Criticizing the critic.

I've been sort of busy since Hurricane Katrina struck, so I really haven't been monitoring the blogworld to see if anyone is commenting on what I write here.

However, today I ran across a blog called To The People, with an article titled "Save My Job!" that was posted in response to something what I wrote here.

Cicero writes:

"Yes, victims of floods and hurricanes shouldn't be helped so that white, upper middle class liberals at nonprofits can keep their jobs. And god damn those selfish Americans that are saving hurricane victims for their own emotional satisfication when they could be saving the spotted owl!"

It's humbling to think that nonprofit professionals have little or no grounds for claiming that they have a clue when it comes to coping with the enormity of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. I've been critical of the nonprofit sector's shortcomings for a while, and I'm not planning to argue that the criticism levelled at me here is entirely misplaced.

At the same time, it's amusing to see that Cicero assumes that I'm white, upper middle class, liberal, and more loyal to my job than to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. (Oh, and male as well. Cicero refers to me as "he.") I may have to revise my self-concept a little.

Did I say "mediocre?" What was I thinking?

Yesterday, I wrote:

"It's not that agencies such as the Red Cross and FEMA are above criticism in the ways that they handle disasters and humanitarian crises - but those clueless idealists should wake up and smell the coffee! It takes years to establish the funding, training, and infrastructure needed to do even a mediocre job."

If the reports I've been hearing and reading are accurate, some agencies that are responsible for responding to the Katrina emergency can't even dream of attaining the relatively high standard implied by the term "mediocre." This tragedy has turned into a scandal and a source of shame.