I don't recall normally seeing mention of so many communities cut off by floodwaters as I have in the aftermath of Irene, like in Vermont and the Catskills. Anyone else notice that? I'm curious if Irene really did isolate more communities than is typical, or if it's just a popular news topic this time around?

It looks like Irene's financial cost is living up to its billing, probably ranking in the top ten disasters in US history when all the costs are tallied. In Irene's case, the vast area that it affected contributes greatly to the final bill. Unfortunately, much of Irene's damage comes from flooding rather than wind damage, and many of the communities struck with historic floods typically do not have flood insurance, which is going to make recovery more difficult for these people. You can read a New York Times article about it here.