of course.  Perhaps one of the largest natural disasters that the US has ever faced.  Odd, isn't it ?, that FEMA has been so competent in handling natural disasters for at least 10 years, hundreds of hurricanes for example; odd isn't it that the recent very damaging Florida hurricanes were well handled by the "incompetent flunkies at FEMA" whom you call a natural disaster.

Odder still that all of these other local governments, other than New Orleans, and Louisiana, seemed to understand that NO had the role of first responder, and LA the first backup role.

Let's remember that FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, was created only in 1979. It was formed to coordinate and focus federal response to major disasters - to "assist" local and state governments.

Common sense suggests that local and state governments are best able to prepare and plan for local disasters.

Is a Washington bureaucrat better suited to prepare for an earthquake in San Francisco, a hurricane in Florida, or a terrorist act in New York?

After the Sept. 11 attacks against the World Trade Center, no one suggested that the Bush administration should have been responsible for New York's disaster response or that federal agents should have been involved in the rescue of those trapped in the buildings.

Last year, four major hurricanes slammed into Florida. Governor Jeb Bush led the disaster response and did a remarkable job, with nothing happening like what we have seen in New Orleans.

The primary response in disasters has always come from local communities and state governments.

 First responders and the manpower to deal with emergencies come from local communities: police, fire and medical. Under our federal system, these local departments answer to local authorities, not those in Washington. These first responders are not even under federal control, nor do they have to follow federal orders.

In addition to local responders, every state in the Union has a National Guard.

 State National Guards answer first to the governor of each state, not to the president. The National Guard exists not to defend one state from an invasion by another state, but primarily for emergencies like the one we have witnessed in New Orleans and in other areas impacted by Katrina. (See: http://www.arng.army.mil/about_us/organization/command_structure.asp)

Newsmax.com

You might check this article out as it lays out the disaster responsibilities from NO's and LA's own disaster plans in some detail.  Here is just a snippet:

The plan makes it evident that New Orleans knew that evacuation of the civilian population was the primary responsibility of the city - not the federal government.

The city plan acknowledges its responsibility in the document:

As established by the City of New Orleans Charter, the government has jurisdiction and responsibility in disaster response. City government shall coordinate its efforts through the Office of Emergency Preparedness.

The city document also makes clear that decisions involving a proper and orderly evacuation lie with the governor, mayor and local authorities. Nowhere is the president or federal government even mentioned

While I think it is fair to criticize FEMA for errors made in what was probably the countries largest natural disaster, and they need upgrading of their capabilities as Jeb Bush, Governor of Florida said after Hurricane Wilma;

 Although Bush said that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had done a good job coordinating the immediate response when four hurricanes hit Florida last year, he criticized FEMA's actions during recovery.

 He cited the agency's "bureaucratic slowness" in securing long-term housing and loans, debris removal and reimbursement.

But to put the entire blame on them is totally illogical given the track record of FEMA when they work with competent state and local authorities.  Why wouldn't the incompetent flunkies have failed in all of these other disasters?  Why don't you even mention the failure of NO and LA?