Opinion: Blog Reaction to FEMA Editorial
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
On Saturday, The Times editorialized that the unusually high levels of fraud in the wake of Katrina were not unexpected, and that cutting back immediate aid in the future was a bad idea. Not everyone agreed. Some samples from across the blogosphere:
* Seth at Standing Up For Nothing says, ‘FEMA did the virtuous thing poorly, while scores of Katrina victims did the immoral thing excellently, and we can criticize FEMA but not the thieves?’
* Kirk at Just My Opinion writes, ‘what exactly are these people a ‘victim’ of in this particular context?’
* David Markland at Metroblogging Los Angeles says, ‘I certainly would have thought twice had I known where some of this money would have gone. Maybe, at the very least, I’d have given 16% less.’
* Scott at Environmental Republican writes, ‘Let’s imagine if FEMA had put serious restrictions on the program and busted people using the funds for non-emergency needs, don’t you think the Times would’ve been blasting the agency for not being compassionate?’
* Politickchick says, ‘Yeah, that really makes a whole lot of sense, considering the people using the money fraudulently weren’t exactly victims.’
* Old Soldier at My Republican Blog writes, ‘Hurricane victims (and others) who defrauded FEMA became criminal perpetrators and FEMA became a victim. So, the unknown editor is correct in that the ‘victim’ should not be blamed; but in this case the victim is FEMA, not the perpetrators of criminal fraud.’
* Laura at Laura’s Miscellanious Musings says, ‘Darn straight I’ll blame the victim and be shocked, when my own hard-earned income is taken by the government and then passed on to others to be spent on sex change operations, porn movies, and divorce fees, not to mention season football tickets and tropical vacations.’
* McQ at the QandO Blog writes, ‘They are crooks. And the LA Times should know better than to try to cast crooks as ‘victims.’’
* Brendan Loy at The Irish Trojan’s Blog says, ‘When people wilfully abuse a system that is designed to help them get the essentials that they need, OF COURSE they should be blamed!’
* Mark Epstein at The Ultimate Truth writes, ‘Contrary to the editorial mindset at the LA Times, it is FEMA’s responsibility to obsess over the spending habits of more than 16,000 people; 16,000 people who engaged in deliberate defrauding of the American taxpayer.’
* Right Thinking Girl says, ‘It was basically a little bit of bad weather and it sent the whole country into a tailspin [...] the money was wasted the instant it was given to those people.’
* Michael at In Defense of America writes, ‘I swear, the more I hear about NOLA the less I want to rebuild it, and the more I want to cut these leeches off.’
We have one defender of The Times’ position: Christopher Wavrin at commentarypage.com:
Considering the spending habits of Americans, I’d say if 84 percent of the people spend their money wisely, then that’s pretty good.
Similarly, Chris Martel at Metroblogging New Orleans also agrees that misuse of money was inevitable:
You know what I spent my FEMA money on? A laptop, booze, eating out, music, seersucker suits, etc. Luxuries. Friends spent it on flying V guitars, drugs, etc. Note that I did not ask FEMA for $2,000, nor did I ask for the subsequent $2,300 in rental assistance. In fact, I was living rent free and still being paid by my employer the entire time, but they still put the cash directly into my bank account.