One oft-cited lesson of Judo is to use your opponents size and momentum against him. Here's how we should apply this to the Katrina "blame-game":
Republicans are arguing that local authorities are to blame. "The locals should have done the planning and much of the intial rescue." At one level, we should not just accept their statements, but amplify them: "Republicans say they want the full responsibility for disaster relief to fall on local communities; Democrats want the Federal Government to play a leading role."
[more below]
It is fine for some folks to get caught up in defending the local officials. But so what if the lcoals weren't perfect? Our side wants FEMA to coordinate and help with both the planning and the aftermath in part because local officials are not likely to be good at disaster planning.
If the locals didn't do everything perfectly right, that just reinforces our point that FEMA should have paid more attention before the disaster struck. If the locals did do everything right, well that simply reinforces the point that FEMA screwed up after the disaster struck.
Most Americans agree with us on the proper Federal role. Even most conservatives agree with us when it comes to large-scale disasters. They are only pretending to disagree to divert attention from Bush (the real "blame game" that is going on.)
Here's the Judo: we take them at their word, accept their own defense. They think that local disasters are responsibility of local governments whereas we think the Federal government should take the lead.
They actually want us to get completely bogged down in the details of who-did-what-when, because then the average citizen will start to tune out. This is the whole idea of their strategy -- throw sand in the air.
So let's make them defend the broader point: they are in opposition to what most Americans think is the proper role of the Federal Government in disaster planning and rescue.
How do they defend themselves!?