Everyone is on the Red Cross bandwagon these days.

But that was not the case before Katrina. The Red Cross was fiercely criticized for its reaction to 9-11. The criticism was bipartisan.

All was forgotten once Katrina hit. The only alternatives offered for giving wre overtly-religious organizations, ranging from the Salvation Army to Pat Robertson's Operation Blessing (number two on the Administration's hit parade).

Besides, you've got to figure, this was really more up the Red Cross' alley than 9-11, which in the end only took out the center of a well-insured central city, and completely displaced only a few tens of thousands. This was different, not just New Orleans but the parishes around it, and Mississippi all the way up to Jackson.

So how are they doing?

In DeKalb County, Georgia, where I live, CEO Vernon Jones (that's the title we have for heads of government in the county -- silly ain't it?) actually kicked the Red Cross outta town, ordering them to vacate a "mega-shelter" in Lithonia, saying they were doing a horrible job. Operations in Houston have also been harshly criticized. A site called Raw Story has even charged the Red Cross with withholding aid to New Orleans itself, in concert with FEMA, which wanted the area evacuated.

Is any of this true? I don't know. What I do know is people should demand a complete audit of everything the Red Cross has done, and has not done, during this disaster.

Would an efficient government response, organized through a special agency, say FEMA, have done better?