Admitted—they’re both rascal’s arguments. The idea of making the one argument shows how silly the other is, though, don’t you think?

Or do you think we could find someone to shout it loud enough to get on TV with it?

The sarcasm was directed at arguments employing theories of causation in which all unwelcome events or characteristics are attributed to the President

And these “theories of causation” have been advanced by whom?

The sarcasm was directed at arguments employing theories of causation in which all unwelcome events or characteristics are attributed to the President, irrespective of his direct involvement or political responsibility (and I am not saying that none are, or that he has no involvement or responsibility); or to (white) society in general, of which Mr Bush is the head, symbol or upholder. It did not imply my views on the responsibility of anyone for specific events not mentioned. So snide, yes. Exonnerating, no.

Well, for you it was clearly about exonerating George W. Bush, or you wouldn’t have thrown in that snarky “But I blame the President,” now would you?

Good luck carrying that water and moving those goalposts, Charlie. You’re gonna need it.

Or something.

An official told of a message found in a wine bottle drifting in floodwaters: ‘To whom it may concern: Please send with immediately, (one) ice cold chest of Coors Light. I’m out at this time. Down to wine. Some shrimp and oysters would be appreciated. Thank you,” said the note, which gave an address. The patrol found the author sitting on his front porch. Between sips of wine, he told them he was staying. The official who found the note intends to fame it because it is “pure New Orleans.”

Hilarious! Do I really need to say anything about alcohol and judgement, and just how continuously this addled sot might have been drunk before Katrina hit. But I blame the President – this irresponsible sponge clearly is a victim, and his conduct is outside his own control.

With security levels dwindling, Nederland has now also joined with neighboring countries to put a disaster relief and evacuation plan in place.

I doubt that. Though hurricanes are a lot stronger than North Sea storms, the danger to the levees is coming from the water, not from the direct impact of the wind. So there isn’t that much difference. And the more “modern” approaches of using wetlands etc. are also relevant in both areas. But then I ain’t no expert.

But I posted those comments because I thought the discussion about the 10.000 years number veered a bit of course. In comment #21 it was called “nonsense”, and I thought that a bit, well, wrong.

I’d also be inclined to think that it isn’t as simple as big v. small governement (for many reasons)

I’ll note however,reducing the discussion to `social benefits’ is an oversimplification. There has been in particular an urban culture created in the US which, among other things, expresses societal values (variously, across the socio-economic spectrum). I believe you could argue quite convincingly that this was a factor in how the disaster has played out, and particularly in the speed at which security devolved.

One would have to step carefully to achieve meaningful dialogue about it though. Avoiding both the sort of blame-the-victim drivel that charlie seems to be veering toward, and simplistic romantasicm of the urban poor would be difficult.