Bush response to shooters in N.O. provides interesting metaphor for con-

[1932]

servative reaction to social problems.

If N.O. mayor Nagin is right, a lot of the shooting and violence was probably caused by drug addicts flipping out for a fix. So, what was Bush response to that? It was to pull out, leaving many innocent people to suffer, until they could get better armed (or at least that's the claim -- I'm not sure I believe the causal relationship they claim is true). The response to violence was a bigger threat of violence.

Is there a better way? What if part of the recovery plan was to make sure that it was communcated to drug addicts that they'd get their fix (methodone or whatever) from the government? If FEMA's immediate respones was not to pull out but to add drugs for the .5% needing their fix to the list of things coming into N.O., would that have been a better plan?

Of should we always respond to every social problem with force, imprisonment, and punishment?

And, hey, notice the social value of having better solutions to social problems? It seems like a lot of people would have survived this thing if our society wasn't so polarized, if parts weren't so poor, and if we didnt' have people addicted to drugs.

Discuss.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. drug problem has always been a medical problem

But that means that the CIA can't make money they can use illegally. That means that the government can't fill up the jails with those they don't like. That's the reason we've never addressed the drug problem as the medical problem it is.

[Webster Green]

2. Excellent harm/risk analysis...

Too bad our leaders are clueless.

I wonder if they had any planning at all. I don't see any indication that any resources were mobilized before this disaster become a PR problem for the prez.

[1932]

3. They went heavily armed with excuses.