Crazy old Uncle Al is at it again. In a speech to the Sierra Club in San Fran, he not only blames Bush for the aftermath of Katrina but implies that, because of Global Warming, the President knew just how bad it would be:

Bush administration officials have said Katrina's damage could not have been anticipated, but Gore rejected that.

"What happened was not only knowable, it was known in advance, in great and painstaking detail. They did tabletop planning exercises. They identified exactly what the scientific evidence showed would take place," Gore said.

Clearly the former Vice-President is off his meds again. So Al, how's your multi-million dollar public access channel doing these days?

UPDATE: 4:55pm
On a related note, Mac Johnson of Human Events lays out five proposals that would make future efforts more successful.

Posted by: Gary at 03:44 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 170 words, total size 1 kb.

Ted Kennedy on Hurricane Katrina:

"What the American people have seen is this incredible disparity in which those people who had cars and money got out and those people who were impoverished died."

h/t: Best of the Web (2nd Item down)

Posted by: Gary at 10:45 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

WaPo reporter Dan Balz laments the country's lack of unity in the aftermath of Katrina, but comes to the wrong conclusion. Balz's theory is that Bush "the divider" has changed since the country was united by 9/11. WRONG. The big change that has taken place is with the Left in general and the Democrats in particular.

Since the end of 2001, Bush has remained steady and consistent in both his policies and his outlook. If anything he's one of the most predictable Presidents in U.S. history. A huge majority of Americans (91% at one point) approved of him then. But many over the last four years have decended into bitter partisan attacks on the President - attacks fueled by the increasingly angry Left.

Patrick Ruffini hits the fallacy of Balz's assumptions right on the head:

Balz doesn't examine the profound change in the Democratic Party that comes closest to explaining the sharply disparate reactions to the two disasters. Four years ago, Daily Kos was barely a glimmer in our eye, Joe Lieberman was a frontrunner for the 2004 nomination, Howard Dean was still considered a "moderate", the DLC was still ascendant, the words "liberal" and "lefty" were almost never spoken in polite conversation, The New Republic represented the mainsteam of Democratic thinking inside the Beltway and you wouldn't think twice about calling David Corn and The Nation "far-left." As I've documented, the party's vitriolic reaction to Katrina was shaped on the blogs. Had those blogs been around on 9/11, we would have seen the same response, with immediate cries of "Bush knew."

Posted by: Gary at 11:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.