Advertisement

Archive for Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Better safe

There will be second-guessing about preparations for Hurricane Irene, but officials in New York and New Jersey were smart to be safe rather than risk being sorry.

August 30, 2011

Advertisement

There’s bound to be a great deal of second-guessing about various aspects of Hurricane Irene. Did forecasters overly frighten residents along the nation’s East Coast? Did the massive pre-hurricane coverage create a “cry wolf” situation? Were the mass evacuations needed?

Those in the hurricane forecasting business were right on target concerning several predictions, including the track and size of the storm, but they missed on the severity or strength of the storm.

There is sure to be some criticism of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who didn’t pull any punches in warning residents about the dangers of the hurricane and called for major, unprecedented actions. Some will say these two elected officials overreacted in their no-nonsense calls for pre-storm preparations and evacuations, but the old saying “better safe than sorry” certainly applies in this situation.

Everything is clearer in hindsight, but do you suppose Vermont’s governor now wishes he had been more forceful in urging those in his state to prepare for the terrible flooding that occurred?

There’s no perfect formula on how to prepare for massive storms such as Irene, but Christie and Bloomberg deserve far more thanks than criticism.

Chances are there will be more hurricanes in the next several months, and, hopefully, professionals in the hurricane forecasting business will be as accurate in predicting the track of these storms as they were with Irene, but a bit more on target concerning the strength and severity of the hurricane. Also, the public must not be careless or lackadaisical in preparing for the storms. The states likely to be hit by these massive natural disasters need and deserve the leadership of officials such as Christie and Bloomberg.

Comments

cato_the_elder 3 years, 3 months ago

Irene was never more than a Category 1 storm. The flooding from rain brought by the storm did major damage in far inland states, which in some cases has been both tragic and devastating. However, the doomsday scenarios for the coastline areas were all media hype at its worst, fueled by the fact that D.C. and, especially, New York City, were in the path of the storm and are the center of the universe for the elite media in this country, who used the weather news opportunity to divert attention from the economy and Obama's embarrassing vacation on Martha's Vineyard.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 3 months ago

So it was Obama's fault? Michelle Bachman said it was God's fault.

cato_the_elder 3 years, 3 months ago

Speaking of faults, as I reported the other day a fault line has apparently been discovered running underneath Washington, D.C., which the Obama administration has determined caused the recent earthquake there. According to them, it's called "Bush's fault."

jaywalker 3 years, 3 months ago

"the elite media...who used the weather news opportunity to divert attention away from the economy and Obama's embarrassing vacation"

"So it was Obama's fault?"

And there are some that don't believe we need massive overhaul to our education system.

riverdrifter 3 years, 3 months ago

"Irene was never more than a Category 1 storm."

Incorrect. Please check the facts before making such statements.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 3 months ago

I subscribe to the "better safe than sorry" school. A great deal of what happened to NOLA had more to do with the city's unpreparedness than with the storm itself. The aftermath was far, far worse than what it should have or would have been. If the Federal government, hadn't prepared, Obama would have been blamed. And now because the government did prepare, it's being criticized. This is very much an example of the saying, "If Obama came out in favor of oxygen, the GOP would refuse to breathe." Either way, no one can say a disaster on the level of Katrina ever took place on Obama's watch. How that must chap the cheeks of a few Republican's.

cato_the_elder 3 years, 3 months ago

Au contraire. The Dems were hoping for a disaster of exactly that magnitude in order to deflect attention from Obama's tanking poll numbers and allow him to look "presidential," and in their view provide extra "stimulus" to the economy by way of the huge amounts of federal spending that would have occurred.

Jimo 3 years, 3 months ago

This from the nut who said: "The notion that the Bush administration is responsible for the state of our economy when Obama took over is the biggest lie promulgated by the Hard Left in my lifetime."

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 3 months ago

Yes and where under the watch of one, 1,836 people died, under the other the death toll was kept to 41. I guess that was just collateral damage to the so called "private sector".

Commenting has been disabled for this item.