Introducing the Clark Policy Brief
Submitted by Wes Clark on September 10, 2005 - 10:29am.
I'm really enjoying the opportunity to build a dialogue with people around our great country, through my travels and speeches across America as well as online.
In particular, I really appreciated Josh Marshall's invitation to join TPM Café as a guest blogger during the last week of August. It was a tremendous experience for me, and I hope it was a good one for you as well. While coping together with the aftermath from Hurricane Katrina and figuring out how best we could help, we were also able to discuss issues related to Iraq, American values, energy policy, and the need for leadership as well as my visits in Wisconsin and Iowa.
These were stimulating and thought-provoking discussions that allowed us to talk and debate directly in the finest tradition of American politics -- and in a way that has not been possible in this age of mass media and mass politics. I want to continue and expand that dialogue to include even more people. That's why I am starting Clark's Policy Brief.
So how do we bring the conversation forward? I'll post my latest thoughts to the Policy Brief. Then I want to hear your feedback and comments -- and I hope you'll invite your friends and family members to take part in this conversation. We want them here and involved in our discussions. We want to grow the number of people taking part in the dialogue.
You'll also need to be a little patient with me. I'm traveling five to six days a week for business and to speak at events where I can talk about the issues facing our country. Sometimes when my schedule is completely packed I won't be able to post during the day -- but I will be here as often as I can, on an ongoing basis. I do want to be engaged with you in discussing the issues and policies we are facing. I do want to hear your ideas and feedback. Overall, I do want to engage together in policy discussions about what we need to do to move this country forward again.
I hope you'll join me in this effort. And there's no time like the present to get Clark's Policy Brief kicked off. So let's begin today.
As we're all aware, the country is completely focused on the relief activities associated with Hurricane Katrina. Now, President Bush has just appointed Coast Guard Vice Admiral Thad Allen to take over responsibility for the relief and recovery effort from FEMA Director Mike Brown.
President Bush's decision follows a flurry of meetings at the White House where Republican leaders discussed the need to appoint a "Hurricane Czar."
Well guess what? They had one in the FEMA Director -- or at least that's what they were supposed to have.
I'm glad President Bush finally appointed a competent person to run the Katrina relief effort. But he should have done that a long time ago, before deciding to appoint Mike Brown as FEMA Director.
We can't fall into the trap that everything is fixed by changing the person at the top. Truth is, disaster recovery takes a lot of experience, and that comes from training as well as learning from the "last time.".
You have to have teamwork, information flow. Taskings and suspense dates, follow-up reports and a strong sense of urgency. This takes some training - not just loud talk.
Of course, my friend and partner James Lee Witt has that experience. As a nation, we have to do the training. It'll take a while.
In the meantime, I hope we'll do more for the people who've been displaced. More on that tomorrow.
Wes
The Clark Policy Brief is a fantastic idea. I can't wait to participate.
Thank you for speaking out about the FEMA situation. Maybe we need statutory minimum qualification standards for political appointments. It's a shame that we'd need something like this, but sadly we may.
The world is always going to be ruled by people who want to rule the world.
Reg, if we had that minimum for the office of President, then we probably wouldn't need it for anything else. OK, so we couldn't actually have it for President, but, still, if we had real leadership, then we wouldn't have incompetent political appointees--or if we did, they'd be gone before they did any damage.
But as we all know, occasionally an unqualified person gets elected and we need statutes in place to make sure he doesn't do too much damage.
The world is always going to be ruled by people who want to rule the world.
Yeah, but how do we get past the Repuke attitude of "He's the pResident and he should have who he wants." Here's hoping the Dems continue to have starch.
What is more important that the President gets who/what he wants like some spoiled child or that America gets the best person for the job? Do they care more about their political party or their country? What comes first petty partisan politics or the future of the United States? Remind them that it is the republican party that gives so much talk time to meritocracy. Tell them that if they want cronyism and nepotism, there is always a place for them in Chicago politics.
-
Between the greater and lesser infinities sleep the dreams undreamt.
SENATOR Ernest F. Hollings, Democrat of South Carolina, responding to a Republican challenger who dared him to take a drug test:
"I'll take a drug test if you take an I.Q. test."
.
.
"Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of Evolution, as not adequately supported by facts, seem quite to forget that their own theory is supported by no facts at all."
--Herbert Spencer: Nineteenth-century English social scientist
Leadership isn't something you can measure. How do you determine whether or not someone like Brown -- who everyone, regardless of their political affiliation says is a joke -- has the stuff you need to get the job done?
Obviously, a minimum qualification standard would have eliminated Brown from consideration, as would even the most cursory check of his resume.
However, it starts at the top. If we had competent leadership at the top, it wouldn't have mattered that Brown was in place. The President would have taken charge and gotten the job done.
Of course, the current administration bungles whatever they touch, so it's no surprise they did it here.
And General Clark, the idea of a policy thread is a very good one. This is viral marketing at its best.
The problem is the people doing the "talent search" in this administration are themselves incompetent. They set the minimum standard and it is pretty darned low-lying, cheating, responsibility avoiding...well, you get the picture. With the Republican controlled Congress, they can do that as there is no one to stop them. Can you say FILIBUSTER?????
To set standards. You can require that the director be promoted from within the agency or require that he or she have been a police or fire chief. I don't think it's unusual. For instance the president appoints the Chairman of The Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Of course it starts at the top, but the founding fathers put many limits on the power of the president because even they knew that we'd sometimes get a bad one.
The world is always going to be ruled by people who want to rule the world.
Building minimum standards into the law that creates a position like FEMA director may look good on paper but its not a cure all. When there is real leadership in the White House you don't need statutory standards, in fact they may be too restrictive and block creative solutions in an evolving world. On the other hand with a leadership vacumm in the White House all the laws on earth are not going to solve the real problem.
Barry
Are you safer today than you were five years ago?
....I saw a systemic failure of government from top to bottom. But I think the blame rests more with the people at the top...all the way up to GWB... than it does with the local and state officials. I never thought I would see, in my country, government holding back water and food from dying people because the right paper work hadn't been filled out. I am ashamed of what was done to the poor and black in NOLA.
"George Bush has had his day and he's bollixed it up."
It may seem perverse, but I hope it was only a systemic failure. I have a sense of forbodeing that tells me that part of the delay was caused in part by the religious apocalyptical beliefs of those at the top. I am very concerned that they delayed action while they tried to determine if this was some sort of end-time prophecy coming true and therfore they should not do anything that might get in God's way; that they sat around and argued about the will and wrath of God and quoted arcane scripture. One of the sad conclusions of this line of thought is that it probably took the prodding of that souless political machine Rove to remind the administration that they had mid-term elections in 14 months....
-
Between the greater and lesser infinities sleep the dreams undreamt.
Great idea.
My burning question for this morning seems to need a military lawyers input. I suspect you know a few... :)
Why was the insurrection act the only considered method of using the military (active duty) for humanitarian assistance? Is the posse commitatus act of ummm 1878? considered a bit to hot to use since the location was the deeeep south? Is it superceeded by something else I am not aware of? Looks like the wingnuts are going to use this legal maneuvering to try and make FEMA out to be the victim in this debacle.
Feel free to ignore this question if it requires a response you are not ready to put in print. :)
.
.
"Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of Evolution, as not adequately supported by facts, seem quite to forget that their own theory is supported by no facts at all."
--Herbert Spencer: Nineteenth-century English social scientist
Katrina has diverted our attention (and rightly so), but your plans for Iraq are drawing some scrutiny. It'd be easier for us to deal with people in other online communities if we had some responses to criticisms like this:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2125905/?nav=tap3
I posted the questions that are still running through my mind here:
Thank you for engaging in this discussion with us. It is so greatly appreciated. It has been incredibly frustrating to have a president who is so insulated from the opinions of the citizens, indeed, a seeming contempt for such dialogue. Your theme of leadership is so timely. And your emphasis on dialogue gives me hope we can recapture an energetic democracy in this great nation.
Leadership means lifting people up. --Wes Clark
I was so glad to hear that Mr. Witt was contacted by Gov. Blanco to help coordinate relief operations in LA. The lack of timely response from the Federal Goverment was criminal. How can anyone feel safe knowing this bunch is in charge of any kind of disaster response, from hurricanes and earthquakes to (god forbid) another terrorist attack?
It was obvious that the hurricane would be devastating. The admin wants to blame the state and local governments for lack of response. How could they not see that local and state resources would be overwhelmed trying deal with this huge disaster?
PS. Did you see the article in today's ArkDemGaz on page 9A trying to take a swipe at you? I'll post it on my blog. Ah, another letter to the editor in progress!
General, it is imperative that our government is run by competent and qualified people. The Republican Party has an unearned reputation for being strong on security. They represent the "shoot first ask questions later" mentality that I am sorry to say is where are country is. Accountability is so lacking in politics today but if Americans cannot look at the people in charge of Homeland Security are far from being the best we have then I am afraid we have started down a scary path. I am still horrified by the President saying "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job" at the same time tens of thousands of fellow Americans pleaded for help.
They have been busy updating wikipedia:
Cronyism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Cronyism is partiality to long-standing friends, especially by appointing them to public office without regard for their qualifications. The word "cronyism" is always used derogatorily.
Governments are particularly susceptible to accusations of cronyism as they spend public money. This is why democratic governments are encouraged to have transparency in their accounting and contracting processes.
Virtually all Presidents of the United States have been accused of cronyism by someone at some time. But since the word means appointment of long-standing friends who are not qualified for the position, the appointment of long-standing friends who are qualified is not cronyism; this would be more akin to political patronage, where political supporters or merely members of the same party are appointed by the patron in power.
Many on both sides of the aisle are coming out and denouncing George W. Bush's appointing Michael D. Brown to the director of FEMA. Republican and conservative media commentators as well as liberal ones have called for Brown's dismissal or resignation. Michelle Malkin stated about Brown: "if someone is a worthless sack of bones, I'll say so. And I don't care if he has 'Bush appointee' stamped on his forehead or a GOP elephant tattooed to his backside. Brown's clueless public comments after landfall are reason enough to give him the boot...and he should have never been there in the first place." Time Magazine has revealed that Brown lied on his resume, and probably only got the important position because of the person he roomed with at college.
See also: nepotism
.
.
"Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of Evolution, as not adequately supported by facts, seem quite to forget that their own theory is supported by no facts at all."
--Herbert Spencer: Nineteenth-century English social scientist
I was walking innocently through the thread and stepped on this awfully smelling troll doo. I wish people would put their trolls on leashes and clean their mess up after them.
Don't Mess with Wes!
a FEMA director and staff that's not part of the political system? These should be permanent, government jobs, inhabited by competent, experienced people who've worked their way up the chain. FEMA is too important for the welfare of this country to be designated as a reward system for political cronies.
Why not?
I learned by a call to Kathleen Sebelius office that a conference call was held by the adjudant generals of all 50 states to coordinate and send whatever the adjudant generals in the states hit by Katrina needed. This was while the federal government was still floundering. At this moment was when all the national guard troops from the various states came and took control of New Orleans. Kathleen signed an emergency declaration that enabled her to send a national guard unit and blackhawk helicopters to the area. One of the lead people commanding the effort there is with the Kansas national guard. Louisiana's own guard troops are being heavily used in Iraq as is their equipment. The Rove spins machine is trying to blame the state and local officials for the slow response and loss of life. I feel certain the Governors took the lead in what went right with the rescue and relief efforts in that region. This has to be a model for all disasters in the future, along with having a plan for who will be the leader when they get there, such as Gen. Honore is doing and now the Coast Guard admiral. Bottomline, of course, the buck stops with the president. He's promoted his cronies into positions to hurt Americans during his entire administration. Had there been real pictures allowed from Iraq, people here would have been as transfixed as they have been on Katrina. We sent a man made Katrina through the entire country of Iraq and all these years later, they still don't have electricity and water on which they can rely. My friends in other parts of the world see how inept we've become. To not acknowledge global warming in their opinion is our biggest error and they blame us for the damage throughout the world.
for fitting this dialoguing in to your already busy schedule. YOu know it means the world to us to hear your thoughts and ideas in these pretty scary times.
My question is very general and I understand if it's too broad to address at this time, but it's along these lines:
Do you think the corporatism, corruption and cronyism at the top levels of our government have gone beyond the point of no return?
Do you ever get the feeling that it might be a waste of time, money and energy to try and defeat a power that even has control over our election process?
Does Corporate money have such a grip on everything that someone representing "we the people" and fighting for the "common good" has no chance of breaking through to be able to actually win an election?
Although that is my fear, thanks to your leadership and inspiration it will not now or ever stop me from fighting for the things we here believe in and support. I would rather go down fighting than live in the kind of country the current power holders are creating.
Bless you and thank you General Clark!
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest places if you look at it right.
--Hunter/Garcia
Government must begin hiring and promoting for all positions based on competency and background.
Educators should be the backbone of the Education Department.
Farmers should be the backbone of the Agriculture Department.
Nepotism and cronyism are no longer acceptable for staffing government. Anyone standing for any type of governmental office must exhibit background and training first, idealogy second.
The time to yell about Michael Brown isn't now - it was when he was hired at FEMA without qualifications.
Blue State of Mind
The complete failure of preparing our country's security is inexcusable. Bottom line is the President's main responsibility is to protect and defend. The Democratic Party must use this to demonstrate that what the GOP calls "obstruction" is really "accountability". The role of the Senate is to confirm qualified nominees not be a rubber stamp. Only five Senators confirmed Mike Brown.
Come on folks, what other leader/prominent figure do you know who solicits direct advice from his supporters online? This Policy Brief is a great idea general.
With regards to Katrina, we need to realize that there are responsibilities in this country that can only be fulfilled by the federal government. The culture of "absolute privatization" that has prevailed in the public debate for the past 25 years has crippled functioning government at the national level.
If the government wants to commission the private sector to streamline business practices, devise an effective plan of action, evaluate operational efficiency....that is all fine. But in the end the private sector isn't an action-based entity, it is not going to deploy hundreds of thousands of personnel, deploy hundreds of helicopters, hospital ships, hundreds of tons worth of heavy equipment, and put up $50 billion every time a disaster strikes (it is the responsibility of the federal government to do these things). For that matter, state and local governments do not have these kinds of resources either.
And no, we don't need a hurricane czar! The past "Czars" in this country (eg. drugs) have a dismal record. It is time that the people at the top who are appointed/elected to do a job, start doing it!
"I am the blogger formerly known as clarkuistador"
General Clark, thanks so much for opening this dialogue!
In case you've missed it, John M. Barry has written a very interesting book about the 1927 Mississippi River flood and its effects on the U.S. for the future. C-Span has interviewed him on the subject.
Thank you for speaking at DC this past Tuesday, "Reflecting on 9/11 and America’s Global Engagement Problem" at the "Terrorism, Security & America's Purpose: Towards a More Comprehensive Strategy Conference.
Before some of our country's top foreign policy and national security experts, you also offered the nation a true demonstration of leadership; and conveyed to our leaders how we should be working together to secure our interests, to honor our values, to defend our country and to promote the ideals of democracy, both here and around the world. Even before the few right-wing conservatives who attended, I believe that your speech convincely projected this renewed call for genuine leadership, accountability and conviction.
For the first time since 9/11, I believe that our government and its leaders may finally share a common conviction to commit towards the real task and "hard work" to restore our country towards success. It's working together in open debate and dialogue for the common good that real progress and solutions can be made; and that begins by holding Bush and his administration accountable for misleading Americans away from the core of our democratic principles.
________________________________________________________________________
"Debate, Dialogue, Discussion, Disagreement - that's not wrong -that's not unpatriotic, that's one of the highest forms of patriotism and love of country, and we need to say it!" - Gen. Wesley Clark(Ret.)
I also believe that security has never been a priority with this administration. How can someone obtain a position so close to the President with a fake resume? Remember White House correspondent Jeff Gannon (aka James D. Guckert)? How about Valerie Plame? How can the President of the United States not DEMAND answers? How can the American people be so blind?
"Out of the mainstream"
"Weak on security--- Won't protect you"
That was the Republican claim in '04 to differentiate themselves from their Democratic contenders. With an absent and utterly unqualified FEMA Director who, after witnessing the worst natural disaster on our shores-- in our lifetime-- publicly comments that he's going to have "Mexican dinner and enjoy a Marguerita"....
What on earth will they be running on in 2006? Vapor?
What kinds of arguments will be hurled against the opposing party this time that won't ring hollow in the people's ears after seeing this unprecedented display of neglect and national disgrace?
Thank you for your genuine concerns for the voices and cares of the PEOPLE of America, who are now crying out to be heard by someone who will listen, and who can offer solutions. I relish this idea of your new Forum... the timing is as ripe as can be.
As always, much gratitude for all you do!
Like icantbelieve at Post #10709 below, just as soon as it is feasible, I would appreciate a revisit of the Iraq withdrawal dialogue that had intensified among Democrats in the week or two before Katrina. Once the dire situation in the Gulf Coast states is more stable, I wonder if you might invite guest bloggers, such as Senator Feingold or Kevin Drum, to discuss their views with you and with us here at the Clark Policy Brief. It is one of our most treasured aspects of your nature, General, your encouragement of open discussion airing differing viewpoints.
I appreciate this "Policy Brief" more than I can say.
"It's time to protect our nation and take it forward. No party can do it better." - Gen. Wes Clark to Arkansas Democrats, 8/13/05
My biggest concern is that the present regime obviously never intended to really protect the American people. They won a lot of opportunity with 9/11 to further their ideologies. Could it be that they don't mind American's getting hurt because in the end they can spin the situation into fear and continue to control many people? They try to control America by "photo ops" and diversions when things go wrong.
...I was always extremely impressed by the people in the Coast Guard. To a person they were professional and knowledgeable. I couldn't be happier that a Coast Guard officer is now the on-scene head of recovery efforts.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
BE THE CHANGE you want to see in the world.
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?
May the Democratic FORCE be with you:
F airness
O pportunity
R esponsibility
C ompetence
E mpathy
Competence could be the major issue in the 2006 and 2008 elections.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
BE THE CHANGE you want to see in the world.
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?
I was delighted to see that you had sent out this message and I think it is a wonderful idea to open a dialogue with regard to the issues of the day, here on this site.
Please don't ever apologize to us for your hectic schedule. We are well aware that you are in demand across the country and throughout the world. And rightfully so. Some people obviously have the ability to recognize a leader when they see one! The others will come along with us, in time.
After reading through the comments posted above, I cannot think of anything more to add to this post of mine, except to say that I am looking forward to participating in this conversation in the weeks and months ahead.
I don't approve of political jokes.....I've seen too many of them get elected.
Great idea & very, very happy you're doing this!!
Kelly
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
And I'm really looking forward to it as a huge, meaningful and ongoing project for all of us!
Wherever you lead we will follow - and contribute in every way we can!
I often find myself wondering what your position might be on a particular issue of the day.
In the process of thinking things through, I always value your opinions.
Sometimes it can take a lot of time to track down a comprehensive statement or just the right quote on a particular issue that is hot one day or week. I am really happy this policy blog is happening.
"It's time to protect our nation and take it forward. No party can do it better." - Gen. Wes Clark to Arkansas Democrats, 8/13/05
A few of us have been working on a database of transcripts and selected quotes:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/blog/272
Anyone who wants to participate can contact us through the WesScripts account contact page.
I have been following your talks about communications operability at the various Nextel conferences with interest. Would your ideas/suggestions have had an impact in the communications problems following the Katrina disaster? Could you elaborate on this?
Thanks. :)
Dear Wes,
It is true that we should not focus entirely on the problems of political patronage in the response to Katrina—there is so much more to it than that, including policy, funding cuts, diversion of resources, and a political party that is focused on gutting many domestic government programs. But I think the United States best take a closer look at the Bush political appointees running other agencies. I wanted to document one real-life experience with such a problem.
I personally experienced the problem of Bush making political appointments based purely on cronyism and ideology. I was an HIV/STD epidemiologist at the Texas Department of Health when Reyn Archer was appointed as Texas Commissioner of Health (TDH). Archer was the physician son of an important Republican Congressman.
You might think that just any ole’ physician could run the place but that is far from the truth—it is a science-based agency and you need some experience in not only running a large organization but also you absolutely have to have some background in the science of public health, which focuses on the population rather than the individual. We had been under the direction of both Democrats and Republicans in the past but had no problem with any of them because their foremost interest, backed up by training, was in public health.
Before he arrived to actually take over direction of this large agency entrusted with public health and with emergency management in Texas, Archer was quoted saying things like he had been a virgin until age 38 so he didn’t see why other people couldn’t do so. And that as an obstetrician in private practice, he “enjoyed bending women to his will” regarding abortion. This kind of off-the-wall, loose cannon, public patter continued after he became Commissioner, to the great embarrassment of even the Republican Board of Health which had rubber-stamped his appointment.
Archer was sent there totally unprepared except for his father’s clout, his fundamentalist ideology, and a stint under Bush One watch-dogging federal funds to keep them from going to entities like Planned Parenthood that did abortions. Apparently, his charge was to attempt to impose a sub rosa religious-right agenda on the Health Department. After a few months of his tenure, scientific people at top who had to deal with him and who also knew their jobs and were dedicated to a science-based approach started leaving as quickly as they could.
Not only did he fail to get his medical license in Texas, but also he had zero real background in public health. Nor did he even have an “ear” for his constituency, immediately going to our HIV/STD conference and getting roundly booed for his comments. After that, I, along with several of my peers, had to go brief him and his crony and unqualified friend who he brought in at the top to be his right hand man, when he asked for our Bureau to educate him on harm reduction strategies for HIV prevention. He hardly listened but instead gave us long personal anecdotes about his grandfather (who he said had been both an abortionist and a heroin user—-he seemed to think that pairing had great significance; further because his grandfather had gone in for treatment one time and later slipped back into using drugs, he was absolutely certain that drug rehabilitation was useless). His right-hand-man told us to our faces that we were soulless bureaucrats and what we really needed to do was study the causes of love and alienation.
The health department really suffered from his tenure—lost many good people. He was eventually asked to resign but a lot of the damage was already done. Later things deteriorated even more as funding cuts were imposed, as real power was moved from the commissioner to administrators and as all control by scientists was ended. I went back recently to do a grant on contract and things are even worse than when I retired in 2003. I really think that all the radical right wing of the Republican Party wants of governmental agencies is a façade of serving the public. I see no evidence whatsoever that they care about functioning programs
Reyn, Reyn, Go Away
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2000-11-03/pols_naked3.html
Dubya, Reyn Archer, and the Commissioner of Love
http://slate.msn.com/id/1006317/
Are Bush appointees racist?
Democrats spotlight a pair of Texas officials who have been dinged for bigoted remarks.
Sadly, I suspect there are any number of examples just like this all over the country. We need a database to track this type of information. If we are able to make a change and get the neocons out of power in 2006 and/or 2008, it is important to have an awareness of where the problems lie so that immediate attention can be paid to the most critical areas. Will there be time to resolve longterm problems caused by cronyism if research on where the problems exist and possible ways to resolve them isn't done ahead of time?
Paul Krugman discusses this same subject in his NY Times column today. It's a staggering cost we are now and will pay for this pattern of incompetence.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/12/opinion/12krugman.html?hp
The New York Times
September 12, 2005
All the President's Friends
By PAUL KRUGMAN
The lethally inept response to Hurricane Katrina revealed to everyone that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which earned universal praise during the Clinton years, is a shell of its former self. The hapless Michael Brown - who is no longer overseeing relief efforts but still heads the agency - has become a symbol of cronyism.
But what we really should be asking is whether FEMA's decline and fall is unique, or part of a larger pattern. What other government functions have been crippled by politicization, cronyism and/or the departure of experienced professionals? How many FEMA's are there?
Unfortunately, it's easy to find other agencies suffering from some version of the FEMA syndrome.
The first example won't surprise you: the Environmental Protection Agency, which has a key role to play in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath, but which has seen a major exodus of experienced officials over the past few years. In particular, senior officials have left in protest over what they say is the Bush administration's unwillingness to enforce environmental law.
Yesterday The Independent, the British newspaper, published an interview about the environmental aftermath of Katrina with Hugh Kaufman, a senior policy analyst in the agency's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, whom one suspects is planning to join the exodus. "The budget has been cut," he said, "and inept political hacks have been put in key positions." That sounds familiar, and given what we've learned over the last two weeks there's no reason to doubt that characterization - or to disregard his warning of an environmental cover-up in progress.
What about the Food and Drug Administration? Serious questions have been raised about the agency's coziness with drug companies, and the agency's top official in charge of women's health issues resigned over the delay in approving Plan B, the morning-after pill, accusing the agency's head of overruling the professional staff on political grounds.
Then there's the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, whose Republican chairman hired a consultant to identify liberal bias in its programs. The consultant apparently considered any criticism of the administration a sign of liberalism, even if it came from conservatives.
You could say that these are all cases in which the Bush administration hasn't worried about degrading the quality of a government agency because it doesn't really believe in the agency's mission. But you can't say that about my other two examples.
Even a conservative government needs an effective Treasury Department. Yet Treasury, which had high prestige and morale during the Clinton years, has fallen from grace.
The public symbol of that fall is the fact that John Snow, who was obviously picked for his loyalty rather than his qualifications, is still Treasury secretary. Less obvious to the public is the hollowing out of the department's expertise. Many experienced staff members have left since 2000, and a number of key positions are either empty or filled only on an acting basis. "There is no policy," an economist who was leaving the department after 22 years told The Washington Post, back in 2002. "If there are no pipes, why do you need a plumber?" So the best and brightest have been leaving.
And finally, what about the department of Homeland Security itself? FEMA was neglected, some people say, because it was folded into a large agency that was focused on terrorist threats, not natural disasters. But what, exactly, is the department doing to protect us from terrorists?
In 2004 Reuters reported a "steady exodus" of counterterrorism officials, who believed that the war in Iraq had taken precedence over the real terrorist threat. Why, then, should we believe that Homeland Security is being well run?
Let's not forget that the administration's first choice to head the department was Bernard Kerik, a crony of Rudy Giuliani. And Mr. Kerik's nomination would have gone through if enterprising reporters hadn't turned up problems in his background that the F.B.I. somehow missed, just as it somehow didn't turn up the little problems in Michael Brown's résumé. How many lesser Keriks made it into other positions?
The point is that Katrina should serve as a wakeup call, not just about FEMA, but about the executive branch as a whole. Everything I know suggests that it's in a sorry state - that an administration which doesn't treat governing seriously has created two, three, many FEMA's.
E-mail:
competent people?
It seems that, in his administration, the least competent are promoted and the most competent are ignored to the point that they resign.
The buck should stop with Bush, but it took a whole-scale tragedy to wake many Americans up to the fact that Bush is just not up to the job - he's well below his pay-grade.
Bush simply doesn't care what the American people want or need - he's a lame duck and selfish to the point that he may ruin his own political party with his cronyism.
Or maybe, simply, it's that no one of credit WANTS to work in this backward administration.
get me the hell out of here. They can get a lot more money in the private sector and they actually get to use their scientific knowledge instead of having it trumped by right wing nuts and their religious beliefs.
This sounds like a great idea Wes. Will be here often.
I've heard some people mention this, but I believe it is actually a bigger issue. If the Hurricane would have hit Newport Beach, response time would have been great. I don't believe our government seemed to worried about the poverty stricken Blacks that could not evacuate. The urgency was never really there with the state and federal government until people started looting, some whom are criminals and others just trying to survive. This to me is a kind of indirect racism. No matter what form, racism is what it is, racism. An example of this 'indirect racism'; On Real Time with Bill Maher, Bill had two newspapers that were covering the looting in New Orleans, one paper had a young black boy carring 12-pack of Diet Coke and other food items in a black bag. The other paper had a white couple, with the young lady holding a loaf of bread and the man carring other food items. The caption for the black boy read something like this, "..boy in waist deep water as he loots a store..." Caption for the white couple read something like this, "...young lady in high waters finds bread and other groceries..." This to me is more outrageous than anything, becuase I believe this racism is whatsnowballed into this huge problems with recovery efforts in New Orleans.
that needs to be addressed at some point is voter registration for all of the displaced hurricane victims. Just something to keep in mind further down the road.
I think that may be what was so "scary" to Babs Bush when she mentioned all the evacuees that wanted to remain in TX...Thereby tipping the balance of a red state.
I am not sure if it was racism or classim or negligence of the worst order, but two things I am sure of is that this would have never happened in a Clark administration or in Kennebunkport,Maine.
I guess it depends on how you define "rich." Most of the people I know who make a ton of money (relative to me, that is) voted for him because they want their taxes cut. But they think he's doing everything else wrong. They really can't stand him. But all they really care about is lower taxes, so they voted for him instead of Kerry.
I don't know what to do about people like this. All they care about is the money. Their answer to everything is "Democrats will raise my taxes." Kids getting killed in Iraq unnecessarily? Democrats will raise my taxes. Deficits through the roof? Democrats will raise my taxes. Theocratic agenda? Democrats will raise my taxes. It's unbelievable.
I agree with icantbelieve mostly, except one geographical exception is-- a large percentage of our uber wealth in Los Angeles is the creative community (entertainment) which is comprised of an overwhelming majority of democrats. So those are the non-bush voting very wealthy. They are also generous donors to charity and have all the other things hard righties lack-- aesthetic sensibilities, sense of humor, wit, empathy, compassion...
We have also the republican don't-raise-my-taxes variety here, plenty of them. But they're outnumbered. Point being, I guess, major wealth does not always equal that kind of vote in some locales.
Sorry ms, I was missing a "that" in my sentence. I meant most rich people I know that voted for him voted for him because of taxes. I didn't mean to imply that all rich people are selfish.
No - I know icantbelieve, I didn't take it that way.
Just wanted to point out that there is indeed a refreshing upper upper uber class out this way that actually is philanthropic and democratic and compassionate. I have no idea how big a slice of the pie they might occupy in terms of percentages, but they are here and they are just as rich as the best of them!
When I ask this to some neocons that I know,.. I never get a reply back.
:/
______________________________________________________________________
"Debate, Dialogue, Discussion, Disagreement - that's not wrong -that's not unpatriotic, that's one of the highest forms of patriotism and love of country, and we need to say it!" - Gen. Wesley Clark(Ret.)
was right. Going into Afghanistan to topple the Taliban was a great idea.
But just like everything else he does, he didn't finish the job. And for all his talk about how the Taliban was no more, they are coming back. Why? Because el Presidente didn't finish the job. We had an opportunity to crush the Taliban and its al Qaeda allies, and we didn't take it because someone was obsessed with a pissant little tin pot dictator, Saddam Hussein.
The Bush administration wants government to be useless so emergency response and rescue can be something else they contract out to private companies leaving relief efforts to be handled by faith based organisations?
Or am just finding method in their incompetence?
You'd be taking them to the Better Business Bureau if you bought a washing machine the way we went into the war in Iraq. Wes Clark, CNN Aug 17 2003
...here's another, via Josh Marshall
....To assist with the recovery and disposition of the victims of Katrina, FEMA has hired Kenyon Worldwide Disaster Management, a Houston-based company which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Service Corporation International (SCI), another Houston-based corporation, which bills itself as the "dominant leader in the North American death care industry."
SCI is not only closely associated with the president (which is not surprising since the company is based in Houston), they were also at the center of what is probably the best-known scandal during Bush's six years as governor of Texas: the so-called 'funeralgate' case.
What's more, Joe Allbaugh -- President Bush's Chief of Staff in Texas and later his first FEMA Director -- was the central figure in that scandal, or at least the guy whose job it was to take care of the mess SCI had gotten into.
The last we heard, you'll remember, now-lobbyist Allbaugh was in Lousiana "helping coordinate the private-sector response to the storm."
One Tennessee mortician, Dan Buckner, who was on stand-by as a volunteer as part of the Department of Homeland Security's DMORT program told a local paper that morticians from around the country were available to do this work as volunteers. (DMORT works in conjunction with the National Funeral Directors Association).
"There's no telling how many dollars they'll spend on that contract," he told the paper.....
More at http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/
"George Bush has had his day and he's bollixed it up."
General Clark. Your willingness to communicate your ideas and take the time to listen to ours in such an open forum is truly inspirational. Surely many, many good things will come of this.
The General gets it right.
Competence--What a concept!
General,
Two themes that to my mind work in tandum are your wonderfully articulated messages about leadership—and the present lack there of—and this collective notion of the common good. When there is effective, engaged leadership and a citizenry committed to and acting in support of the common good, the post-Katrina horrors that we witnessed these last two weeks would not have happened. While privately, we, as American citizens, are acting to demonstrate our collective commitment to the common good, our anoited "leaders" certainly have not. At last, for those perhaps not paying sufficient attention, the curtain has been drawn to reveal a political party and its nominal head, the president, who so often and so cavalierly have wrapped themselves in the twin memes of providing security and being the sole defenders of "values" to be revealed as craven, uncaring political opportunists devoid of leadership or a sense of the common good.
So I ask, can our discussion here explore these two themes? How does political leadership defend and protect the common good, and how does it cultivate, model, and inspire citizens to identify with and act to support the common good? This is the challenge and the opportunity for us as Democrats.
Thank You General Clark
give us your thoughts on Bill Moyers' recent speech at the Union Theological Seminary. Click on my name to get to my blog which contains the speech. IMHO, this right-wing religious nutcase mentality is more dangerous to our freedoms than the nutcase Islamic fundamentalists who are busy trying to kill us.
Why?
Hello General Clark,
It will be so valuable to have your direct input to the conversations here.
I, too, would like your feedback about Bill Moyers' speech. I'd also really love to see/hear a dialogue between you and Bill Moyers. You both offer such deeply thoughtful perspectives on our situation today, I think such a dialogue would be very compelling.
Thanks for everything you're doing,
Carol
I would definitely like you to weigh in with your thoughts on Bill Moyers' speech. To me, this development is frightening.
We are going to need some real honest-to-goodness leadership in order to combat this phenomenon. I feel that if we don't pick up some additional seats in 2006 we are doomed. Your remarks on this subject would be greatly appreciated.
I don't approve of political jokes.....I've seen too many of them get elected.
The Clark Policy Brief is a terrific idea! There have been countless times I've wondered what you think about particular items in the news. I just love this! Thank you.
First, I truly hope Coast Guard Vice Admiral Thad Allen is successful.
Second, There was "teamwork, information flow....." when James Lee Witt was in charge. It was when this crew changed it that things went awry. And particularly when they put it under Homeland Security it seems. They had different ideas of what FEMA should do. And here's where you may need your tin foil hat, but......I remembered reading way back about how FEMA would run the Operations TIPS program, and FEMA would set up and run Ashcroft's internment camps for "enemy combatants" (Johnathan Turley has written about these). That FEMA would be working in conjuction with the DOJ on these things. Just appears they had a whole different role in mind for FEMA. And when it came to hurricane relief, FEMA was feckless. Did it not matter who the figure head was at the top, or if he was qualified because it was mostly being run by the DOJ? Why was this Adm so adamant about putting FEMA under Homeland Security when so many said it was a bad idea? This Michael Brown was the type of crony to be made the Ambassador to the Bahamas, but Director of FEMA? Makes me wonder why and what else is in his background.
Third, I agree with some here who have said part of the problem is the "rubber stamp" Republicans. They need to be removed using every vote they have cast as enablers. Hard to believe, but this Brown character was actually confirmed by the Senate. And, if we all recall this Adm didn't even want a Homeland Security Dept until they found they could use it as a political tool against the Dems. And did with Max Cleland. We need to use this in 06 to at least take the Senate and put this Adm in a box until 2008. Then we can start moving this country forward again. Thank you for listening.
Thank you, General Clark, for engaging us in this discussion. I think the Policy Brief is a great idea and appreciate the time you will take out of your busy schedule to converse with us.
As for the incompetency of FEMA Director Mike Brown, I do think that this is an issue that needs to be out there before the public. It’s not just this FEMA appointment. No doubt, Bush has unqualified people in many positions.
I remember reading an article in New York Review of Books a while back that detailed appointments that Bush had made in Iraq where very competent people, who may have been able to make something good happen there, were replaced by totally unqualified people who were appointed only because they were friends of the President’s or they shared his ideology, or they could be counted on to be loyal to the President and not disagree with Bush or make any waves. As a result, many an opportunity has been lost in Iraq and, in fact, more harm was done. It was a very disturbing and maddening article. Who knows how many lives, here and in Iraq could have been spared had the President only had the courage to appoint qualified people in all positions whether they would agree with him on all things or not.
I am so distressed by the failures of this government and the air of unconcern it gives off. I have given up on them ever acting in the best interests of the country.
I fear our only hope is to get some important victories in 2006. I’m so glad to see you working toward that end.
Again, thanks...and I like WesDem’s idea of bringing in guest bloggers to discuss various sides of an issue with you.
Also, I'm glad to see you participating in the discussion on climate change at the Clinton Global Initiative this week.
Take care, Carol
"...when politicians screw up it is the duty of the opposing party to point out to the people how badly they screwed it up so that the people don't make the same mistake in the future." Wes Clark Jr
Thank you General Clark.
I'm excited to know you'll be close at hand, posting your thoughts, listening and guiding. There's so much to discuss, so glad today is the "Kick off".
Barb in MI
Great Idea General.We should also get to the point of turning you ideas into action in the feild.
The way this country is going is so depressing.But you are hope .We have to stand up an do something.I am going to give a call to my local Dem party and work on the town fall campaines.We should think of this as layout for the ground force for 06.Peter King (R) Repersentive in the NY 3rd CD is in my district and a BIG Bush supporter.
JDrake
Long Island For Clark
what a great addition to CCN to help us be heard by you, our leader now and when you become our next President with your National Civilian Reserve Corps. Here's what's on my mind as of 9/10/05:
~entire Katrina disaster seems very contrived to me, "deliberate incompetence"
-to kill off N.O. black subculture by diaspora
-to direct public anger toward FEMA so much that door is opened for complete privatization of any future disaster relief=big bucks for Halliburton, etc.
-heck, [this thought you may really find far-out but here I go anyway] even manipulating the path of the hurricane and neglecting levee projects seem believable for this administration that has no ethical restraints IMHO
~as for the future of N.O, could you, along with James Lee Witt, consult with technical experts of the Netherlands to draw up plans to restore a viable "New New Orleans". . .the Dutch have been building levees for centuries! And isn't it expedient for us to reassemble the dispersed New Orleanians and their unique cultural heritage?
Well, that's all for now. . .only that I wish you were publicly side-by-side with J. L. Witt as you both restore order to N.O. so the American people realize what a treasure you really are.
For Clarksanity in 2008
DEMOCRATS have a golden opportunity now to expose this blithering crowd of incompetent, insensitive, morons in a way they've never had before. We democrats need a united front that puts our message forth as the party who REALLY cares about people--ALL people.
What does it take for people to finally wake up and see this administration for the crooks, incompetent fools, and mean-spirited hypocrites that they are?
It occurred to me that by putting FEMA into the DHS, they emphasized security, and order, over humanitarian issues like search, rescue and helping people. It seems that they saw their mission that way and were trying to militarize everything.
Was it a bad idea to put FEMA into DHS, or is it just that the people running FEMA were incompetent.
Combining about 22 agencies into the mega-bureaucracy called the Department of Homeland Security guaranteed that we would not be capable of responding to a crisis. We need agencies that can respond quickly and that have clear lines of authority not more layers of bureaucracy.
Also this mega-bureaucracy, by burying critical agencies in the ocean of bureaucrats camouflages weaknesses. The Coast Guard is one agency that did respond to the situation in New Orleans in a timely manner and has done heroic work, but it too is buried in the DHS. Since the Coast Guard was moved into DHS its budget has been gutted by Congress and the White House. For too long the Coast Guard has been forced to operate with obsolete and dangerous equipment. Yet Congress has continued to cut the budget. Right now the inadequate $966 million budget request from Bush has been cut again in Congress. The Senate has cut it by $60 million and the House by $466 million. If this continues the Coast Guard won't be there for us next time.
Barry
Are you safer today than you were five years ago?
FEMA needs to be seperate from DHS. Tommorrow's anniversary is a day likely an attack. DHS is doing a job it isn't suited for now. The new command man is well qualified, but the DHS agency's focus should be upon terror not disaster relief.
You have to do both, and we all know riding bikes and chewing gum are tasks Bush can't do well. So why expect his poor decision making and political use of emergency situations to serve two prime capacities in the same instance?
He's said 9-11 so many times. As if he needs to remind people of his failure. As if saying the word removes negligent approach. It's happened once again.
My uncle was in the corps and took pride in the river he helped shape and maintain, spent many times in New Orleans as well. He's no longer here and it would have hurt him greatly to see this malfaesance. Bush ignored the levee and many Dems highlighted such a mistake.
Demand the books be opened on Iraq spending. It is why they ripped off New Orleans and look at the results. The same man (Cheney) is now running another multibillion swindle and needs to be held accountable.
Larry Fitzgerald will soon take care of Cheney's staff and Condi's. We don't need the fox Cheney to guard the henhouse after smashing the chickencoop and submerging it.
Our Guard members (from LA) serving Iraq have hurt greatly in this whole season of loss. Your ability to encourage and thank them and see to theirs at home in terms that would see every soldier(and his family's) needs would be something that can embolden all ours so called.
The anniversary of 9-11, the fatwah that scared Bulgeria's 400 troops out of Iraq which was issued this past week, and a dozen parallel efforts to escalate this war via sympathetic neocon friendly journalists in Iran and Syria must be challenged now.
Syria was trhe first Mid Eastern country to make strong statements of American support after 9-11 and coordinate with us. Iran is a growing concern but strong and poorly chosen words have caused this present scenario. Bush's words have helped invite a reflex of hardline support.
We need to engage them and devlop solid footing. The presence in Afghanistan, with two nuclear neighbors and a UN presence in better numbers, should have been our focus. Iraq has inflamed this region to new levels.
How do we fix this? Policy of triangulation via a three state solution would hedge Iran's Kurds, force Shi'ite interests to vie within the state of Iraq one with another, and present an opportunity for a true republic within Sunni regions whose ability to recognize a Shi'ite minorty within would see them get similar recognition as a whole with the others.
Six provinces within one state, Sunni, two Kurd, three Shi'ia. Or a three state with a revenue sharing lease upon resource and war reparations.
Neither on the cheap but to get the world community in we need to re-examine the entire oil concessions terms within the land.
Such would reinvigorate EU efforts to join.
Domestic policy you had many great points to make. Your platform was ignored by the media. This will come another time. One assumes that your discussion of policy at this time would facilitate your strength of security policy.
Finally statements of support for the cop shown who actually allowed bread and grocery looting as a necessity in such times, and of the policemen who killed selves, for their service in the time, would be two instances of pragmatic reflection on the complex human nature of such events and how these men tried to maintain some sense of purpose relative to the situation.
Thanks again for the TPM cafe threads.
Could you perhaps verify a statement of record, in either instance, if the first ever ARAMCO(Arabian-American Oil Co, Standard of Cali 'SOCAL' and Arab interests) director of public relations, Michael Sheldon Cheney, is of any blood relation to the current Vice President Dick Cheney?
I've yet to hear a person of authority deny he is. Is this a vote of confidence? Can you determine so with any level of authority? Thanks.
You were a straight shooter. The media expected you to vote 'all go' on Iraq war, with the only vote you then had at the time, your opinion as a career soldier of good standing and high decoration. When you opposed it they went on a smear campaign. If ever there were time for straight shooting truth to power, it is now.
You took note of what others said. How we needed to see the role of vested interests of war and weigh true security concerns against profit margins.
You spoke so at the time. Realizing we're there now, someone who would speak the truth on the underlying reasons we went and the motivations of the shot caller Cheney could be the person to help rebuild our standing within the world community.
You're still "The Man" to do it. You always were and will be.
Please inform us of ties one Michael Sheldon Cheney may have with Dick Cheney, as the former was the prime man to help attract venture capital and makret share to OPEC's biggest member. Now is the time to do, it speaks of his credibility to be given the key to the great Crescent city and its bruised Spirit.
A non answer is taken as a yes. Others asking of you does not make you the instigator. Is Michael Sheldon Cheney of any relation to Dick Cheney?
This entire debacle with FEMA director is just another example of the total incompetency of this administration. Our democratic leaders should emphasize this fact over and over. Bush is putting politics and cronyism above the welfare of this country. Never mind whether we were right to go into Iraq...just pound on the incompetence once there. The same ineptitude we saw in New Orleans, was experienced by the soldiers in Iraq with lack of supplies, body armor...proper vehicles, etc. John Bolton and Karen Hughes are Bush appointees completely unqualified for their positions. We are dealing with thugs who are trying to drown our government in the bathtub. About 35% of the nation will follow the radical right off the cliff....they are lost to us - they think Rush Limbaugh is a truth speaker. We have to find a way to convince the rest of America that democrats can make them safer, healthier and wealthier.
If the leadership at the top is competent and hires competent people, you will have a capable organization that does its job well.
Clinton versus Bush. Look at the results.
I giving a call to my local town repersentive David Denenburg . I going to work on his fall campaign.He broke his ass to get names on pititions for Clark for the 04 New York Primary .I got him the spot for running as Delegate for Clark for the New York 3rd CD
I think we should start to network with the local Dem party.
JDrake
Long Island For Clark
It's hard to beleive Americans talking to their leaders about the issue's is such a novel concept, it's good to see a leader of national stature who wants to hear directly in our own words from we the people. I appreciate the oppertunity to get more insight on your thoughts on the issues facing our nation and to participate in this important discussion about our furure.
James Mitchem
Virginia For Clark
James Lee Watt is not only experienced and capable, but he is a take charge type of individual, as you are, someone who takes a problem and works it through, while keeping the entire picture in view. But a James Lee Watt or a Wesley K. Clark was not appointed by Bush. Clearly, it was beholden upon the President to place a director at FEMA who met these necessary qualifications for the job; he didn't do this and the onus is on Bush. However, when it comes to critically important appointments such as this one is to national security, is there no Congressional oversight? Is this something the president just gets to do because he is the president? There must be a way to make basic job qualifications binding on any president as he or she makes such choices in the future.
"It's time to protect our nation and take it forward. No party can do it better." - Gen. Wes Clark to Arkansas Democrats, 8/13/05
Went through a whole 42 minute long confirmation process, headed by none other than Lieberman. Not once was he asked any questions pertaining to his experience or how he would keep the nation safe from disaster. Unfortunately, Washington has been an "I'll scratch your back if you'll scratch mine" town for so long.........appointing cronies with no experience for the job is actually SOP. Clinton broke with tradition when he appointed Witt.
"George Bush has had his day and he's bollixed it up."
....from you on the issues of the day, General
Thank you for all you do.