Whatever Happened to New Orleans?
This is my last of five nights in The Big Easy.
It's been great being a tourist because there is simply no city in America more gracious to visitors than Nawlins. Gracious and grateful. Because, unfortunately, the simple act of buying a chickory-laced cafe au lait and a plate of powdery beignets at the Cafe Du Monde still feels like an act of solidarity with a forgotten and devastated land than it does an oblivious moment of summer frivolity.
We didn't come here this week to preach politics or to be preached at. And most of our time has, indeed, been spent scarfing oysters at Acme, listening to the cajuns sing at Mulate's, devouring the best rack of lamb ever at Adolfo's, catching an unforgettable all-night jam in the Merigny, and tripping out three nights in a row on both Big Al Carson and Marva Wright.
But three years after the disaster, Katrina still festers, burns and pervades the lives and thoughts of those still here. And those who have come back. Even Wright's roof-shaking, improvised and elongated rendition of the old standard, A Change Is Gonna Come, last Sunday night to close out a set on Bourbon Street, turned into a wrenching, inflamed anthem to persistence and resistance bringing down the house with a repeated vow to "stand, stand, stand, stand, stand."
Yes, there's been rebuilding. Even a certain rebirth. But with 200,000 people still displaced -- about 40% of the pre-Katrina population-- most experts now agree that what you see is what you get i.e. that the recovery and return has now peaked and plateaued. In sum, the city is stunted at about 2/3 of what it was before 2005.
In the meantime, there remain tens of thousands of blighted and abandoned properties. The infamous Lower 9th Ward still looks much like post-war Berlin. Devastated. Bombed out. Ghostly quiet.
Except here there is no Marshall Plan. More to the point. There ain't nothing. "There is no plan that I know of," flatly said the Grayline bus driver who took us on the still-going Katrina Tour as we traversed block after block of almost desolate urban landscape.
And that's what truly boggles the mind about this place. Not the scale of destruction itself. That's pretty easy to understand once you grasp the odd topography and chart out the failures of the levees and canals and pumping systems.
What's unfathomable is with what indifference this richest country in the world tolerated the destruction and virtual abandonment of one of its most historic and beloved cities. The failure of political imagination is simply incalculable. How did rebuilding New Orleans somehow not become a national crusade?
You would think that even the most craven and opportunistic of administrations would have rushed in to at least capitalize on reconstruction. Anyone with a real brain in the White House could have taken a lesson, say, from Argentina's Juan Domingo Peron, who built a still-standing now 60 year old political empire out of providing massive doses of post-earthquake populist relief.
What it costs to sustain the stupidity of the Iraq War for a couple of months -- $5 or $10 billion-- could have been poured into here. Tens of thousands of locals could have been gainfully employed in rebuilding their own city and not just warehoused in carcinogenic trailers (from which the most vulnerable are now being formally evicted).
Perhaps I have imbided one Mint Julep too many to indulge in such bleeding heart sentimentality. It seems just a tad unrealistic, doesn't it, to harbor --even for a moment-- such grandiose expectations.
Turns out, that such reconstruction isn't even being carried out in the precise place where we have sunk all that cash-- hundreds times that amount of cash. And blood.
Take your choice. New Orleans or Iraq. Shameful monuments to the moral bankruptcy and total failure of both domestic and foreign policy.
August 5th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
What happened to New Orleans is that the obviously inevitable finally happened. A category 5 storm surge (in a category 3 wind hurricane) overwhelmed all the defenses and massively flooded the city.
I, too, have toured the damaged areas and the devastation is amazing.
However, rebuilding in most of those areas is just plain silly, unless one believe The Big Easy deserves Holland sized dikes. And if it is to be rebuilt, who should pay for it? How about the people who insist on living in the flood area?
The heart of New Orleans is alive and well. Historic French Quarter wasn’t damaged. That’s hardly surprising since it is where the city was first built – on a high spot because the Indians warned the Spanish about flooding.
The city isn’t virtually abandoned. The port is doing fine. The tourist areas are doing fine. Downtown is fine. It is the residential areas, built in the wrong place, that are devastated.
New Orleans is a gigantic example of human hubris and of the natural human tendency to discount low probability (”while I’m here”) disasters.
If you want to go down there and rebuild – have at it. I’ve helped the refugees, but I see no sense in subsidizing stupidity.
BTW… Hi Marc, LTNS
August 6th, 2008 at 4:21 am
I hope you meant “chickory-laced,” not “hickory-laced.” Don’t want no hickory in my coffee.
August 6th, 2008 at 6:29 am
Welcome back, Marc. Thanks for this excellent piece.
August 6th, 2008 at 7:32 am
I mentioned it long ago here, but I drove along the Mississippi coast after Hurricane Camille hit. The power of Katrina was considerably less than the power of that storm, and the destruction of Camille was incredible. But, the people of Mississippi recovered without all the hand wringing and gnashing of teeth, just as Biloxi and Mobile after Katrina and other hurricanes.
The difference with New Orleans seems to be the stupid politicians of the city and state who put flood control money towards stupid projects and were so stupid that they let their stupid school busses get flooded rather than use them to evacuate the stupid people who were stupid enough to live in reclaimed swampland and were too stupid to get out themselves.
Look at maps from the 1700 and 1800’s showing the low areas. The city was expanded on top of the swampland, so what do you expect? We shouldn’t be stupid enough to rebuild in the same areas. If today’s stupid “environmentalists” lived back then, they would rename the swamps and call them wetlands and would fight any building in the area, because stupid mosquitoes and alligators lived there. So, don’t rebuild in those areas. Mosquitoes are people, too.
Oh, yeah, I forgot…Bush bombed the levees, but that’s just a stupid excuse.
August 6th, 2008 at 7:52 am
Iraq and Katrina. Made me think of the Thomas Frank interview about his new book The Wrecking Crew:
He argues that stories of incompetence in government from Katrina relief to reconstruction in Iraq are no accident. He says because conservatives don’t believe in government when elected they systematically degrade and dismantle the machinery of state. Thomas frank as a regular columnist for The Wall Street Journal…
August 6th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Mr. Kowalski beat me to it. The folk at Cafe du Monde (who ship their coffee world wide and I happen to have a can of it in my cabinet which I enjoy a tad each morning) would not be happy with that spelling. I suggest you correct it before some mad cajun comes after you!
August 6th, 2008 at 8:08 am
John Moore repeats many of the same erroneous tropes and bullshit that have characterized the typical right-wing approach to New Orleans.
(Judging by his blog and the semi-fascist assortment of links on it, Moore is a typical right-wing know-nothing blowhard. But I digress.)
First, a nitpicking on the cause of the flood. The flooding was due to faulty levees. Get it? Levees that didn’t meet their design standard. Levees that had been built in response to the LAST flood, forty years prior.
Second. The Big Easy DOES deserve “Holland sized dikes.” It’s not that difficult. Dutch experts who have toured the area have been quoted as saying it wouldn’t even be that expensive. Return on investment would of course be phenomenal. Simple solution: fire the Army Corps of Engineers and hire the Dutch. Fire the incompetent cause of the disaster and hire proven problem-solvers.
(Of course, to pick up Marc’s reference to Iraq, we can note the US resistance to non-US contractors; same problem here.)
As for the residential areas, to say they are all “built in the wrong place” and “devastated” is to exhibit the typical glib ignorance of right-wing talking points. Some areas are devastated. Some aren’t. Some are in-between these extremes. The devastated areas were devastated by FEDERAL INCOMPETENCE. Get it, Moore? It was a FEDERAL FLOOD. This is a key point that so many people fail to understand.
Note to Marc: Big Al Carson and Marva Wright were the best you can do? Hit me up next time you’re in town and I’ll clue you in to something better than the usual touristy bullshit.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:16 am
I think those who want to see the flood zones in New Orleans rebuilt ought to relocate there and grab themselves some great bargains……using their dime and their financial risk.
The sentimental idealist always want to use your money to pursue their ideal.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Matter is a resident of New Orleans. Read his comment with the understood self-interest.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:30 am
John Moore, did you know that you’re a fascist? Well, you are according to the commenter, matter, whose blog states: Degenerate Matter: “Fair and balanced commentary on current events….” and who links to David Corn and Daily Kos.
matter: Judging by his blog and the semi-fascist assortment of links on it, Moore is a typical right-wing know-nothing blowhard.
When logic fails and emotion rules, lefties call conservatives bad names.
Let’s see what happens when liberals are in charge of flood control….
Fischer: Outrage in Idaho: Feds send man to prison for protecting town from flooding
As George Washington said, “Government is like fire, a handy servant but a dangerous master.”
August 6th, 2008 at 8:51 am
>>>Matter is a resident of New Orleans. Read his comment with the understood self-interest.
Thanks for the textbook example of argumentum ad hominem
August 6th, 2008 at 8:56 am
@Woody
As George Washington said, “Government is like fire, a handy servant but a dangerous master.”
So what crystal clear and level headed response can you offer to Thomas Frank’s premise that conservatives are dismantling government well beyond “handy servant” status, and delivering it to incompetent private contractors?
August 6th, 2008 at 9:28 am
A quick back of the envelope calculations on the labor force needed to rebuild the homes destroyed in 3 years.
Assumptions:
200,000 homes destroyed
200,000 dollars/house
100,000 dollars of labor/house
50 dollars/hour of labor
100,000 dollars of labor/house * 1 hour/50 dollars = 2000 hours/house
2000 hours/house x 200,000 houses = 400,000,000 man hours
400,000,000 man hours * 1 year / 2000 hours = 200,000 man years
200,000 man years / 3 years = 66,667 men
So a rough guess of 66,667 laborers working 3 years, about 10% of the entire U.S. construction labor force. Just for the housing stock. Logistically I doubt it would be possible to rebuild in a 3 year timeframe, even if it were to become our national crusade.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:58 am
First, the whole New Orleans thing was a tragedy and the Federal response was criminal.
But, why do we think we have some natrual right to live in areas that are regulraly flooded? The casual reading I’ve done on the topic suggests that the whole system of dikes and levees the length of the Mississippi is making the flooding problem much worse by destroying the natural forces that dampen the severity of floods.
That may not have been specifically relevant in the case of Katrina (but maybe it was), but I think any place that needs an elaborate set of levees to keep it from drowning is probably not a place we should be building a lot of houses.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:31 am
The future of New Orleans…. They can copy commies or oil countries. Given the guilt money being extracted from taxpayers, New Orleans could outdo Dubai.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:14 am
Matter: lots of ad hominem commentary, little content.
Here’s more information about your city, hurricanes and your government (I’m an engineer, and I know quite a bit about Hurricanes too).
The hurricane was category 5 for a while before the winds suddenly slowed down just as it hit. Furthermore, it was fairly big. That meant that a large amount of momentum was transferred from the winds to a lot of waterwater. When the winds slowed, there wasn’t time for the water to transfer the momentum back. Hence the storm surge was the equivalent of a category 5 storm (in fact, it was a record or near record storm surge for an Atlantic Hurricane).
The levee/flood-wall system was designed for a category 3 storm. I once attended a talk by Dr. Bob Sheets, head of the National Hurricane Center at the time, who said that a category three hurricane or above, headed for New Orleans, was his biggest worry. This was a category 5.
The night before the storm hit, I told my wife that the next day, New Orleans would be history. Actually, New Orleans got by easy – if it had the Category 5 winds AND the Category 5 storm surge, rather than just the surge, the destruction and casualty rate would have been dramatically worse.
As for who is responsible… blame can be laid all over the place. The primary responsibility has to lie with those who chose to live in an area the was GUARANTEED to suffer catastrophic flooding, those who failed to educate them, and those who enabled this by building enough levees to create a false sense of security.
Understand this: the flood control system was NEVER designed to handle a category 5 storm surge. Never. It was guaranteed to fail. Furthermore, when the system requires many, many miles of structures to perform beyond specifications, it is guaranteed to fail – even with an event that is just at the specified maximum level, because a single failure would cause a disaster. One foot out of many miles of system was all that was needed. But this system failed in almost 30 places – in some, the water simply was higher than the top of the structures (such as the east). In others, the structures failed – partly because engineers did not have experience with flood walls under these conditions, and failed to anticipate effects such as major temporary overtopping from wave action in the canals. There were structures which had sunk into the ground a ways. There were structures that were poorly designed. There were structures that were improperly built (did I mention that New Orleans was extremely corrupt?). All of this should not be surprising.
Furthermore, the levee system is a political creation. It wasn’t built by Republicans or Democrats, it was built by both, and managed both by the Corps of Engineers and the local levee boards – notorious for their corruption (well, the Big Easy has long been the most corrupt major city in the US and has the highest murder rate).
Furthermore, as you know, the I-10 causeway collapsed. That wasn’t Corps of Engineers. It failed because of the unprecedented surge flowing into Lake Ponchartraine – the surge which then flowed into the City (of course, the eastern part of the city got the surge directly).
The local government failed in almost every way possible. It failed to prepare for the emergency, either in urban planning, preparing residents, or having adequate emergency services resources.
Even such obvious things as having critical pumps and generators above flood level were not done. Having radio systems that could withstand the storm and prolonged power outages was another obvious need (and I have built such radio systems here in Arizona. Some can go 4 weeks without power, and are hardened against nuclear EMP – and these were built and financed by hobbyists.
The city’s hurricane emergency plan failed FEMA standards and was not certified. Furthermore, the city did not follow it, and in fact pulled it from its web site a week or so after the storm hit.
The city government was so unprepared that top city officials had to kick people out of their rooms in the Hyatt to set up their emergency command posts. Then, when gangs started taking over the Hyatt, they had to flee to higher floors with the Chief of Police holding off armed gang members with his personal side arm. Of course, that city government couldn’t do anything anyway – the phones were out and the radio systems were out and the idiots didn’t even have enough batteries for their portable radios.
The Federal Government, which made mistakes (which is one reason conservatives view it as a last resort, not a first resort), still provided fantastic services. Department of Homeland Security’s Coast Guard had rescue helicopters flying before the storm was completely past. The Navy provided an amphibious task group that had full hospital facilities, lots of water, and more helicopters. FEMA, as is typical with bureaucracies (whether run by conservatives or progressives), had bureaucratic snafus.
Meanwhile, In Mississippi (and Woody, you should drive the coast again), 20 miles of coastline was swept clear of structures – even though most of those where high on pillars because of past experience (including Camille, which was had much higher winds than Katrina and almost as high a storm surge). Mississippi didn’t whine, cry racism and Federal failure and general act like the spoiled kids of the Louisiana and New Orleans government. They dealt with the disaster and moved on.
The moral of the story: don’t build in stupid places. Don’t ask others to pay for your mistakes (other than freely given charity, of which there was a whole lot). And don’t expect government at any level to do the right thing – it probably won’t, whether run by Republicans, Democrats or Fascists/Communists.
One final comment… the people of New Orleans actually did a remarkable job of evacuation – on their own. Once they knew they had to leave, they evacuated the city much faster than had been projected. The main help the government provided was the standard reversal of inbound lanes to increase outbound flow.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:33 am
“Matter: lots of ad hominem commentary, little content.”
This from a wingnut wind machine who compares Barack Obama to Stalin, Hitler and Saddam Hussein on his “Useless Tool” blog. Check it out.
This guy Moore may not attain the coherence of a “semi-fascist” but he unfortunately belongs to that cohort of tedious blowhards who – God Bless America – use the 1st Amendment to expel fecal matter and rely on the 2nd Amendment as penile implant.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:42 am
John Moore: further poorly-informed bloviations mixed with many non-factual claims. Ho-hum. Dismissed!
Woody: do note that the link to Kos describes them as “semi-blind Dem party sycophants” (i.e., for amusement only)
One more point for all of you to consider. Did you hear ANYONE, in the past several weeks, saying that the residents in Iowa and other flooded points along the Mississippi “shouldn’t have built there in the first place?” Or anything similar? Of course not. Right-wing twats like Moore like to pick on NOLA because they don’t like the (not all that) permissive culture here. They’re also far too uptight to live here. I suspect a lot of latent racism towards “chocolate city” plays a part in that too.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:47 am
Thank you, reg. Your usual personal attack completely discounts to liberals the accurate science and history that John Moore just provided and means that they must not rely on reality and logic.
Now, if we just added air to our tires, we could end the oil problem, stop global warming, and, therby, end hurricanes forever. In the meantime, New Orleans, build away! See you next hurricane.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
matter, I accept your explanation on the Kos link. I didn’t give it more than a glance.
matter: Did you hear ANYONE, in the past several weeks, saying that the residents in Iowa and other flooded points along the Mississippi “shouldn’t have built there in the first place?” Or anything similar?
Yep, I said it and heard a lot of others say it. The Mississippi River’s course has been artificially guided by levees up and down its length. Sooner or later, the river will win, as it always does.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Woody, today:
>>>…the accurate science and history that John Moore just provided…
Woody, August 15th, 2007:
>>>…I don’t read long comments. Normally 250-400 words is my limit…
Interesting.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
matter
Do you really think that just calling my statements ill informed is going to convince anyone. Perhaps you could try to refute the information I provided.
As for flooding in other areas – yes, conservatives have long argued that people should assume responsibility for their own risk – whether they live in hurricane areas, flood areas or whatever, and whether their government is left or right. In the case of hurricanes, NO is far from the only offender. The cyclic hurricane lull of the 70s-90s led many to build in areas guaranteed to be eventually destroyed.
And humans being humans, whether these people are Republicans or Dems, they ask the guvmint for help.
For those who call me a Fascist, I would just point out that left wing Fascism has been far more prevalent and deadly than right wing Fascism, since Fascism was first invented.
And for Reg – you must be one miserable creature. Here it is, years since I last posted, and you are still full of hatred and vitriol.
The sad thing is that previous comments of yours have shown that you have the ability to make cogent arguments. It’s a shame you choose the low road instead.
Why don’t you follow the example of your fellow leftist and our host – Marc Cooper – and grow a sense of humor, grow some humanity, and use your talents more effectively?
Woody – we could get the air for our tires from Obama’s head. He has plenty of it up there.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Matter:
I grew up in a town located in a river valley which is a tributary of the Mississippi. Before I was born, the low lying areas regularly flooded. The Corps of Engineers has built a nice big wall on both sides of the Minnesota river there, so flood waters no longer spill over the banks.
I, for one, always wondered why people simply did not build their houses up on the hills. You either have to accept that you should live in another location, or from time to time you’re going to be the victim of a massive flood–in New Orleans, Iowa or wherever.
But as I said earlier, I’ve read that all this levee building makes things much worse downstream from where I grew up.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
“you are still full of hatred and vitriol”
Moore – you’re the asshat who in recent days scraped the bottom of your toilet to compare Obama to Stalin, et. al.
Go rot in hell with Corsi and the rest of your perverse and pathological ilk.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
“The sad thing is that previous comments of yours have shown that you have the ability to make cogent arguments. It’s a shame you choose the low road instead.”
Moore – you’re reaping what you sow. Why would I engage in civil discourse with pondscum ?
Now I’ve spent more time on this than it deserved.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
The Katrina affair simply pulled away the curtain and showed America the utter bankruptcy of modern American Conservatism. I have Dutch friends simply amazed at the incompetence shown there re the levees and dikes.
Marc want the Bushies indicted for war crimes. How about crimes against the American people?
Don’t know this Moore guy but he and Woody should answer a simple question. What is the purpose of Government? So far all I see is their desire to see it contnue as an ATM for the crony capitalists running it presently.
SalBass do you really think that, given the current status of the construction industry, 75,000 workers could have been found to rebuild NO?
August 6th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
And am I the only one who thinks that GWB’s speech in Thailand today denouncing the Chinese record on human rights will get a stony silence – if not a loud guffaw – from the rest of the world amazed that any administration like this would have the chutzpah (cojones?) to make such a speech?
August 6th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Guys, it’s chicory, not chickory.
And, hey, John Moore.
August 6th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Reg,
Care to share a link to your hyperbolic claim that I compare Obama to Stalin?
Hey, Jim.
August 6th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
MY hyperbolic claim ????
I’m ROFL…
Here’s the deranged putz JM on his blahg (click his name above for the link if it sounds so crazy you think I must be distorting, taking out of context or waxing “hyperbolic”):
“The similarity of (Obama’s) campaign to tyrannical cults of personality sends chills down my back…
“North Korea, Stalin, Saddam and most dramatically the Nazis did this same stuff.”
August 6th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
rlc: What is the purpose of Government?
We thought that you knew. Government should act as a nanny-state to take care of people from cradle to grave by taking the money and profit incentives away from the productive segment so as to appease the losers who would rather trade freedoms for security. Oh, and maybe it should provide for the common defense, make treaties, and facilitate interstate commerce–if it has time.
- – -
To enhance our abilities to understand each other, we should all sign up for this: New Grant Program For White Forgetfulness
For true Americans:
For whiney Americans:
You might see why I don’t like long comments. I tune them out and then have “white forgetfulness” about what was said at the first.
August 6th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Uh, oh. I might have to start temporarily pulling for Obama again.
Sen. Hillary Clinton Not Ruling Out Having Name Put Up for Vote in Denver
August 6th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
What if Al Qaida blew up the levees?
Would New Orleans have been safer that way?
August 6th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Reg,
I figured that’s what you would write. Too bad your comprehension skills are lacking tonite.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
No John, it’s too bad you’re a raving fucking lunatic…and so pathological that you accuse others of your own glaring sins.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Since Woody, et. al. desperately crave attention, they might note that Obama gave them a shout-out on the campaign trail:
http://tinyurl.com/5ltoh6
August 6th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
Well reg, if John is the raving lunatic, why are you the one behaving like one?
Seems like you’re the one that’s going off, pulling your hair, stomping your feet and other wise hurting yourself over someone, anyone as a matter of fact, that don’t agree with you.
Not normal…….and childish.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Some prick pontificating here – stupidly – compares Obama to Stalin on his blog and I’m “childish” for outing him as a crap merchant who deserves to be treated as such. Yeah Jim. Great insight. The last time he showed up and I clicked on his blog, he was suggesting that certain journalists should be shot for treason. Is there nothing that offends you ? Other than my pointing out the obvious.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
You want “not normal…childish”, Jim. Try this on…
Moore: “Woody – we could get the air for our tires from Obama’s head.”
Obama on the McCain/Woody/Moore cohort: “These people take pride in being ignorant.”
August 6th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
John “I approved this message” McCain will go down in history as the only Presidential aspirant ever who ended up looking like even more of an idiot than the vapid young woman who he mocked and used as a bimbo prop in his campaign ads:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/05/paris-hilton-responds-to_n_117137.html
August 6th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Reg, you can’t even stay on topic.
August 7th, 2008 at 5:52 am
reg: Obama on the McCain/Woody/Moore cohort: “These people take pride in being ignorant.”
Just another example of Obama being arrogant and elitist–or, as you leftists like to portray us, as Obama being uppity.
- – -
On the Paris Hilton ad, everyone liked it–even McCain folks. It’s just Paris doing what she does best–promoting herself. But, it’s good to know that the “intellectuals” backing Obama identify with her, which was McCain’s point.
August 7th, 2008 at 6:39 am
But, it’s good to know that the “intellectuals” backing Obama identify with her
If there was any actual proof of that you might have a point. All too typically you’re just extrapolating your own nonsense out of this.
August 7th, 2008 at 6:52 am
Here’s what really caused Katrina–it was Bill Clinton’s and Al Gore’s failure to do anything about global warming during the Clinton administration.
Global Warming Led to Katrina and ‘Black Hawk Down,’ Congressman Says
So, how can we spend some money to do something about this?
$500K to Inform African Americans on Global Warming
By ignoring blacks, who are disproportionately affected by global warming (it’s true!), Bill Clinton proved that he is a racist.
August 7th, 2008 at 7:25 am
“everyone liked it–even McCain folks”
If you believe that you really are as ignorant as you generally sound here – too stupid to know when your guy has been punked.
August 7th, 2008 at 7:34 am
Or, if you don’t believe it, you may be too emotional and left-wing to understand that it was all in fun. (Fun – Something that liberals can’t experience because they have to be miserable about everything.)
It’s not going to change anything, except maybe give McCain some votes from middle-aged people who are tired of Obama’s Hollywood style celebrity campaign.
August 7th, 2008 at 7:45 am
Well, you guys, if Reg is acting insane, there’s some case to be made here that he’s been driven to it.
I go peek at John Moore’s blog. (Yep: looks like he still thinks Lenin said or wrote “useful fools” somewhere — when there’s no evidence for that.) And what’s Moore’s idea of a scrumptious high-quality information morsel? Why, it’s somebody’s computation that proper tire inflation would save as much oil as the drilling Obama opposed — if we had 11,308 years to wait for those savings.
Hm. Really? Quoting from Moore’s source:
“ANWR: 10 billion barrels
“Outer Continental Shelf: 18 billion barrels (estimated; the actual total is undoubtedly much higher, since exploration has been banned)
“Oil shale: 1 trillion barrels
“So, on the above assumptions, it would take only 11,308 years of proper tire inflation to equal “all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling.” ”
Eh? Weren’t we talking only about OCS drilling, just a minute ago? How did oil shale creep in there, inflating the time-to-savings by about a factor of 30-50? Does oil shale extraction involve drilling? Well, it CAN ….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_shale_extraction#Economics
… if done “in situ”. For which we currently see a miniscule amount of commercial production, even with oil well over $100/bbl, when oil shale is supposedly economical somewhere around $40/bbl. However, it appears most of these in-situ techniques are in their infancy, and anyway, I don’t know of any plan to exploit offshore oil *shale* on the OCS. Besides, is extrapolating prices from the Canadian experience of cost reductions with oil sands reliable? After all, Alberta oil sands costs went the other way, if anything. They initially estimated oil sands as being profitable at about $20-$25/bbl, but that figure somehow crept up to $60. Whoa, too late for those poor investors who believed the elevator pitch, I guess! But we’ll let them come and watch our big steam shovels for free! Woo!
And is shale oil extraction worth doing anyway? Energy return on energy invested (EROEI) is maybe 3 to 4 (Royal Dutch Shell’s figures.) I guess if you’re REAL hard up for liquid transportation fuels. Otherwise, well … even wind power passed that EROEI range a lo-o-ong time ago, and is up around 15-20 last I checked.
And was Obama talking about only car drivers in the U.S.? Or (considering that what really matters is how OCS drilling would effect the *world* market oil prices) all car drivers the entire world? How many cars are there on the road, globally? How many will be on the road when OCS starts yielding significant amounts of oil (estimated as over a decade away)? Maybe over a billion? Yeah, the way things are going. And could that figure grow to 2 billion in the time it takes to drawn down all known OCS reserves? Maybe.
So maybe Obama’s figures exaggerate by a factor of 5-8 (or less)? Or rather, they overstate by about that much in what some of us would call Reality-Based Terms, terms in which you don’t offer an answer out to 5 significant digits when starting with parameters that could each be off by 50% or more. But what if you have a deeply felt *need* to ridiculously exaggerate Obama’s error (a need you would feel in proportion to your desperation to send up flak to cover for McCain’s much more numerous gaffs). Well, than, I say: just go for it. Yes, run with the absurdly precise “11,308 years” (which is somehow based on the absurdly *imprecise* 1 trillion barrels of oil shale.) You should especially indulge this strange need of yours if an additional source of motivation is a need to drive the reg’s of this world insane with your own brand of insanity. And you’ll have plenty of ammo in that fight, you’ll have a lotta crazy to pour on your adversary. After all, if you credulously regurgitate numbers like “11,308 years” on your blog just on some wingnut’s say-so, that makes you a wingnut too. No way around it.
August 7th, 2008 at 7:48 am
I don’t think it will swing McCain any “middle-aged people” he hadn’t already locked up with his appearances on Leno, “The Tony Danza Show” and Regis & Kathie Lee.
August 7th, 2008 at 8:03 am
Michael – anyone here who wasn’t drinking or dozing off also probably noticed that Moore’s entire argument about New Orleans was predicated on the “logic” that New Orleans never “deserved” adequate levee protection. I hope I don’t sound like an uppity Negro if I repeat the obvious: “These guys take pride in being ignorant.”
August 7th, 2008 at 9:09 am
reg, restating what was said earlier, the Indians warned early settlers about the flooding in lower parts of what is now New Orleans. Surely, somewhere along the line, someone recognized that half of the city was within the 500 year floodplain. Yet, they continued to move there–just like people live on the coasts where hurricanes hit.
When did these folks begin to believe that government was supposed to bail them out for their stupid moves? Why am I supposed to pay for something that isn’t an accident but a calculated risk that backfired? In that sense especially, the conclusion you attributed to John Moore isn’t off base.
Now, you folks in California who know that you’re living in an active earthquake zone, get out now or don’t expect me to pay for your informed decision to stay there when the big one hits.
August 7th, 2008 at 9:11 am
I sometimes feel bad that reg is always left to handle the intellectually dishonest crud tossed at him from the usual Tweedledee/dum suspects, but then I remember he’s a feisty sort, and hopefully finds some pleasure in these exchanges for his sake–I know I wouldn’t. Which brings me to my usual entreaty to our genial host: Marc, please find some honest conservative friends!. Seriously, your comment board is like a littered trashdump of the same prattling FOX-news-speak. I’d hate to see your comment section shut down, but I’m finding it takes a lot more wading through junk in order to find some intelligent interaction, so I usually just stick to your main text.
Anyway, reg, hang in there. And Michael Turner, thanks for chiming in with some rational thinking, but you’re probably wasting your time.
August 7th, 2008 at 9:14 am
“the conclusion you attributed to John Moore isn’t off base”
Explain that to the Dutch…
August 7th, 2008 at 9:33 am
reg, you are such an idiot. The Dutch were under pressure to expand their crowded land area into the sea, which is different than moving into a swamp. Plus, the Dutch did it with proper equipment–like wooden shoes. I propose that we compromise on building larger levees or windmills and, instead, give wooden shoes to all the residents of New Orleans–and, oh, a Dutchboy to stick his finger in a dyke.
BTW, the Dutch had their share of major catastrophes and it took them a fortune to establish a good, but not foolproof, method to prevent such recurrences. To me, it’s not the worth the money in N.O., because there is plenty of good land available in nearby areas.
Give the swamps back to nature. Alligators and mosquitoes don’t demand tax money and they don’t vote.
August 7th, 2008 at 9:56 am
It’s not so much about absolute ignorance. Woody lived in NOLA. From a civil engineering point of view, I don’t suppose there’s anything wrong with Moore’s analysis. The source of differences here is rather with how one might reason from differing premises about government and the terms of social contract expressed or implied by a government’s actions, or (as the case may be) inaction.
Reg, I say we make a deal with Moore and Woody, in the interests of a unified outlook. Tit for tat. Here it is:
(tit) WE will admit they have a point that Katrina flooding was merely the just desserts of the New Orleans refugees, for their utter and absolute stupidity.
(tat) THEY will admit that Americans had it coming with 9/11, because they voted for Dubya, a really dumb guy who obviously didn’t much care about serious and credible warnings from much smarter people, indicating that Al Qaeda was planning a major attack.
The basic principle here: in a democracy, the people get the government they deserve. Therefore, when anything bad happens to us that provably stems from any failure of government, it’s really only because we deserved it, because we’re the people, and democracy is government by the people, right?
It’s the ultimate in personal responsibility — you don’t even have to do anything wrong to be punished for your sins. You could be 11 years old, and if your house floated away and you had to paddle through sewage to get to safety, all that suffering is still your own damn fault, simply for being born a citizen in a democracy.
Yep. Sounds fair to me.
August 7th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Woody – a hint. Don’t start comments that devolve into sheer idiocy with the admonition that the person you’re responding to is “such an idiot.” Frankly, if I were you I wouldn’t use the word “idiot” in any of my comments. Sort of like if I were some narcissistic schmuck who showed up every time he had the chance on Letterman, Leno, Conan, Saturday Night Live, The View, 24, even The Tony Danza Show and…yes…Wedding Crashers, not to mention being the subject of a Hollywood biopic, I wouldn’t rag on anyone else for acting like a celebrity.
August 7th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Wow. Michael `DeTocqueville’ Turner!
August 7th, 2008 at 10:39 am
Michael Turner,
Once again you engage in deflecting the discussion (what does the content of my blog have to do with Katrina?). Presumably you believe attacks on those who contradict you are the best way to make your point.
In other words, if you can’t deal with the messenger, attack the messenger. It was the ferocity and preponderance of that kind of behavior that caused me to leave this blog in disgust a few years ago.
Perhaps you prefer to have only an echo chamber here. From the bad behavior of *some* of the leftist commenters here, that is the only logical conclusion.
Finally, in the last comment, you take our position to an illogical extreme.
Your behavior is that of a troll, not one who is interested in discussion of issues.
August 7th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Turner:
Great post!
Woody, I used to hold out hope for some rationality from you, but that hope fades fast.
I’m glad reg takes it upon himself to knock Woody in the teeth–usually I just end up rolling my eyes. For example, listening to the sheer hypocrisy of Woody calling Obama an elitist. I just can’t muster the will to care. Plus, it’s an insult without any teeth, and it doesn’t mean anything. What is he an elitist about? Wine? Suits? Political philosophy? Thomas Jefferson was an elitist, and I’d take him back any day (minus the slaves of course).
We’ve had enough of aw-shucks, down-home, just-folks presidents for a while haven’t we? But I know Woody will not possibly admit what a disaster this president has been. The budget deficit, the violation of the constitution, directing torture, ignoring Congress, signing statements…none of it elicits even the slightest flutter in his heart. He has the temerity to say that liberals prefer safety over freedom, when it’s been his boy that has done all of the damage.
Tell a lie, make sure it’s a big one, cover your ears, and then just keep yelling in the face of all facts. That seems to be the method he employs. Whatever.
August 7th, 2008 at 10:45 am
I was in New Orleans during and after Katrina.
The levees that broke were not even topped.
The pilings were only 10-12 feet deep instead of the recommended 25.
Reports od seepage had regularly been published before Katrina and we were regularly told that it was normal by the local politicians and by the Army Corps.
Once the levess broke, after beginning an attempt to fill it the breaks the effort was called off and the various govt agencies let the city flood.
No food, water, or medical supplies were provided till Friday after the flooding and then only in very limited areas.
Peple who wanted to bring in food, etc. were prevented from doing so by the National Guard.
We were all told we had to leave even though many of us lived on high ground and had adequate supplies.
The water system was intentionally turned off at the order of our Gvernor Blanco even though the water system was not threatened by the floding. It is a self contained system taking in water from the Mississippi. Leaks in the system cause water to flow out, not contaminated water to flow in.
The electricity could have been restored in 2 days in the French Quarter and oother areas that has underground utilities but it was intentionally kept off.
The land line phnes were blocked from making outgoing calls but I was able to call out using an 800 number on a calling card.
We were all treated like we were criminals or potential criminals by the state police and the govt officials. Most of the local police I found to be helpful.
But when Bush, Blanc, Nagin, et all started calling for “shot to kill” on “suspicion” starting early Thursday 99/1) morning I knew it was time to escape.
I say escape because roadblocks existed all over and one could just as well be arrested as let out of the city.
The group I left with on Fri afternoon was held at gunpoint for about 10-15 minutes before we were allowed to leave (and we were all white and well dressed).
The various levels of Govt caused the flooding (except for the lower 9th ward which flooded because a very large barge got loose and busted the canal walls overloking the lower 9th) and then the same govt officials crated the post Katrina crises and exodus.
August 7th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Oh, on the name of my blog. Lenin’s alleged statement is usually translated as “Useful Idiots.” That was already taken, so I used an alternate translation – “Useful Fools.” There is some dispute about the provenance of the term, as Wikipedia notes.
NBD.
August 7th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Les, well, there’s government for you. The next time you have a flood, contract for help from Blackwater. Thank goodness you were white so that you could get out. My question would be why you were there and didn’t leave earlier.
- – -
Michael Turner (and, John Moore, MT is one of the few libs who can be reasonable), on your compromise, let’s split it this way. Neither the residents of New Orleans are responsible for the flood suffereing nor is Bush responsible for 9-11. The real culprit is Bill Clinton.
On the flood, Clinton did nothing to stop global warming which caused Katrina and he did not build up the levees when he was President. On 9-11, he put a wall between communications of the FBI with the CIA, did not take OBL when offered to him, treated the first WTC bombing as a domestic police issue, and had Sandy Berger steal documents from the LoC to conceal Clinton’s complacency and negligence.
So, there you go.
August 7th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Okay, I’m tired of this. You guys take it.
August 7th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Taking Woody’s definition of what “Government” is for as the minimal “provide for the Common defense” etc. this crowd failed miserably. Remember the PDB “OBL Determined to Attack in US?” They simply had no clue.
To Woody Et Al. I know you take pride in being ignorant of anything literary (see WitnessLA) and also deride keeping tire pressure up (maybe you ride on wagon wheels!) but a simple geography course would tell you why NO is where it is. See there this waterway system – the Mississippi/Missouri/Ohio – that drains 2/3 of the continent and provides the cheapest route for the products of that region to reach a deepwater port. And that port? No prizes for getting it in one!
August 7th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Someone upstream conflates oil shale with drilling on the OCS. Sorry they are two different things. And the biggest booster of oil shale (or tar sands) is a DEMOCRAT – Montana Governor Switzer. Course there is a problem with it since the process uses a lot of water but a little history here – when the Reagan “Revolution” came into being in 1980 these “Rebels” – as one of their first acts in power – not only defended renewable energy research but also abandoned oil shale technology as well.
America went into a dreamworld then and is just now seeing reality bite once again. But the pride of the GOP in being ignorant of anything that smacks of science would do the Nazis – with their denunciation of “Jewish Science” – proud!
August 7th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Reaganuts “defended renewable energy research” is surely “defunded” – right ?
August 7th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
The tire controversy – apparently it’s wingnuts vs. the Bush Admnistration on whether Obama’s comments on the McCain offshore fallacy were accurate, with the Bushies supporting…Barack:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1829354,00.html
Of course Time magazine is a marxist rag, so this could just be an Orwellian Big Lie, kinda like Staliin et. al. Probably need to hang more journalists, per John Moore’s prediliction.
August 7th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
You’re right – it was defunded.
August 7th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
BTW Ijust learned that the person hired by the Chinese to plan their Olympic venues was Albert Speer Jr. Guess there’s no Leni Junior to record the events.
Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert? Who needs ‘em!
August 7th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
So who is playing the Riefenstahl role… NBC?
August 7th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
“Presumably you believe attacks on those who contradict you are the best way to make your point. In other words, if you can’t deal with the messenger, attack the messenger.”
Actually, John, you’ll see that I take you as a reasonably reliable messenger of civil engineering issues in NOLA and Katrina. And I do that because, on those issues, you sound reasonable. Ideologically, we obviously have some differences, however. And your ideology taints your engineer’s objectivity to a surprising degree for such an obviously intelligent individual.
Did you inspect the computation that led to someone’s claim that proper tire inflation would lead to an 11,308 year time-to-savings of oil? Nope. You just credulously repeated it. So who’s really in the “echo chamber” you accuse me of being in?
Is it an attack on a messenger to point out that the messenger is not a reliable source? Is it “trolling”? Whoa. In that case, Wikipedia must be the biggest trolling operation ever, with its curious emphasis on citing reliable sources. No wonder Wikipedia’s Al-Gore-lovin’ article on Global Climate Change is total bunk. It had to run the gauntlet of a thousand shrieking trolls demanding citations from reliable sources! How can The Truth ™ stand up to such punishment!
August 8th, 2008 at 12:14 am
Michael, I apologize. You did grant my engineering comments credibility, and I forgot to mention it. That was in error. You are not one of the wing nuts on here, and my exposure to them may have left me a bit over-sensitive.
But when you wander off to my blog and bring back something that is utterly off topic (like my fun little post on tire inflation – which was never meant to be rigorous), well… that’s attacking the messenger.
As for Wikipedia, it’s a great resource, created with great intentions and ideals, but is not reliable on controversial issues, including Climate Change. Furthermore, it’s source policy automatically biases it towards whatever view the MSM has (which many commenters here think is towards the right, btw).
Those who understand science recognize that consensus is an irrelevant issue in determining scientific validity. But Wiki, by its source policy, is biased towards the consensus of those who publish in certain places.
Also, Wikipedia is subject to O’Sullivan’s First Law.
We could go into the global warming debate, but that’s not the topic here (unless some idiot blames Katrina on our not signing Kyoto or something).
As for my ideology tainting my engineering… not a whole lot. Certainly we are all subject to confirmation bias, and I am not immune. But when I talk engineering or science, it is not based on ideology (although I might use results from those fields to buttress an ideological argument). I have studied the issues on Climate Change and find lots of reason for doubt, but no refutation of the AGW hypothesis.
One of the wonderful things about the hard sciences (which does not include much of today’s Climatology, none of sociology, not much of psychology, etc) is that the real world ultimately wins the debate. There really is one truth and it eventually wins out.
But one should look at the pathological cases too – the difficulty getting continental drift accepted, or the Helicobacter Pylori ulcer connection recognized (there are still lots of MD’s who treat ulcers as if that hadn’t been shown), the Polywater episode – to recognize where science can, at least in the short term, fail.
Climatology is one of those areas where a lot of pathological science is practiced, along with some very good science. My climatologist friends are terribly upset about the whole AGW debate because it is bringing discredit on their field. Meanwhile my meteorologist friends are true believers. Go figure.
August 8th, 2008 at 3:27 am
“But when I talk engineering or science, it is not based on ideology ….”
Like it or not, John, the question of whether proper tire inflation would save as much oil as offshore drilling might produce is far more of engineering question than an ideological one. And yet, you were unambiguously incredulous at Obama’s figure, and you went the other way, with an answer that is about four orders of magnitude off, far more ridiculous by that measure than Obama’s original claim (which is probably still off, notwithstanding Time magazine’s defense of it.) And why? Because of confirmation bias, obviously. What else could it be? Could it be because the figure you so gullibly accepted was “intuitively obvious”? Sorry, but you must know as well as I do that when the factors involved get very big or very small, nothing less than good calculation suffices.
Your distortions don’t end there. I wonder if they end anywhere. Look at your most recent blog posting, about your grandson waiting in the wings of life. (Congratulations, btw. OK, now back to business.) I know plenty of pro-choice people (not a difficult sort of acquaintance to make, since “pro-choice” covers a pretty solid majority of Americans). Not one would subscribe to the “blob of protoplasm” description for that sonogram you posted recently. Not even the old girlfriend who used to be a NARAL activist. I think the last time I met anyone who defined pro-choice as “abortion on demand, for free, in any trimester, no questions asked” was almost 30 years ago, in Berkeley, in a very radical feminist milieu. When I try to think of the likely reaction to that sonogram from all other pro-choicers I know, the only thing that comes to mind is “Ooh, when is it due? Boy or girl?” Their reaction to any news that it had been aborted would be incredulous, they’d demand a reason, and if the reason had anything to mere whim rather than a threat to the mother’s health, they’d be pretty troubled, and most likely lip-curlingly indignant about it. They might still defend a woman’s right to do that (some might not), but might in the same breath compare it to their defense of free speech even for unabashed Nazis. Well, guess what: on that count, it seems I know a lot of pretty average Americans.
We liberals must seem so touchy to you, so prone to flying off the handle upon hearing the slightest hint of dissent from our views. It doesn’t seem to occur to you that, with much of your rhetoric, the first face-slap is too often a ham-handed one coming from you, and that many of the sources you seem to regard as reliable are actually laughably bogus, transparently partisan, and similarly offensive to a great many people with relatively mainstream views, not just us “libruls”. It’s no way to run a political conversation among intelligent people, at least not one with the idea of roughly converging on consent of the governed. It can only be calculated to inflame and to divide, and any claim to the contrary is pretty hard to believe.
August 8th, 2008 at 8:55 am
Incidentally, what makes this whole exercise particularly absurd is that Obama’s off-the-cuff counter-assertion to the McCain camp’s “proud ignorance” clearly contained the conditional “maybe” and used a joking reference to McCain “drilling wherever he is standing” as the obviously hyperbolic, humorous subject of the sentence. (McCain had pointed to his feet and said “drill right here” in a campaign foray mocking Obama’s enerby plan, so he was fair game for laughs.) So this is just more desperation dressed up as “debating issues.” Mockery is literally all they’ve got. Especially since McCain lost the Iraqi government on his signature issue…
August 8th, 2008 at 9:01 am
On a serious note, the more literate types have all probably already read this (I know Marc has), but James Lee Burke’s “Tin Roof Blowdown” just came out last week in mass-market paperback (so the folks it was written for can snatch it up.) Ace crime genre novelist (i.e. one of the best novelists currently writing) does Katrina…
August 8th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Michael Turner,
Obviously you don’t understand the intent of my posting on inflation.
As to pro-choicers… the ones with political clout oppose ANY legal process that would prevent people from aborting that baby for any reason and use as their argument that the baby is not alive. Of course, they don’t state it that way.
Look at what their policies really effect, not what reaction they might have to a sonogram. I frankly don’t give a rat’s ass what they say or what their views are – I care what the effects of their views are. And those effects are extremely radical – to the point that the US has just about the most radical abortion laws in the western world.
August 8th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Ah, see how he does it? “the ones with political clout” somehow, in the second paragraph, become everybody who’s pro-choice. It’s all the same powerful elite, to him. A powerful elite that, inconveniently for his argument, comprises about 2/3rds of the American people. A They. Not an Us.
“… extremely radical …” Yeah, right. If the American people felt that this was some extremely radical situation with our abortion laws, why do almost 70% of them say that merely differing with a political candidate on their abortion position wouldn’t be a factor in their vote?
Test yourself, John: say, “extremely radical” to yourself, a couple times. First, did your voice go up an octave on “extremely”? Second, how many times did you have to say these two words to yourself before you recognized that the combination is redundant?
It’s called hysteria, John. It would seem your average American is not nearly as prone to it, on this issue. Why don’t you try going out there with your sonogram and asking people on the street to describe what they see in it? I doubt a single one of them would say “blob of protoplasm”, even if you talked to 50 of them. Then ask yourself: is it fair of you to think of all pro-choicers that way? Including the ones (which is most of them) who personally think abortion is wrong, but who don’t think it should be illegal?
Or you can sit in your ideological bubble, wimpering “extremely radical …. extremely radical ….” and avoid ever having to face reality.
August 8th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
As to the intent of your posting on tire inflation, what is there to misunderstand? You express incredulity at Obama’s claim, then point to an even more ridiculous claim as if it were credible.
Here’s how Powerline blog justifies its reasoning: at much higher prices, much more oil becomes profitably extractable, so reserves declared unexploitable at $60/bbl (which felt like a high price back then — how long ago it seems) are now exploitable, and that’s GOOD for us:
“Currently crude oil is at around $120 per barrel, not $60. At the elevated prices we are now experiencing and are expected to experience in the future, vastly greater quantities of OCS oil (or ANWR oil, or shale oil) can profitably be exploited, and those resources can make a vastly greater contribution to our economic well-being.”
But how is this different from saying that $120/bbl leads to a “vastly greater contribution to our economic well-being”? Basically, not much. And how much sense does it make to talk about oil being at economic shock-level prices making anything other than a negative contribution to our well-being? Basically, not much.
But that sort of jarring logical dissonance hardly matter when you’re writing for the Right Wing Echo Chamber’s Ministry of Truth.