The New York Times once again the framing of record

http://nytimes.com/2005/09/09/national/nationalspecial/09military.html?ei=5094&en=29839ee3ffe8c2ba&hp=&ex=1126238400&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1126238047-S23bBqnAG4ioB3hyOwxpUA

To seize control of the mission, Mr. Bush would have had to invoke the Insurrection Act, which allows the president in times of unrest to command active-duty forces into the states to perform law enforcement duties.

"While troops can conduct relief missions without the legal authority of the Insurrection Act, Pentagon and military officials say that no active-duty forces could have been sent into the chaos of New Orleans on Wednesday or Thursday without confronting law-and-order challenges."

Looks like they needed a little law and disorder, like the propaganda that was so widely reported in our free anything but "dead bodies" press. In the end, the hype reported was hardly worth the coverage it got; especially over the pain and suffering being had by the overwhelming majority of our fellow citizens abandoned by our lovely corporate controlled Government. We saw frames defining credibility such as looters and takers; maybe they thought we wouldn't see the color coding.

then comes the spin.

"Can you imagine how it would have been perceived if a president of the United States of one party had pre-emptively taken from the female governor of another party the command and control of her forces, unless the security situation made it completely clear that she was unable to effectively execute her command authority and that lawlessness was the inevitable result?" asked one senior administration official, who spoke anonymously because the talks were confidential.

Here they go again flip flopping making it about one of their old standby issues “Is a woman good enough”. She fucking put Bush in his place, and this guy (meaning me) has the lack of ego and enough respect for people to see when someone does a great job; you go lady. The frame: Was she good enough? You know this is all suggestive garbage they shovel for distraction right?

Then they talk about all the problems that frame fault away from the untouchable gay-waving frat-boy cheerleader who has a website devoted to his overtly strange obsession with the word fabulous. It's all a distraction, that keeps you away from what went wrong.

There is another tidbit for the bullshit highlight reel:

The federal government rewrote its national emergency response plan after the Sept. 11 attacks, but it relied on local officials to manage any crisis in its opening days.

Did you get that? They said DHS fucked up without admitting it, when they rewrote the plan to manage an emergency after Bush's first big failure to respond. These smart guys gave themselves a pretty wide birth of time to respond. Something they obviously utilized in this operation in order to manage the perception of chaos. The chaos wasn’t caused by a lack of security it was caused by the effect of the devastation and those responsible neglected to pay attention to the nuance; somewhere the president has repeatedly said he doesn’t like to get lost. Well that dislike just killed many Americans.

Instead of framing it why don't I just quote my thesaurus at dictionary.com, Negligence the word is found as entries in the following list of words.

disregard, fault, forgetfulness, indifference, injustice, lapse, laziness, malpractice, neglect, violation,

One of those is what happened in this debacle, and now the author of this crap printed in the "Paper of Record" wants to start playing media musical chairs with this reality and who it belongs too at the end of the day.

It would have worked too if they had not been caught playing the advocate of the chaos. You know the frames of "we didn't know who had control so we couldn't accept help". 10 days later the squishy looking fruity-boy that never answers jackshit states "It was always the presidents responsibility" after being asked "Who was ultimately responsible?" enough that you stopped hearing the question. Timelines show the presidents merry men turning away food, medicine, and hundreds of rescue workers; because they didn’t know their boss was in charge. Can you tell me how that is anyone’s fault but the frat-boy who wanted to grow up to be “Commander in Chief”?

If they made the 1% sound like the 99% than could have invoked law granting Federal control (which governor was denying them).

the tension, the presence of the armed soldiers from the moment they arrived.

with all levels of government. Et tu, New York Times?

FEMA was called in. They have the authority to bring in troops, declare martial law and all the rest. Once they are called in--and they were--they have the ability to handle all aspects of the emergency.

I guess Rove has been running around......

We've lost our press.

Do you think the reason there are more choices, more channels of so called news is there is more information or, to spread the limited information over a greater area?

with Bolton & the UN, Brown was there to privatize & diminish the functions of the institution FEMA. Then they sat back and watched as christian groups and private enterprise were supposed to pick up in the void.

None of them could. Because they didn't know what they were doing. Because FEMA was not doing its job. Because they didn't want FEMA to be doing great work.

Bush has at his fingertips in an emergency, a thousand people as brilliant and affable as Bill Clinton. If communication was lacking, on Tuesday the President could have sent out an pile of envoys with professional experience to fix it & cut through any red tape. He sent one. Honore. One fixer.

I think Bush simply didn't care. And was on the phone to CEOS and such when he was not playing the guitar. We know that is what Cheney does all day. This was a big opportunity for them.

They sat on all their power & expertise. And they all sang the same song ... so you know it was going around on Monday & Tuesday "oh - they choose to stay - their fault - tough love". Look back at the talking points on those days. Look at their actions: ain't no way they were going to let the financial markets crash because of this...keep the market going....Condi shop...Rummy to a baseball game...Bush playing the guitar.

They, and/or their minions saw what was starting to happen and it isn't that what they saw was "black people". It was that they didn't notice was that there were old people, children & babies. And still harped along with "they were told to leave - and the economy will be fine - please no worries in the capital markets" The problem isn't racism. It's another problem entirely.

And still no feds. No FEMA. In spite of the Governor envoking the LAW allowing FEMA to do what it needed to.