Two different storms. Two different regions of the country. One often seen as poor and republican. One often seen as affluent and democrat.
Both offered significant time to leave. Both offered significant time to prepare.
Was there a difference in government response?
Should the government accept the burden of response? If so, which government? Local, state or federal?
I doubt that politics was the cause of the different reactions. I’d like to think lessons were learned from Katrina and that’s why Sandy got handled much more effectively. I think the geography of New Orleans and the nature of the flooding had a lot to do with the difficulties down there.
I’d like to think lessons were learned from Katrina and that’s why Sandy got handled much more effectively.
Do you think that the handling of Sandy was better than the handling of Katrina?
I’m not so sure it was.
I’ve not seen anything negative about Sandy, Gov. Christie praised the response, and in general everything I can find suggests it was handled well. Why do you think it wasn’t? I mean, Katrina made headlines and caused anger. Sandy has been quiet and caused praise of FEMA!
I’ve not seen anything negative about Sandy
People were without power for a long long time. Gas shortages abound. No heat.
I’d say that’s pretty bad.
I mean, Katrina made headlines and caused anger. Sandy has been quiet and caused praise of FEMA!
I’d say that both storms were about the same. However, in one you have massive press on the poor handling of the situation. The other, nothing but praise.
I’ll let’cha draw your own conclusion.
Seriously – some gas shortages and no heat compares to Katrina? Those things can’t be avoided in a crisis, and they were handled quickly. I have read somewhere that people who read the Drudge Report and watch Fox news got a very different view of Sandy because those sources cherry picked complaints and tried to make things sound worse than they were. In pre-election polls, Benghazi, and now Sandy it appears the conservative media tried to create an alternate reality that simply was untrue. But doing a search now, the only complaints I find is of local power companies for being slow. Heck, we had an ice storm here in ’98 and some people were without power and heat for over three weeks in the dead of a Maine winter. Those things happen. Katrina was something far more intense.
It could be a massive media conspiracy, but common sense says that Christie, FEMA and Obama wouldn’t be getting praise if the response as anything at all like what happened with Katrina. When you compare what happened, it’s clear there’s no comparison – Sandy was handled very well.
Seriously – some gas shortages and no heat compares to Katrina?
What were the complaints lodged in Katrina?
I have read somewhere that people who read the Drudge Report and watch Fox news got a very different view of Sandy because those sources cherry picked complaints and tried to make things sound worse than they were. In pre-election polls, Benghazi, and now Sandy it appears the conservative media tried to create an alternate reality that simply was untrue.
You’re starting to sound like a republican 😉
There is absolutely proof that the media spins things in a liberal direction, just look at election coverage of both Romney and Obama. Heck, go back to 08 and look at the same coverage for Obama and McCain.
It’s not even close.
I would suggest that if conservative outlets are telling different stories you may wanna consider that the shine is being applied by the liberal media, not the conservative.
When you compare what happened, it’s clear there’s no comparison – Sandy was handled very well.
Interesting.
Actually election coverage was pretty even, according to PEW. Obama did get more positive coverage the last week, but that’s probably because of Sandy and his work with Christie. Overall the campaigns were covered pretty evenly. FOX News clearly biases things to the right, and a lot of people get their news there. There’s been a myriad of reports debunking FOX, I refuse to watch both it and MSNBC, which does skew things to the left.
Do you recall what happened with Katrina?! How can you compare it to Sandy. You’re making a claim that seems on its face to be outlandish. Do you have any support for it? Do you really think its a media conspiracy to make Bush look bad in 2005 and Obama good? I can’t find much negative about the response to Sandy (save some general complaints you’ll always get about it taking awhile for power to come back), even using google. I don’t know where you’re getting this. I had the same reaction on Benghazi, though I did know that the GOP had been trying to politicize it so I wasn’t as surprised. But Sandy being like Katrina? Seriously?
I had an earlier version of my blog back in 2005. Here’s September, I had entries on Katrina the 1st, 2nd, 7th and 8th: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/scotterb/public.www/septblog05.htm That gives a feel of just how bad things were. Note that nearly 2000 people died from Katrina, and many were trapped for days. The death toll for Sandy was about 100, mostly due to weather related accidents. People weren’t trapped for days, rescuers got in to virtually all areas right away.
Wikipedia has a good entry on Katrina: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_Hurricane_Katrina_in_New_Orleans
Compare all that with Sandy!
Actually election coverage was pretty even, according to PEW.
Not even close. And the last week was horrible. And MSNBC was dreadful; worse than FOX.
I had an earlier version of my blog back in 2005. Here’s September, I had entries on Katrina the 1st, 2nd, 7th and 8th: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/scotterb/public.www/septblog05.htm That gives a feel of just how bad things were. Note that nearly 2000 people died from Katrina, and many were trapped for days.
So, that was part of my questioning.
Remember, Katrina was a MASSIVE storm; Sandy not even a hurricane.
I’m just wondering if the critique was the same.