"The United Arab Emirates has shown the world a model Muslim state that is tolerant toward its people and other faiths, said US President George W. Bush in his speech at the Emirates Palace Hotel in Abu Dhabi yesterday." -Bush

"One unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' 're-education camps,' and 'killing fields,'" Bush said

After years of willfully neglecting this comparison, Bush finally offers it to the American people unsolicited. But how can he talk of the possible cost of American withdrawal without also mentioning the sunk cost of American intervention?

The consensus seems to be that only a politician stupid enough to start an unnecessary war could ever be resolute enough to finish it, so Bush has a reluctant backing even among democrats, who don't seem willing to put up much resistence to the surge.

Only democrat candidate Mike Gravel (not to mention Kucinich) has taken a stand on this issue, stating unequivocally since '71 that American troops in Vietnam 'died in vain'. In the youtube debates, he was confronted on this issue by a vietnam vet, and held his ground, while virtually every other candidates danced around the question. Many were willing to state that US soldiers were dying unnecessarily, but were unwilling to make the equivalent statement that they were 'dying in vain'. That's pathetic. Gravel was powerful in his respond that the only thing more tragic than American soldiers dying in vain, was the idea of more American soldiers dying in vain. Hence a pullout, and a return to the politics of reality.

Mike Gravel is the only one with the guts to stand up to the national consensus, which is so hopelessly skewed by blind patriotism that it refuses to see reason.

We need a new leader with the freshness to reverse current policies without looking like a hypocrit, but also with enough street cred in the deep south, where politics and other critical mental functions are distort by the heat.

Crossposted from my Katrina recovery blog, which includes pictures:

I met with Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) earlier this week. Biden is the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and my candidate for president in 2008. I asked him about rebuilding New Orleans, and am pleased to report that he demonstrated a much better understanding of the issue than any of the other presidential candidates I’ve yet asked (I'm in NH, so get to personally see and meet the candidates). Joe Biden actually understands the ongoing situation and, unlike other candidates, has some policy suggestions about how to deal with those realities. (I've also reviewed Obama, Edwards, and Dodd on the subject.)

Biden made it very clear that he understands where things are in New Orleans today, lamenting houses that are “still literally in the streets” in the Lower Ninth Ward (which isn’t quite true, but I would call houses on top of houses and motorboats in yards close enough!). His family has close ties to Hurricane Katrina, giving him a special understanding of the issue’s importance and magnitude. His daughter graduated from Tulane a few years ago, and helped relocate thousands of storm refugees. One son led a National Guard unit in New Orleans for a month after Katrina, and the other son went to Thibodeaux immediately after the storm to help with relief efforts.

The Senator demonstrated an excellent grasp of the Gulf Coast big picture. The problem with recovery, he said, is not a lack of federal funding. The problem is bureaucracy, which he called “a rat’s nest.” The money has been allocated, but it isn’t getting to its ultimate destination. I was thrilled to hear him say this – that’s EXACTLY the problem with most Katrina recovery, particularly with the Road Home program.

The Senator had plenty of criticism for local leaders and politicians, including Democrats. The local officials aren’t cooperating with the state or the feds, and the feds aren’t cooperating with the state, he said. As President, he would cut aside the red tape to make sure money reached its destination, and he would tell Mayor Nagin to come up with an actual plan for rebuilding the city (as opposed to the farce that is UNOP), or he would revoke the federal grants. “We need to force decisions!” Biden said. Obviously, Nagin wouldn’t risk losing the money – if faced with that threat, things would get real better, real fast.

Biden brought up the city’s exploding crime, something he’s familiar with as Chairman of a Senate subcommittee on crime. He lamented the pre-storm corruption in the NOPD (which exists post-storm, as well), and said the Bush administration has drastically cut funding for local police departments (he had a figure, but I’ve forgotten it). These funding cuts affected New Orleans, and Biden implied that he would again make law enforcement a budget priority. This makes sense – he was the author of 1994’s Violent Crime Control Act, which put thousands of cops on the street.

The Senator did admit that he is unfamiliar with specific recovery bills currently winding their way through Congress, and with the specific program failures (like FEMA policies or Road Home). I can’t say I blame him – he’s the leader in the fight against Bush’s Iraq troop surge, so he’s a little preoccupied with other issues. I appreciate, however, his willingness to say “I don’t know.” Politicians who will actually choke those words out are a rare and wonderful breed. His honesty was refreshing, as was his grasp of the overall situation and problem and his specific proposals (red tape, crime). Yes, he lacked a few specifics and it's outside of his Committee assignments, and yes, I wish he'd make it a higher profile issue on the campaign trail and his website. That's why I don't give him a full A, but an A-/B+ is still a darn good grade.

Candidates on NOLA so far (I’ll blog more as I learn more):
Biden: A-/B+ (I call that a good grade!)
Obama: C+
Edwards: C-/D+
Dodd: D-