The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Obama vows support for flood-hit Louisiana after the 'cameras leave'
By KEVIN FREKING ZACHARY, La.©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
36 Comments
Login to comment
CrazyJoe
Thank you Mr. President. You continue to serve the American people well.
bass4funk
https://youtu.be/mJJbTZHIz38
Serve the people well??? This pretty much sums up the delusional Unicornverse liberals reside in.
Wakarimasen
Yeah, right> the aftereffects of Katrina are still plain to see years later. This will be the same.
bass4funk
Forget what Trump thins, the people are the ones that Obama needs to convince that his vacation was more important than the people, regardless of what the Democratic governor wants the affected people to believe.
Alphaape
I find it interesting that back in 2012 when Hurricane Sandy damaged parts of NJ, the President went while things were still in the recovery phase, and the governor of the state (Chris Christie) was blasted by the conservative media for cozying up to Obama and giving him a hug and shaking his hand, basically making Romney look bad for not showing up.
4 years later, we have a similar situation. A Dem. Gov. of a state didn't want to meet with Trump when he arrived, and in fairness he did ask Obama not to come right away, but had that been the case if a Rep. was President he would be singing a different song.
I didn't care back in 2012 about Obama and Christie giving each other a shake and a hug on the tarmac because like it or not, he was the President of all the USA, not just the Dems and he had an obligation to at least try to show some compassion. Romney lost that election well before the hurricane had hit.
Now, Obama doesn't seem to want to show up for some reason. Maybe because the hardest hit areas were not all Black populations like New Orleans after Katrina or that the state may lean GOP in the upcoming election. In any event, shows poor leadership. Same for the Gov. of the state, he should want to big named people to show up, if for anything to keep the story in the news cycle and maybe get a few more people to donate. Yet we have partisan politics standing in the way.
gaijinpapa
He was heartbroken. Rich dudes who played golf with him say he was crying everyday for at least three holes a day.
So, there's your media bias. Obama doesn't go. Liberal media say nothing. He goes after a week of golf and he's the greatest.
Trump goes with supplies - hardly any coverage. Then they say he just went there for photos.
Total hypocrisy.
The people there were happy to get help from Trump and the attention.
Obama was playing golf and Hillary was.....deleting emails? Resting up? One thing she wasn't doing was holding rallies because nobody turns up.
bass4funk
Welcome to the world of liberal media hypocrisy at its worst.
Hillary is not known for and doesn't exactly bring in the most enthusiastic crowds.
Texas A&M Aggie
Hillary Clinton issued a statement Monday saying she would visit “at a time when the presence of a political campaign will not disrupt the response -- article
But she could find the time to trade jokes with Jimmy Kimmel on late night TV. Baton Rouge ought to hold a democrat fundraising event. That would get her attention and give her the reason to go there, since obviously compassion is not in her wheel house.
Meanwhile, Obama is a classic example of "do as I say, not as I do." He was on his soap box deriding GW Bush for not going to NO quickly after Katrina; but now, a natural disaster to hit an American city had zero effect on cutting short his vacation; choosing instead to hang out with his celebrity friends and play golf in Martha's Vineyard.
Worst. President. Ever.
Jimizo
"Worst. President. Ever."
Not according to his approval ratings. In fact, nowhere near the worst.
In terms of worst presidents ever, you'll find a GOP crook and a GOP warmonger scavenging the scraps at the bottom. The first is no longer with us and the second is something the GOP keep locked out of sight in the attic.
Alphaape
This was the second disaster to hit the state of LA since he has been in office. Remember the BP oil spill? People complained about his lack of an immediate response after that, but he was very quick on the whole we need to get off oil and go "green."
Look, I get that his going there is not going to fix anything, any President going there will not do much of anything. But him taking an active interest sets the tone. The first responders and other emergency personnel as well as those affected will do what they have to do to survive and bounce back. Any visits by elected leaders are at best photo ops, and designed to let the people know that we support them and will do what is right by them to make sure that they can recover. I am not talking about just giving a "participation award" as some would say that we have gone to these days where everyone is a winner, but inspiring people to give a little extra and to let them know that we are all in the situation.
SimondB
I can understand why Obama held back on this visit. President comes to town you need scores of hotel rooms for security, more rooms for media and television crew. Workable airports and so much more. Something Louisiana was seriously lacking in, The POTUS does not just say "Hey, big flood down that way - get the plane ready. It is a massive logistical undertaking to get the President on the move to anywhere, It causes great inconvenience to those hosting him, And he was right - any earlier appearance would have been difficult during the recovery period and would have been detrimental to those recovery and clean up tasks.
So Trump went there. For a few hours. And then flew out. Well done Donald. I'm sure your actions won you at least two votes (one who may change their mind later).
bass4funk
And you'll find a habitual liar, a skirt chaser and one of the most disastrous that got our people taken hostage and a president that will leave us with the worst deficit, an ongoing war, a radical group that believes in pure jihadism, a country divided. So I think when you peel that onion layer by layer, you'll see that this administration by far is the most corrupt.
Strangerland
Yeah, they were so corrupt they went and invaded a sovereign nation that hadn't attacked them, based on lies.
Oh wait, that wasn't this administration.
This one is one of the best ever. Which is why Obama would win another term hands down if he were allowed to run for a third.
bass4funk
No, this administration dropped the ball and was complicit in not overseeing the rise of ISIS despite the warnings.
Thank God few only have two terms. But it doesn't matter, his last day is approaching and soon we won't have to be bothered by this guy anymore! Got the poco run ready.
Jimizo
"And you'll find a habitual liar, a skirt chaser and one of the most disastrous that got our people taken hostage and a president that will leave us with the worst deficit, an ongoing war, a radical group that believes in pure jihadism, a country divided. So I think when you peel that onion layer by layer, you'll see that this administration by far is the most corrupt."
I think you'll find the Republican Nixon oversaw the most corrupt administration. He's at the bottom of the pile according to the US electorate. Also, the US electorate sees him joined down there by Bush whose deceitful bloodbath in Iraq was followed by the economy flying off the cliff under his watch.
I'll stick with the assessment of the US electorate until you provide the names of the non-partisan historians who claim the Bush presidency was a roaring success. You claim they exist but I just can't find them. If I subscribe to Fox News, will I find them there? Just give me a hint.
bass4funk
So that's how the democrats learned how to be stealthy by hiring a bunch of IRS thugs to target predominantly top donors to the Republican Party, taking them out of the election cycle, ironically all this happening months before the 2012 election, we have the now what we know are lies about this Iran deal and the ransom money that was paid, fast and furious, the lies about Obamacare and keeping your doctor, the sneaky backdoor trying to grant illegals amnesty, Bergdahl lies....sorry, this administration makes Nixon look like a choirboy.
I could care less what all the libs say, I go by what the voters think and NOT the voters living on the coastal areas or flyover America.
sangetsu03
Wonderful sarcasm (at least I hope it is, no president has served the people well since I don't know when).
That is all it is, and nothing more. There is nothing Obama really needs to do about Louisiana, the mechanism for dealing with such disasters has been in place for many years, and can be switched on without his input. Obama is now working on improving his legacy, so expect a lot more photo ops, but not much in the way of work.
Any other president, republican, democrat, or Trump, would do the same thing.
Jimizo
@Bass
I'm quoting what the voters thought about postwar presidents. Nixon and Bush are at the bottom. Obama is nowhere near those levels. According to you, he should be much lower than these two as he's even more corrupt than Nixon and even more incompetent than Bush. The majority of US people disagree with you.
I suppose another way to look at this is the assessment of non-partisan scholars looking at say, the W. Bush presidency. Can you provide the names of these historians ( note the plural ) who have reassessed the Bush presidency favorably? I'd love to read them ( again, note the plural ).
I think it would help all of us to read them.
SuperLib
I think Obama's approval ratings are around 54%.
Black Sabbath
A catastrophic flood occurs because of intense, highly improbable rain dump:
-- http://www.nola.com/weather/index.ssf/2016/08/louisiana_flood_of_2016_result.html
That's science talk for 'extreme weather event." The kind of thing that is happening with greater frequency. Which is impossible, but for climate change.
And the best our Republ..er, 'independent conservate' friends can come up with, and I'm guessing here is:
Benghanzi, Lewinsky or emails.
bass4funk
Not according to me, polling is not an accurate science, there are many contributing factors that need to be taken into account, demographics, districts, racial, liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, plus and minus margins, big organizations or university polling where they interview a certain amount of people on "campus," which technically isn't even a true poll in the sense of national polling, who is doing the polling, are they independent, conservative or liberal, the reputation of the pollster, and this is the most important part, how many Americans took part in the polling? How many throughout the country and NOT just the usual coastal areas where sadly, most of the polling is done, because along the coastal areas, you have a larger population of Democrats residing. This makes a huge difference on the outcome of any polling. The timing of the polls taken, all of these are heavy in weighing on the outcome of these polls.
Also the press during Nixon's time absolutely despised the man and there was nothing he could do, right or wrong that would change the outcome of mostly very opinionated polls of his presidency that were pushed in large part by the media. Now to be fair, Nixon wasn't the most likable president for a number of reason, not including the war, but like LBJ, he was just a very dry person.
Bush wasn't incompetent, maybe the decision of going into Iraq was perhaps not the right one (depending on how you look at the events) personally, I think removing Saddam was the best thing overall, but that's my opinion based on many issues with that country, but as I always say when it comes to Obama, there is a lot more condemnation of the president than what the media wants people to believe. Is he a popular president under his constituents, Yes. Was he an affective president, No.
Strangerland
As long as the polling is consistent, it will show trends.
And those trends show that Obama is awesome, and Bush sucked.
Jimizo
@Bass
Yes, Bass. Thanks for the dummies guide to polling. This isn't a Fox News audience here.
So, I'll just take it that your non-partisan historians evaluating the Bush presidency favourably don't exist?
Strangerland
They don't. There literally is not a single non-partisan historian who evaluates the Bush presidency favorably. I looked.
bass4funk
Of course not, so I don't know why you would make reference to FOX? We worked with Pollsters all the time, it can be a very tedious job. FOX is a reliable, but they do more of the major polling as does NBC and CNN, pretty solid overall.
Whatever you wish, some people believe Elvis is still alive, who am I to argue. Live and let live. I don't believe in bursting someone's bubble.
Strangerland
Well it's nice that you accept that your belief in the existence of non-partisan historians that evaluate Bush's presidency favorably is akin to believing Elvis is alive.
Jimizo
"So, I'll just take it that your non-partisan historians evaluating the Bush presidency favorably don't exist?"
"Whatever you wish, some people believe Elvis is still alive, who am I to argue. Live and let live. I don't believe in bursting someone's bubble."
Not nice, Bass. I wasted time looking for them. I like reading things which challenge my opinions.
Not nice at all. Remember, it's the libs who lie.
bass4funk
Not nice, Bass. I wasted time looking for them. I like reading things which challenge my opinions.
Keep reading, I do it as well, it's better than playing Pokemon Go.
Especially this last admin. Hey, 75 more days until Obama is history!
Jimizo
"Thanks for the dummies guide to polling. This isn't a Fox News audience here."
"Of course not, so I don't know why you would make reference to FOX? We worked with Pollsters all the time, it can be a very tedious job. FOX is a reliable, but they do more of the major polling as does NBC and CNN, pretty solid overall."
You missed my point. Your explanation of polling was a little patronizing. I understand polling and have a passable grasp of maths. It sounded like you were talking to Fox viewers.
About you working at Fox, I'm not sure what I should or shouldn't believe about what you post now. Best stick to the arguments themselves.
Serrano
"So Trump went there. For a few hours. And then flew out. Well done Donald. I'm sure your actions won you at least two votes (one who may change their mind later)."
“Too little too late,” Mona Gaspard said of Obama’s visit. The resident of Ascension Parish said she saw her home filled with 4 feet of water and resented what she saw from Obama. “I saw him play golf, not helping out over here. Trump was over here, but he wasn’t,” she said."
Hmm... who's right?
"I think Obama's approval ratings are around 54%."
Dayuumm... that would mean 46% disapprove. That's a lot. How could that be?
bass4funk
Patronizing? I don't think the average person or voter if you will understands the polling process in detail. unless they've worked with pollsters and seen up close and how difficult and tedious a job it is.
As far as what people believe or don't believe is irrelevant, just stating the truth, that's it and that's all.
Strangerland
The polling method isn't actually relevant to most people. What is relevant is the degree of accuracy. Any poll that doesn't give that degree isn't a scientific poll.
bass4funk
To a slight degree, but overall, it's a good indicator of seeing where things are in the political spectrum, but again, not an exact science. Look at what happened with Brexit, No one predicted that as well, the "silent majority." Just have to wait and see.
Serrano
"Hey, 75 more days until Obama is history!"
I'm afraid it's going to be 4 more years of Obama with more lies and less style ( Crooked Hillary, lol )