320 SHARES Share Tweet

Forget about the flooding. Now all eyes are focused on the gamesmanship between political parties hoping to win some points at the expense of a community in ruin.

In the wake of the massive flood that has taken many lives as well as forcing over a hundred thousand residents to abandon their destroyed property and register with FEMA for temporary assistance, the overshadowing discussion now is whether President Obama should have visited the flood damage in Louisiana.

Should presidential hopeful, Donald Trump have visited?

Trump is accusing President Obama of neglecting his duty in not making a personal visit during the flooding.

In the meantime, Mr. Trump did visit the area accompanied by plenty of media attention.

At first, Baton Rouge’s “The Advocate” did print criticism of the president’s failure to cut short his Martha’s Vineyard vacation to come to Louisiana, but Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards insists he requested that the president as well as Mr. Trump refrain from visiting this storm-ravaged area until later in order not to distract attention from the immediate problem at hand.

President Obama listened, Governor Bel Edwards claims, while Mr. Trump ignored his request in the hope of taking advantage of this situation.

“The Advocate” has since rescinded its criticism of the president’s delayed visit after having had pointed out to it the logistics of a presidential visit along with all the Secret Service and other ancillary personnel only complicating and confusing the disaster-stricken community.

Democratic hopeful, Hillary Clinton too, on Monday said she also plans a visit to the flooded region. At this point her campaign staff says the exact date of her visit is yet to be determined. At the moment, Ms. Clinton too, avers that for her to visit too soon would only detract from the national as well as public response to the dire needs of the people of Louisiana.