The Fallout of a Can't-Do Presidency

[dweller]

by Harold Meyerson
We're not No. 1. We're not even close.

By which measures, precisely, do we lead the world? Caring for our countrymen? You jest. A first-class physical infrastructure? Tell
that to New Orleans. Throwing so much money at the rich that we've got nothing left over to promote the general welfare? Now you're
talking.

The problem goes beyond the fact that we can't count on our government to be there for us in catastrophes. It's that a can't-do spirit,
a shouldn't-do spirit, guides the men who run the nation. Consider the congressional testimony of Joe Allbaugh, George W. Bush's
2000 campaign manager, who assumed the top position at the Federal Emergency Management Agency in 2001. He characterized
the organization as "an oversized entitlement program," and counseled states and cities to rely instead on "faith-based
organizations... such as the Salvation Army and the Mennonite Disaster Service."

Is it any surprise, then, that the administration's response to the devastation in New Orleans is of a piece with its response to the
sacking of Baghdad once our troops arrived? "Stuff happens" was the way Don Rumsfeld described the destruction of Baghdad's
hospitals, universities and museums while American soldiers stood around. Now stuff has happened in New Orleans, too, even as
FEMA was turning away offers of assistance. This is the stuff-happens administration. And it's willing, apparently, to sacrifice any
claim America may have to national greatness rather than inconvenience the rich by taxing them to build a more secure nation.

As a matter of social policy, the catastrophic lack of response in New Orleans is exceptional only in its scale and immediacy.
When it comes to caring for our fellow countrymen, we all know that America has never ranked very high. We are, of course, the
only democracy in the developed world that doesn't offer health care to its citizens as a matter of right. We rank 34th among nations
in infant mortality rates, behind such rival superpowers as Cyprus, Andorra and Brunei.

But these are chronic conditions, and even many of us who argue for universal health coverage have grown inured to that distinctly
American indifference to the common good, to our radical lack of solidarity with our fellow citizens. Besides, the poor generally have
the decency to die discreetly, and discretely - not conspicuously, not in droves. Come rain or come shine, we leave millions of
beleaguered Americans to fend for themselves every day. It's just a lot more noticeable in a horrific rain, and when the ordinary lack
of access to medical care is augmented by an extraordinary lack of access to emergency services.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0914-31.htm
(originally at www.philly.com-but unable to find link)

dp

[cwydro]

1. Sadly

I have to concur.

[acmejack]

2. excellent essay!

He nails it.

[OneBlueSky]

3. this presidency is as much "won't do" as "can't do" . . . n/t

.

[cliss]

4. You've come a long way, baby.

What a difference a few decades makes.

We spent a few weeks in Europe last summer. In Scandinavia, we saw healthy, attractive people out walking. Even old people were out and about, they looked great & even had hour-glass figures. The people we met were well off: they had homes, cars, most of them even had vacation homes. In Sweden, you get 5 weeks mandatory government-paid vacation every summer.

They all had medical & dental coverage, courtesy of the government.

The US is the world's greatest?