1) What troops did GWB stand with after 9-11? I remember him with a fireman a few days afterward, but the only time he stands with the troops is when he can use them for a photo-op.

2) What "business" is it you want to get the government out of? Whatever it is, appearently the Red Cross does it better. The reason the government is involved is that the amount of money is beyond the resources of most organizations, private or public.

3) Rudy Giuliani doesn't act like a man who wants to be president. He's making good money as a consultant. Besides, NO is going to be years, with many opportunities for failure. If I were him, I'd give some interviews to keep my face in front of the public, and duck the risky heavy lifting. Besides, the Republican party will not nominate a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, twice divorced adulterer.

Haley Barbour? are you kidding. Other than his polished look on MTP today, his primary concern is to get the casinos open again. It is interesting to note that when GWB did his photo op visit, Haley was in the background.

4)Chairatable giving is tax deductable now. You can deduct up to 250 dollars without receipts. Speaking of charity, Bill Frist is planning permanent repeal of the estate tax in a few days, something that most charities say will cost them 25 to 30 percent of their annual contributions.

Troops was a metaphor. It was the firemen I meant.

Charitable giving should be completely tax free. No limits and make it so you don't have to itemize. Ok, that heads towards an exception to my desire for a flat tax, but still. Heck, make it a tax credit.

Will - you are asking for trouble with your wish for charitable deductions to be handled like that. You need to itemize - you need regulation and control - otherwise there will be a lot of shady things going on. Not that there isn't already.

Working in the industry, I follow charitable giving trends closely, and there are many 'schemes' that seem charitable but are just shells for tax fraud. C'mon Will, you don't want the bastards to get away with defrauding the public and taking money away from legit charities, do you?

There's a popular theory that a tax deduction is really a gov't subsidy.

That being said, I think a lot of people think a deduction is a credit already. It's not like getting a deduction on money you don't have to pay (or want to pay) is of any real benefit to you. If I give $100 to the Red Cross tax free, it just means I'm out $100 instead of ~$130. I'm no better off for it, except for my feeling of goodwill toward my fellow person.

A credit with no limits, however, would turn the whole system upside down. If you think the U.S. is run by right-wing nut jobs now, you haven't seen nothing yet. People, lots and lots of people, will pay their taxes to Pat "pray for the death of federal judges" Robertson instead of the government.

This is exactly the business the government needs to be in. Who else has the expertise, and the resources to take control of a city like New Orleans? This is what the National Guard is for. They have vehicles that are actually capable of entering a flooded city. The army corp of engineers can build temporary bridges and roads, and can set up communications networks. There is no private organization in the world that is able to it as well. The only question is why it took them so long to get in there...that's the real embarrasment.

FEMA used to be the shining example of a well run government agency, Bush himself said so in his debates with Al Gore. The problem is he canned the man responsible for it, James Lee Witt, in favor of his F@#$%ing Campaign Manager.

Will you are simply delusional if you think the Federal government should be out of this business. It's one of the few things that even libertarian republicans believe in. There's no way that Randian individualism, or even states and local governments for that matter, can handle such a catastrophe. Where would NYC be without the federal money, albeit not the amount(s) Bush promised, they rec'd post-9/11? Or Chicago for that matter after 1871?

And really this can't be discussed without discussing politics - well I should say it could have been discussed without politics if anyone in the chain, anyone at all, could have executed a reasonable catastrophic plan. The Democratic mayor of NO and the Democratic Governor were ill-prepared and did not perform to any objective measure, but the Republicans in the WH completely bumbled this due to their standard-operating-procedure - political hacks, in policy or operating posts, run amok.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/04/opinion/04rich.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fFrank%20Rich

Re: politics and Katrina, here's Olbermann

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_09_04_atrios_archive.html#112597122217543452

more... from Boehlert

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2005/09/05/hurricane_track_record/print.html

The Red Cross is doing an ok job of handing out hot meals -- as is the Salvation Army -- but you need the government to deal with law & order and, I think, emergency construction. You want the ARC to be running bulldozers out on the canal seawall?

No politics here. cough

Can someone imagine what would happen if this would have happened under a Democratic President? The impeachment proceedings would have already begun...

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2005/09/politicizing_ka.html

No, I want the Federal government doing as little as possible. Law and order should be a local thing, with the state National Guard as a backup for big things. Unfortunately, the National Guard is over in Iraq rather than keeping looters and thugs off New Orleans streets. The Federal government in terms of the ACE is fine, though honestly, I'm not sure why that's not a state function. The Mississippi River is probably too important nationally to be left solely to one state though, so I won't quibble. Where I DON'T want the Feds involved is in doing anything for the "refugees" - that's a Red Cross function. I know it sounds harsh to say 'don't do anything', but at this stage, it's doing more harm than good. I hate to think what Honore is going to do to clear out New Orleans and Jefferson Parish -- or why that's even necessary.

* In addition to FEMA don't forget the poor job at the local and state level. First responders failed. Did you see all the school buses still sitting in the school yard? I agree FEMA screwed up, but it unacceptable to give the Mayor and the Governor a free pass Do we want Fema to now be the first responders???

As someone who has often disagreed with you on matters of politics, I have to say this is extremely well said. Thanks for the clearheaded commentary.

Has anyone ever notice how Will Carroll is an expert on everything? This guy is simply amazing.
Why he isn't President ......well some of us know why he isn't anything. ;o_

I can't speak for Will, but i think his preference to "get federal gov't out of this situation" doesn't refer to funding, or even to all sorts of federal aid -- it's just that the federal government has no business trying to dictate preparation and response for a regional situation like this. They've already taken away funds and put the relief agency FEMA in the Washington-controlled Homeland Security Dept. -- that's not good. The feds should provide the funding and even spare manpower (troops, Nat'l Guard) when necessary, but it should only be done to help the Red Cross and the local disaster prevention workers do their thing.

"I can't speak for Will, but i think his preference to "get federal gov't out of this situation" doesn't refer to funding, or even to all sorts of federal aid -- it's just that the federal government has no business trying to dictate preparation and response for a regional situation like this. They've already taken away funds and put the relief agency FEMA in the Washington-controlled Homeland Security Dept.-- that's not good. The feds should provide the funding and even spare manpower (troops, Nat'l Guard) when necessary, but it should only be done to help the Red Cross and the local disaster prevention workers do their thing."

Couple of things: FEMA was a "Washington-controlled" agency before it came under Homeland Security. It's the FEDERAL Emergency Management Agency. Each state has its mini EMA. Second, the National Guard isn't federal manpower--it's state troops. The "well-regulated militias" mentioned in the Second Amendment? That's the state national guard. Finally, the federal government doesn't dictate emergency response. It already is controlled from the local and state level. Only in emergency situations where the state and local governments can't do the job do the feds get involved. Given the abject failure of the New Orleans police department (20% of them quit, by the way), an increased federal response might be better when you know that the local government is as abysmal as New Orleans was/is.

"this can be addressed without politics entering the discussion"

Your liberal hubris is showing. Or were you joking?

BTW, the names Nagin and Blanco don't even register?