Tuesday, November 27, 2012
In general, there've been two responses to NY Governor and potential 2016 presidential candidate, Andrew Cuomo, comparing Hurricane Sandy to Hurricane Katrina.
1. Wow, Sandy was a really, really bad hurricane.
2. Wow, Cuomo was really, really insensitive.
Evidence for proposition #1: The Daily Mail has a good comparison of the 'canes and notes that Sandy recovery will probably run $71 billion, while Katrina/Rita ran $108 billion.
Evidence for proposition #2: So far, 121 people have died from Sandy. The death toll for Katrina/Rita was a staggering 1,833.
If you're talking dollars and cents, perhaps there's a comparison. If you're talking human lives, there's no comparison.
And, as a supremely popular and able politician, Cuomo should probably have picked up on the difference.
Not surprisingly, he's taking a few lumps in a heretofore lumpless existence.
New York Magazine: "Cuomo gets flak for comparing Hurricane Sandy to Hurricane Katrina."
Village Voice: "Andrew Cuomo: Sandy worse than Katrina. Umm.... Nope."
The Daily Mail: New York Governor Cuomo Under Fire for Claiming Hurricane Sandy was 'worse than Katrina' even though far more died in 2005 storm."
Now... this isn't Bush flying over New Orleans in a chopper-bad... but, combined with MSNBC's Chris Hayes' repeated attacks on Cuomo for being insufficiently liberal, it's been a couple tough weeks for Cuomo.