Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.
Published on September 10, 2005 By COL Gene In Politics


Katrina is beginning to uncover some very nasty secrets in the Bush administration. It now turns out FIVE of the TOP FEMA officials got their jobs with virtually no experience in managing emergency situations. Director Brown, Chief of Staff Rhode, Deputy Chief Alshuler were tied to the Bush 2000 election campaign. Two other positions are filled by other political operatives - The Lt. Governor of Nebraska and an official in the US Chamber of Commerce. None of these top five appointees had ANY emergency Management Experience!

In the case of Mr. Brown not only was he not qualified but his background had material lies as to his experience. We have heard over and over again how the president deserves to have the Senate approve positions because he has the right to have the people he wants in his administration. When the Senate questions the background of a Bush appointee, the White House refuses to provide all the information like in the Bolton case. When the Senate refuses to vote on a candidate, the president uses his power with an interim appointment when the Senate is no longer in session to circumvent the Senate confirmation process. Now Bush supporters are saying the Senate approved Mr. Brown because the Senators accepted his resume as correct which was submitted by the White House.

Political patronage is not new with the Bush Administration. But to have used political patronage to populate an agency like FEMA, which has the responsibility of life and death after an emergency like Katrina, is CRIMINAL. Now we see the beginnings of " pin the tail on the donkey " ( or in this case on the elephant) with the recall of Mr. Brown. There is no question that Mr. Brown and the other political hacks should be terminated from their jobs. But the real culprit is George W. Bush because of the way he has forced his political hacks into jobs within his administration for which they are NOT QUALIFIED!. It is time for the Senate, whenever confirmation is required, to insist that the credentials have been thoroughly vetted and that the information requested is provided prior to a vote on any Bush appointee. If the White House continues to stonewall providing information requested by the Senate, they should NOT VOTE on the candidate. Bush has proven his judgment concerning senior officials of the United States government cannot be trusted.

Comments (Page 4)
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4 
on Sep 12, 2005
on Sep 13, 2005
The Joe Users that ignore the FACTS I sight, does not change their TRUTH! It just shows that many of the JoeUser Bloggers are out of touch and refuse to accept reality!.
on Sep 13, 2005
I'm not stupid, you know. I'm very well aware what 'dumping ground' means and what the qualities of a good leader are. I simply don't understand why you insist on blaming bush for everything. he's not the only one who has a hand in appointing people to positions in FEMA y'know.


On a technicality--yes, Bush was the only one who "appointed" him. The Senate may have confirmed him at a later date, but only GWB appointed.

I imagine that you're familiar with the term 'good ol' boy network'? That's what I see ever day in the infrastructure of the base I live/work on, and that's what I see in the Whitehouse right now too. Took me a few years to get a clue, but I do see it.


You've hit the nail on the head with this one. Brown was an appointment from the good ol' boy network. He was friends with GWB's campaign manager and he need a job. He slid through the process, and it's come back to haunt the president. Sometimes you win on these "crony appointments" and some times you lose. The important thing is--he's now gone and hopefully someone with more experience and expertise will replace him.
on Sep 13, 2005
I'm not stupid, you know. I'm very well aware what 'dumping ground' means and what the qualities of a good leader are. I simply don't understand why you insist on blaming bush for everything. he's not the only one who has a hand in appointing people to positions in FEMA y'know.


On a technicality--yes, Bush was the only one who "appointed" him. The Senate may have confirmed him at a later date, but only GWB appointed.


You're missing something here shades....While Bush may appoint, for Brown's post senate confirmation is a MUST! Brown could not have started work without it. He couldn't "slide" through this if he wanted to! He was confirmed without one dissenting vote! So where were the libs and dems on this? Sitting around with their thumbs up their butt?
on Sep 13, 2005
You're missing something here shades....While Bush may appoint, for Brown's post senate confirmation is a MUST! Brown could not have started work without it. He couldn't "slide" through this if he wanted to! He was confirmed without one dissenting vote! So where were the libs and dems on this? Sitting around with their thumbs up their butt?


Did you read the part about the "technicality?" I didn't miss it--I was simply pointing out that while the point stood, the word choice did not.
on Sep 13, 2005
"Political patronage is not new with the Bush Administration."---ColGene

Political patronage is not new with ANY administration.
Hell, in 1862 Abraham Lincoln complained that there were "too many pigs for the tits"----in other words, too many people who supported him in various ways were now coming to him for too few jobs.
on Sep 13, 2005
Hey col.....You're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem. I'm guessing in your case and that of your 2 running mates it's the later not the former.
on Sep 15, 2005
Look at bush yall see how things are going since november of last year his cheated re election nothing has been good! Him and his dad do njot know how to run a country;)
on Sep 15, 2005
"When the Senate questions the background of a Bush appointee, the White House refuses to provide all the information like in the Bolton case."

But he's in there.
Off topic, yes, but let me ask this:

What is it about you people that you don't want someone in the UN who might actually hold them accountable and help whip things into shape? They've never done anything, in their entire 60-year history, of any real and lasting relevance. They're a joke.
Kofi Anan and his family would give the Carlo Gambino "Family" a run for its money. Why does the Left resist someone who might make some positive changes in the UN?
on Sep 15, 2005
Look at bush yall see how things are going since november of last year his cheated re election nothing has been good! Him and his dad do njot know how to run a country;)


Can you please provide documented proof of how he "cheated"?
on Sep 15, 2005

Look at bush yall see how things are going since november of last year his cheated re election nothing has been good! Him and his dad do njot know how to run a country;)


If that's the "best" you can come up with, then piss off! Because this is nothing but "HORSE MANURE"!
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4