a federal disaster area.

<h2>I never suggested Bush shouldn't go to Kansas, to the contrary, I suggested that 5 days was a long time to wait and questioned his reasoning that he wanted to "stay out of the way" of relief efforts. He didn't stay out of the way of relief efforts after 9/11. But before someone calls me out on it - I looked it up, and it seems Clinton waited as long or longer to tour the Oklahoma EF-5 tornado.</h2>