In this case high ground.

The difference between what Truehill was talking about and what you said is this: He was describing an embryonic plan for disaster management that required widespread cooperative action, including using government resources to disseminate information on effective involvement, a good idea but too late. What you said placed a harsh judgment on the victims after the fact, in order to blame them for their plight so as to distract attention away from the lack of response by the people we pay to respond. Your suggestions were unrealistic, non-cooperative (every man for himself rather than we are all responsible for each other), and unfairly punishing to people without the resources necessary to rescue themselves all by themselves.

What I did was point out what everyone with common sense already understands - personal responsibility. That this happened to be the exact same plan for evacuating the residents of New Orleans is not much of a surprise.

It's now rather apparent these folks should've KNOWN they were responsible for themselves if the worst hit.

Your denigrating my message of "personal responsibility" into a sort of "every man for himself and cut your neighbors down in the process" is great spin, but its too little and too late.

Let's review my words:

Poverty is not an excuse for not leaving the city. There was ample time to leave on foot if necessary and head for higher ground. Only the medical cases and elderly have a valid excuse. And for these it is only too painfully obvious that their local government failed them. Yet, even they are responsible for their own safety and should have arranged exodus with those who were able to take them away.

Emphasis added

Doesn't exactly sound like someone advocating anarchy and noncooperation does it? And how exactly is it "unfairly punishing to people without the resources necessary to rescue themselves all by themselves"?

It's the exact same message: *Get yourself out of harms way.*

Only when I say it it is a heartless and cruel and oh...it's also racist!

When a liberal says it, it is a cooperative effort filled with concern, love, racial sensitivity and warm puppies.

Balderdash!

When you go to a restaurant, the chef better identify himself as a liberal - so he can expect you to thank him for the finest meal you ever ate.

Otherwise, should he identify himself as a conservative, he can expect you to say the food tasted lousy and you suspect it gave you food poisoning, perhaps even botulism.

;-)