Via NewsBusters

Reynolds asked Connie London: “Did you harbor any anger toward the President because of the slow federal response?” She rejected the premise: “No, none whatsoever, because I feel like our city and our state government should have been there before the federal government was called in.” She pointed out: “They had RTA buses, Greyhound buses, school buses, that was just sitting there going under water when they could have been evacuating people.”

(GP Ed. Note – Is Connie a blog-reader?)

Not one of the six people interviewed on camera had a bad word for Bush — despite Reynolds’ best efforts. Reynolds goaded: “Was there anything that you found hard to believe that he said, that you thought, well, that’s nice rhetoric, but you know, the proof is in the pudding.” Brenda Marshall answered, “No, I didn’t,” prompting Reynolds to marvel to anchor Ted Koppel: “Very little skepticism here.”

Video link here.
I guess we should listen to those who were in New Orleans, since I’m not sure any of us “Pundit Morning Quarterbacks” were there ourselves.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
UPDATE (from GPW): Listening to NPR this morning, Blogger Matt Duffy heard only negative reactions from evacuees to the president’s speech. His conclusion:

What’s the difference between the ABC News coverage and NPR’s this morning? Simple. Because ABC was broadcasting live, they didn’t have the ability to present the news according to their frame. NPR, having 12 hours with which to work, managed to present the speech from the proper perspective: Bush sucks.

HT: Polipundit’s Athena.

After watching the speech, I thought the president did what he needed do — and then some. His tone was exactly right and many of ideas right on the money. As I noted in my first post on the speech, I do have some concerns about what he said. Yet, of those conservatives pundits and bloggers I have read (or heard) since I first wrote, it seems I am one of the least enthusiastic about last night’s address. And I thought it was a pretty darn good speech. A very American speech. An optimistic, can-do speech.
Hugh Hewitt said the president’s “perfect pitch returned tonight” and his “looks backward and forward were on target.” On FoxNews, Dick Morris thought the president “rose to the occasion” and that the speech would help drive a turnaround in his poll numbers, particularly among women. Lorie Byrd “loved the religious references because they were beautiful and appropriate considering the wonderful work that has been done by faith-based organizations.”
Instead of focusing on the bickering and finger-pointing that have marked much of the media coverage these past two weeks, the president noted that this “was not a normal hurricane and the normal disaster relief system was not equal to it.” Yet, instead of using this line as an explanation of the failures of local, state and federal governments to provide relief, he, as a true American, did not evade responsibility. Instead, he said we are capable of meeting the challenges ahead of us and offered a number of proposals to meet those challenges.
He hailed the efforts of rescue workers and noted the generosity of the American people. Importantly, he assured those “who question the future of the Crescent City” that “there is no way to imagine America without New Orleans, and this great city will rise again.”
[Read more…]

I just watched the president’s speech from New Orleans on the Katrina disaster and recovery efforts. On the whole, I think he delivered a good speech and showed that he recognized the scope of the task ahead. I hope later in the evening to update this post with more extended thoughts on the speech because I do have some concerns.
Importantly, the president wants all departments of the federal government to investigate what went wrong with the response to this disaster — at all levels. He wants to find out what went wrong so we can figure out how to better improve our reaction to future disasters of this magnitude. This is exactly the attitude the chief executive should take in response to the failures of the recovery in the immediate aftermath of the storm. And this stand is clear contradistinction to the attitude of many Democrats, notably the House Minority Leader, and their allies in the blogosphere and MSM. They want investigations to serve primarily to prove their pre-existing theories of their chief adversary’s incompetence.
Tonight the president laid out his plans for what needs to be done in the wake of this unprecedented catastrophe. Let’s hope that his adversaries address the merits of this proposal.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
UPDATE: While yours truly watched speech on Fox, PrismWarden took in the coverage on ABC and observed

There is nothing sweeter than seeing an ABC reporter interviewing black New Orleaneans, asking questions fully intended to draw out criticism of the president, only to be met with tirades against the state and local governments and warm, unanimous support of the president.

Over at Polipundit, Lorie Byrd, an up and coming Athena, noted the same thing. One evacuee “said that what the President said lifted her up and gave her hope.”