Subj : Re: It seems not everyone shares the "Blame Bush All The Way" viewpoint...
To   : alt.tv.farscape
From : Chaya
Date : Tue Sep 06 2005 21:05:41

From Newsgroup: alt.tv.farscape

Nick wrote:

> Chaya wrote:
> 
>> Ken McElhaney wrote:
>> 
>>> Over the weekend, ABC/Washington Post poll reveals that despite the
>>> massive criticism aired 24/7 on Bush, most Americans just don't see
>>> it that way;
>>> 
>>> http://tinyurl.com/8lbd5
>>> 
>>> And while the federal response was way too slow and disasters of
>>> this size should NOT be handled by FEMA, but rather the US military
>>> (which has no buerocracy to get in the way), I do have some
>>> questions for the local 'n state authorities, namely;
>>> 
>>> Why did the Mayor of New Orleans wait until SUNDAY to order the
>>> manditory evacuation of his city? 24 hours after both the govenor
>>> AND Bush pleaded with him to do so?
>>> 
>>> Why didn't the Superdome & Convention Center have ANY water 'n food
>>> supplies IF they were suppose to be shelters?
>>> 
>>> And if they weren't capable of handling that number of people, then
>>> why didn't they use the school 'n tourist buses (there were over 500
>>> that survived the hurricane) to start getting them out BEFORE the
>>> flood waters cut off the city? In fact, why didn't they start moving
>>> people out on Saturday?
>>> 
>>> When word of the water barriers breaking reached the gov's office on
>>> Monday, why didn't she send in the National Guard (over 5,000
>>> soldiers who had already been activated) into New Orleans right away
>>> before the flood waters cut off the city?
>>> 
>>> I think that after all this is over and the investigations are
>>> concluded, we'll have a new FEMA director, a new federal system for
>>> handling disaters of this massive size (which is larger than ANY in
>>> US history), and hopefully New Orleans will have a new Mayor and
>>> perhaps an actual plan to deal with a situation everyone knew could
>>> happen over the past 40 years. 
>> 
>> 
>> I would be very surprised if GWB fired anyone over this.  He only
>> seems to can people who disagree with him, including the Director of
>> the Bureau of Justice Statistics (who refused to bury statistical
>> findings that racial profiling is alive and well). 
>> 
>> http://littlink.com/owv5y
>> 
> 
> If all were equally likely to be stopped it doesn't sound like racial 
> profiling.  Now, there were some problems with what happened
> afterwards, I'll agree.  But I thought racial profiling had to do with
> who got stopped.  Do I have the definition incorrect?


The term "racial profiling" kind of encompasses the whole spectrum,
including stopping, searching, citing, ticketing, etc.  Officers may
stop people equally, but they be more likely to issue citations to
minority drivers, for example. 

What I haven't seen is any indication the study controlled for things
like prior criminal record, outstanding warrants, or suspect demeanor
toward the police (which would increase the likelihood of arrest). 

My main concern about this issue was that there was an attempt to bury
it.  I mean, why not say, "Hey, guess what?  Minority drivers aren't any
more likely to be stopped than white drivers according to this study. 
However, they are more likely to be searched, ticketed, and arrested. 
We need to find out why."

.