Where's the anger over the Haiti aid lateness?

The differences five years and two administrations make in regards to the reaction of the US media, elected officials and political activists over New Orleans and Haiti is undeniable. It speaks volume about the tactics that were played out in late summer 2005 and what we are seeing today.

For all the abuse President George W. Bush took over his handling of the federal response in the wake of Katrina, the untold number of deaths as a result of the flooding, the rumors that it was all a government conspiracy to weed out the black residents from the ninth ward, and FEMA's late response, all contributed to the sagging of Bush's approval numbers.

This, despite the fact that the federal government is not the first responder of sorts in any natural emergency or disaster, but rather it is the responsibility of the local authority and the state government to handle such matters as they see fit.

Regardless, the blood was in the water, and the press force-fed the idea that Bush was not up to the job of protecting Americans after all. Truly horrible. The vendetta was on, again. Bush had to be made an example of GOP incompetence, negligence and uncaring towards the poor minorities of New Orleans.

In the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, we see similarities with New Orleans. Black residents in desperation. Thousands dead, many injured and dying. Total infrastructural collapse. And, little to no government control.

Granted, Haiti, unlike New Orleans, is an independent nation. However, it's been over a week since the Caribbean plate rumbled, and humanitarian relief along with thousands of US troops have just arrived. The USNS Comfort, a hospital ship, has also docked in the capital, Port-au-Prince. Seven days it took, but they are there now, nonetheless.

Where's the outrage from the US media? Where are Speaker Pelosi and senate majority leader Harry Reid calling for an investigation into the late arrivals? Where is the manifestation of public anger at President Obama for not getting there sooner?

Frankly, I'm waiting to hear Minister Louis Farrakhan come up with a doozy, like say, the Mothership observed a United States Geological Survey vessel in the distance of the Haitian capital unload some super-secret depth charges causing the earth to shake violently so white crackers can re-colonize the black nation in order to transform it into a Club Med paradise for white blue-eyed devils.

But no. That's not going to happen. All's quiet in the American pressrooms. No visibly-shaken shouting Sheps. No dumb Kanye comment. No problems. Things are under control. The Democrats are in charge now.

But a Democrat governor, Kathleen Blanco of Louisiana, was in charge at the time of Katrina, as was a Democrat mayor, Ray Nagin of New Orleans. Right, both so-called leaders availed themselves to the comfort of safety while their own citizens were left to fend for themselves amid the ravaging storm and flood, leaving one leader, a republican, to take the flak for the combined ineptitude of two democrats.

Mopping Up the Democrat Mess

As the loss in Massachusetts begins to sink in for the Democrats in Washington, it's time for Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to apologize to the nation for playing gutter patisan politics over healthcare. Not that it's going to do Reid any good since he's clearly facing an uphill battle to keep his seat this year, but he ought to save face before it's too late.

Forget party politics. It's time the Congress face reality. The American people are disgusted with the tactics displayed over the past ten years by both parties. The voters are clamoring for change. Real change. Not verbal gimmicks.

The United States is yearning for a statesman or stateswoman to guide this ship onto its rightful course. It wants a leader willing to buck the establishmentarians and speak to the commoners as if he or she is one of them. A Joe the Plummer type willing to ask the right questions and provide the right answers. No political double-speak.

Last October, at a fundraiser in California, President Obama ordered the republicans to grab a mop and clean up the mess left by the previous administration. If last night's election of republican Scott Brown is any indication of mass discontent, in a Blue state of all places, it tells the Democrats in control of Washington the voters want them to grab a mop as well and clean up after their rancid legislative mess of 2009.

Mr. Brown Will Go to Washington, After All

The Massachusetts special election is over. Senator-elect Scott Brown will now represent the Bay State. His stunning victory will provide the GOP with 41 votes to the Democrats' 59.

Meaning, the Nevada senator Harry Reid will either invite the GOP leadership into the negotiating table, or play hardball and pass all legislation with a senate budgetary maneouvre called Reconciliation requiring just a 51-vote majority.

In yesterday's blog, I mentioned that Brown must win by several thousand votes in order to avoid a Democrat hijacking. He won big in a state that has only 21 elected republicans compared to the Democrats' 178 in the Massachusetts House and Senate combined.

The Democrats are in disarray as they circle the wagon seeking someone or somebody to blame for their electoral defeat not only in yesterday's loss, but the losses this past November in the gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey.

With the Tea Bag movement in full battle mode, independents flocking back in droves to the GOP, and the 365-day Obama honeymoon over, 2010 will certainly be an interesting year in American politics as voters take out their hostility towards career politicians who created this miasmic economic conditions and a president who has absolutely no clue as to how to fix it.

The Special Election in Massachusetts

Scott Brown, the conservative Republican candidate attempting to succeed the late Ted Kennedy for a seat in the United States Senate from Massachusetts, may not succeed in today's special election if the Democrat machine in the Bay State manage to pull off a 50% to 49% "victory" for the Democrat candidate Martha Coakley, the current state attorney general.

For some weird reason, Democrats have won races that were too close for comfort where the conservative candidate was thought to have had the advantage coming in to the final leg of the race.

Most recently in the New York 23rd congressional district last November where the conservative Doug Hoffman was winning in the polls over the Democrat, Bill Owens and the liberal Republican, Dede Scozzafava. In the end, Owens barely eked out a victory with 50.0% of the vote over Hoffman's 44.7%. The problem in this race was Scozzafava, who having received the bad news that she was badly trailing Hoffman, endorsed Owens the weekend prior to the election. She received a paltry 5.3% of the vote, but just enough to give the upstate Adirondack seat to the Democrat, which hadn't been won by that party since before the Civil War.

Then, there was the upset in the Minnesota senate election in November 2008 where the incumbent senator Norm Coleman lost a heated race to comedian and diehard leftist Al Franken by just 312 votes after a lengthy recount and court battle lasting seven months. In the end, the vote tally for Franken and Coleman were 41.99% and 41.98%, respectively, with the independent candidate garnering 15.15%.

After a few weeks in which Brown, like Hoffman, was gaining momentum, another GOP loss will have voters pondering just what in God's name is going on at the local level where the votes are counted. There is a saying, that it's not how many votes are cast but who counts the votes. Are there enough Republican officials in the electoral precincts keeping vigilance in Massachusetts, especially in big cities like Boston, Cambridge, Fall River, Worcester and Springfield?

There is clear pandemonium in Democrat circles, and there is no telling what may be up their sleeves to protect what they truly believe in their hearts to be their senate seat. Ted Kennedy's beloved seat. Nevermind that, as Brown said in last week's only debate, that the seat actually belongs to the people of Massachusetts. This is all about preserving the Democrat party's political power at all cost, and if they must play dirty again, they will.

Democrat operative Ed Schultz said on his radio program a couple of days ago that he would be in favor of voter fraud if it helped Coakley. "Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are," said Schultz.

Was Schultz, an ardent pro-union guy, sending a message from the Democrat establishment to the people of Massachusetts, something akin to union-bullyism: You better vote for Coakley or else?

Can one imagine what the uproar would be like if a Republican pundit, campaign or elected official had said that? Oh, the double standard.

So, although I am praying for a Brown win, I'm pessimistic enough to know that if he does not pull ahead tonight by several thousand votes, we may not know who actually won this campaign until next week or next month, God forbid.

Long enough by hook or crook to keep the current temporary occupier, Paul G. Kirk, Jr., in the senate to vote for ObamaPelosiReid Healthcare, Cap & Trade, Stimulus II and a host of other goodies favored by the White House and congressional democrats while Massachusetts Democrat officials miraculously find uncounted ballots left in poll watchers' car trunks.

If Bostonian Paul Revere were alive today, he'd be shouting this evening: The Democrats are coming! The Democrats are coming!

Addressing the Haiti Problem Now, Not Later

Time magazine has a very compelling feature on the deteriorating situation in Haiti.

My heart and prayers go out to the people of that impoverished country.

Once Haiti begins to stabilize in the coming months with international humanitarian assistance the nations of the Americas and France will need to meet to find a solution or solutions to this quagmire of a country that hasn't developed economically since its independence from Napoleonic France in the early 1800's.

Since 1992, the United States has provided Haiti with $4B in foreign aid on top of billions more from other countries for infrastructure development. Where has the money gone? Why has there been a lack of accountability from the United States, France and the United Nations?

We can no longer continue to witness this nation in our own back yard slide deeper and deeper into misery thus affecting its island neighbor, the Dominican Republic, whom it shares a border with on the island of Hispaniola.

Haiti must change. Haiti must work. However, I do not think allowing the oligarchs to run Haiti again will be beneficial to any short or long term improvements. History shows us that allowing the Haitians to manage their own country's affairs will not help matters. It's far too corrupt. Far too inept. Far too poor. Far too complex.

The Americas can no longer allow the island of Hispaniola to have a failed state and a prosperous one living side by side. Such uncomfortable situations give rise to bitterness, disharmony and hatred towards the failed party and the people who allow it to happen. The Dominican Republic also deserves a better, more orderly and civil neighbor to its west.

Perhaps the time has come for France to dispatch its world renowned Legion Etrangere to impose order and civility to the people of this narrow stretch of land that have never experienced such ideals we take for granted in our own country.

What is also in order is the creation of a Franco-Americas Authority (under a United Nations mandate if possible) with the United States and France running the administrative processes, reforming the national police and army, and bringing in foreign investments under strict Authority regulation.

Certainly, such Authority is worth considering because the current situation is not working for either the Haitian people, the Dominicans next door, the United States, France and Latin America.

What's your opinion? I'd like to know.