Thomas L. Friedman: 9/11, 8/29

[question everything]

Thomas L. Friedman: 9/11, 8/29

New York Times
Published September 11, 2005

(snip)

Well, if 9/11 is one bookend of the Bush administration, Katrina may be the other. If 9/11 put the wind at Bush's back, Katrina's put the wind in his face. If the Bush-Cheney team seemed to be the right guys to deal with Osama, they seem exactly the wrong guys to deal with Katrina -- and all the rot and misplaced priorities it's exposed here at home.

(snip)

And then there are the president's standard lines: "It's not the government's money; it's your money," and, "One of the last things that we need to do to this economy is to take money out of your pocket and fuel government." Maybe Bush will now also tell us: "It's not the government's hurricane -- it's your hurricane."

(snip)

The Bush team has engaged in a tax giveaway since 9/11 that has had one underlying assumption: There will never be another rainy day. Just spend money. You knew that sooner or later there would be a rainy day, but Karl Rove has assumed it wouldn't happen on Bush's watch -- that someone else would have to clean it up. Well, it did happen on his watch.

Besides ripping away the roofs of New Orleans, Katrina ripped away the argument that we can cut taxes, properly educate our kids, compete with India and China, succeed in Iraq, keep improving the U.S. infrastructure and take care of a catastrophic emergency -- without putting ourselves totally into the debt of Beijing.

So many of the things the Bush team has ignored or distorted under the guise of fighting Osama were exposed by Katrina: its refusal to impose a gasoline tax after 9/11, which would have begun to shift our economy much sooner to more fuel-efficient cars, helped raise money for a rainy day and eased our dependence on the world's worst regimes for energy; its refusal to develop some form of national health care to cover the 40 million uninsured; its insistence on cutting more taxes, even when that has contributed to incomplete levees and too small an Army to deal with Katrina, Osama and Saddam at the same time. As my Democratic entrepreneur friend Joel Hyatt once remarked, the Bush team's philosophy since 9/11 has been: "We're at war. Let's party."

Well, the party is over. If Bush learns the lessons of Katrina, he has a chance to replace his 9/11 mandate with something new and relevant. If that happens, Katrina will have destroyed New Orleans, but helped to restore America. If Bush goes back to his politics as usual, he'll be thwarted at every turn. Katrina will have destroyed a city and a presidency.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5606300.html

[wtmusic]

1. Boy, next thing you know

Tom will be telling us the Iraq war was a mistake (right now, it's apparently just not having enough money to give Halliburton).

[Maestro]

2. The wheels are flying off fast for this admin.

The roll-over of their humvee is approaching. Let's hope there are no survivors. Good read, btw, and not something I would usually expect from Friedman.

[otohara]

3. Well Then I Will Read It

based on your review. But what does he mean by: "If the Bush-Cheney team seemed to be the right guys to deal with Osama"

Did they deal with Osama ? Osama morphed into Saddam...

[question everything]

4. Yes, the first part of the piece (which I snipped)

was a glory hymn for them, at least for Afghanistan.

But I was impressed with the second part. I think most of us will be happy if Bush will leave office even now. Of course, as someone recently pointed out - this will mean Cheney as a president (ugh!)

[bemildred]

5. Damn, for a second I thought it was his obituary. nt