Terry Neal
washingtonpost.com Chief Political Correspondent
Friday, September 16, 2005
11:00 AM
washingtonpost.com Chief Political Correspondent Terry Neal takes your questions and comments on politics, politicians and his latest columns Fridays at 11 a.m. ET.
Read more Talking Points.
The transcript follows.
____________________
washingtonpost.com: Parsing the Abortion Debate.
_______________________
Terry Neal: Good morning everyone. Thanks for joining me for my weekly chat on politics. Lots to talk about this week. We've got the Roberts hearings, an upsurge of violence in Iraq, and the president's speech on Katrina last night. In fact, I have a column about the president's speech that's being edited and prepared for publication. It should be up on the site soon (hopefully), so feel free to comment on that as well.
So with that, let's get it started!
Terry
_______________________
Laurel, Md.: Terry, I really respect the objectivity you bring to your columns. My question is: Who was supposed to drive the flooded school buses shown in New Orleans? I think the TV media has done a disservice by showing the footage but not asking this fundamental question. Were low-way earning drivers supposed to leave their families? Was it the duty of the national guards? How about police or fire personnel? Maybe you could do a column on this. Thanks for your time.
Terry Neal: Thanks for your question, and it's a good one. Look, I don't know all of the ins and outs about that issue. But I do know that's talking point number one in deflecting responsibility from the feds for the Katrina aftermath.
There are some legitimate questions here on both sides. I was struck by the shots of those buses under water, just like everyone else.
My question is this: Has any community ever used school buses for a major urban evacuation? Was it reasonable for the mayor to have a plan that called for the use of school buses? And if so, who was going to drive the buses? Where were would those buses take people? Is it practical to spend time coming up with a plan, assigning routes, establishing procedures for who has priority to board the buses, etc?
I guess it all leads to a few big questions, which are, should the mayor really be criticized for not using those school buses? Was it reasonable to expect him to have had a plan for the use of those buses?
_______________________
Baltimore, Md.: It seems that Democrats may finally have a defining moment to finally rally around (Katrina response) and bring attention to the lack of concern for America's cities. Has there been an effort to strategize to keep the focus on making sure that the opportunity this opportunity is not lost? Elections after all are next year.
Terry Neal: Good question. That remains to be seen. Politics are ephemeral. And as horrible as this disaster was, the nation's attention at some point will eventually begin moving on to the next big story. Whether this focus will lead to some sort of major change is something many of us are pondering. Wish I could be more specific, but I just don't know.
_______________________
College Park, Md.: Not quite political, but I wanted to ask somebody at The Post.
Why hasn't The Post written about the Gretna Sheriff Department refusing to allow people to cross Crescent City Connector after the Katrina? How is it that a police department from the South greeting a group of black people trying to escape a crumbling city not news?
Please, I've been looking for confirm or denial of this story from The Post for over a week. What is going on in your newsroom?
Terry Neal: I don't know. I'm not a newsroom editor, and I don't assign stories. I've mentioned this to a couple reporters who are down in La. right now, and I'm not sure whether they are looking into it or not. I've been hearing about it mostly from the blogs, and I'm not sure if this is as straightforward a case of racism as some suggest, or whether there are some other aspects that are being ignored by those pushing the story...I just don't know because I haven't done any reporting on it yet. But that doesn't mean I won't look into it in some greater detail soon...If it's true and clear cut as some have tried to make it, it's an amazing story.
_______________________
Pasadena, Calif.: I was curious about Tom DeLay's comment recently congratulating the Republican leadership about keeping government spending under control and saying there was no fat in the budget.
Why do people in power say things that are so obviously divorced from reality?
Terry Neal: I don't know...Obviously, there is fat to cut, but perhaps not as much as you think. I wrote a column several months back where I pointed out that the entire non-military, non-discretionary, non-debt service portion of the budget is less than the amount of the projected deficit for the next fiscal year. (I wrote this before new projections reduced the anticipated deficit, but my guess is this is still probably the case)
Let me put it another way...If the government eliminated spending on every single thing it does other than defense and entitlement spending (such as Social Security and Medicare), it would still run a deficit in the next year.
This isn't the point Delay was making, but the point is, unless you want to cut into defense spending, there aren't lots of places to make huge cuts, in the range of hundreds of billions of dollars, without wholesale draconian cuts.
Now there may very well be some people who believe that's exactly what the government should do. But neither Bush, nor Republicans in Congress, nor Democrats in Congress, has demonstrated the fortitude to make spending cuts equal to the multi-trillion dollar tax cuts.
And Tom Delay isn't about to start proposing draconian spending cuts the year before what is assured to be hard-fought midterm elections.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: Of all the armchair wisdom I've seen over the past two weeks, the comment that struck me the most was a letter to the editor in The Post that pointed out that no one learned the lessons from Hurricane Andrew. Apparently, a commission wrote an expert report that described all the problems that have been observed in the Gulf Coast response. It seems to me that this puts even more blame squarely on the shoulders of the Administration for failing to heed these lessons. What are your thoughts?
BTW, I find the blame game to be such a sad thing to watch. Very undignified for all involved.
Terry Neal: That's interesting. You say this commission report "seems to me that this puts even more blame squarely on the shoulders of the Administration for failing to heed these lessons." Then you say you find the blame game "very undignified for all involved."
Seems somewhat contradictory...I'll say this: I don't like the term "blame game." Because it's not a game. It'd deadly serious. And I do absolutely believe it's necessary to get to the bottom of why these problems occurred, primarily so the deficiencies can be fixed. But also, I don't know how you send the message to politicians and bureaucrats in the future that the people demand they do the right thing, be on top of their jobs, if you don't demand accountability at the same time. This is not a call for anyone to be fired, or pilloried, or voted out of office even. It just means that something obviously went wrong, and the stakes are too high just to sit back and suggest that no one should be blamed.
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: Teetering on the Precipice.
_______________________
Manassas, Va.: Terry obvious Katrina has become a big racial issue. I am curious what your personal opinion is about it as an African American, do you think race was a factor in the poor federal response?
Terry Neal: Thanks for your question. This is something I've thought about a lot. You know, I covered the Bush campaign for the Post in 1999-2000. I had at least two long, off the record conversations with Bush about racial issues. We talked on the record, of course, and they led to stories that were published in the Post. But as is often the case, some of the most revealing conversations happen off the record.
I'll say this. I don't think George W. Bush is in any way a racist, or really even racially insensitive. I believe he believes his conservative policies can help uplift poor people, minorities, etc. Now I'm neither endorsing, nor condemning his policies. But to me the term "racist" implies hatred or animosity. And I don't see that in Bush.
But even still, it's more complicated than that. I don't think Bush or anyone in his administration sat back and said, "hmmm, black folks. Let 'em suffer!"
But even having said that, I do believe the reaction would have been different had the images been of tens of thousands of white folks, starving and thirsty in the streets. I don't think that's racism. I think that's reality. I just think it would have hit people differently, from an emotional standpoint, and there would have been much more screaming to get something done now. People can and will disagree, but I have a right to my opinion on this, and that's what it is.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: I miss Mike Allen!
Terry Neal: Me too. He's a friend and a good man. But you can read him in Time now.
_______________________
Reston, Va.: Hi Terry, I really look forward to your online sessions--you are really thoughtful in your responses and that is very much appreciated.
My question is about your reaction to the recent spate of articles that have sort of debunked the myth that was Bush. I felt all along that the media has given him a pass and I couldn't believe the way Mr. Bush was portrayed in the media given what I had heard through the grapevine about him. Now, it seems that suddenly reporters are reporting what I have been hearing about Bush through that grapevine that he is essentially a disengaged, uncaring person without a clear plan on anything and little interest in his job. Why do you think reporters have started moving away from the Bob Woodward image of Bush toward the Kitty Kelly image--and where were these stories last year when we were choosing a president?
Terry Neal: Hi. Thanks for your comment.
No offense, but this is a selective perception issue. I've received almost 9,000 emails since I started writing my column three years ago. I'd say about a quarter of those are complaining about media bias. And among those who complain, they're split almost evenly between people who say the media is unfair to Bush and people who say the media has given him a free pass.
This debate starts to get boring to me after a while, because I've never met one person who was disabused of his notions on the subject of media bias, no matter how much arguing you do.
People are going to believe what they want to believe.
_______________________
Toledo, Ohio: Terry, Let me preface by saying that I am a pro-choice Democrat. However, If I were a pro-lifer I would seriously be feeling played by a Republican party that has for a generation sought and received my moral and financial support and yet with a Republican Executive and Legislative dominance still failed to advance my cause. Is there an opportunity for a moderate Democrat such as Hillary to make inroads into that segment of the Republican base?
Terry Neal: No, I don't think so. And I don't think Sen. Clinton really thinks she can appeal to that voter, either. I think she'll be trying to appeal to the moderate voter for whom issues such as abortion are not priority number one.
_______________________
Wilmington, N.C.: Here's the story of the Gretna Sheriff's actions confirmed in the Times: Police in Suburbs Blocked Evacuees, Witnesses Report. Wow! That does seem bizarrely inhumane.
Terry Neal: For those who are interested...Thanks.
_______________________
Re: Gretna sheriff dept shooting at NO residents: I read about this in the Washington City Paper yesterday. If the NY Times has covered it, Nagin talked about it, then why has not The Washington Post?
Terry Neal: Good question...Post editors, are you listening?
_______________________
Chicago, Ill.: John Roberts seems like an intelligent, fairly reasonable guy, obviously qualified for the job of chief justice. But there's something that bothers me...I wish one of those doormat Democratic Senators had asked him: "Judge Roberts, if you are no ideologue and no extremist, can you explain why the most conservative of the right-wingers in this country are doing handsprings over your nomination? What do ideological extremists like Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson and James Dobson know about you that makes them so giddy about you spending the next 30 or 40 years on the Supreme Court?"
Terry Neal: Thanks for your comment. That's an interesting question...I just don't think there's a lot of fervor there from the Democrats on this one. It's been assumed for weeks that the Roberts nomination was a fait accompli. I think the Democrats in Congress are looking ahead to other battles. Then again, critics within the party, say Democrats in Congress are to wimpy to stand up for themselves on Roberts or any other issue.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: I think I agree with you that the President isn't racist, but I do think he is rather oblivious. His upbringing, his supporters and his inner circle seem to have isolated him from the realities of the minority struggle in this country. I don't think he sits behind his desk and says "let's be do things that hurt African Americans, etc." But sometimes I wonder if he even thinks about it at all. I suppose this isn't a posting-type submission, but just my two cents.
Terry Neal: Thank you for offering your two cents.
_______________________
Terry Neal: All right folks, this has been fun. But I've got to run (sorry to sound like the Rev. Jesse Jackson!).
Have a great weekend. And let's chat again next week.
Later,
Terry
_______________________
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.