Thursday, November 01, 2012

Not from The Onion: Michael Brown on the response to Sandy

By Michael J.W. Stickings and Mustang Bobby


I've always thought that Brown was Bush's convenient scapegoat after Katrina, even if it was clear that he wasn't at all qualified for the job and didn't do anywhere near a good job, let alone a heckuva one. He and I even had some e-mail exchanges several years ago after I published a post at The Moderate Voice (somewhat) defending him. He's a nice guy, or at least he was to me, and he seemed like a thoughtful man.

But this... this is just stupid, not to mention unnecessarily partisan (and self-defensive) at a time when what is needed, as Chris Christie knows, isn't division but unity. And if he's really having a hard time figuring out the difference between Benghazi and Sandy, perhaps he should think a little harder. One involves trying to gether meaningful intelligence after a sudden uprising/attack in a dangerous foreign location, while the other involves responding, with measures already in place, to the devastation caused by a storm that everyone knew was coming, along the rather less foreign eastern seabord of the United States.

If you have trouble getting your head around that, you shouldn't be commenting publicly about anything, especially if you didn't have much credibility to begin with.



Michael ("Heckuvajob Brownie") Brown, failed ex-head of FEMA under George W. Bush who completely screwed up Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts, on President Obama's response to Hurricane Sandy:

"One thing he's gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly when in... Benghazi, he went to Las Vegas?" Brown says. "Why was this so quick?... At some point, somebody's going to ask that question... This is like the inverse of Benghazi."

Yeah: he's saying President Obama responded too quickly.

There's never a large polo mallet around when you need one.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share


Post a Comment

<< Home