hasbeen;1309483 wrote:Ancestors left, but those that followed relish their history. I'm a proud American, but live my Irish ancestry.

I agree with you on the African American ****. They're black. Not African American.

gosh a ruddies president obama is african american.

hasbeen;1309483 wrote:Ancestors left, but those that followed relish their history. I'm a proud American, but live my Irish ancestry.

I agree with you on the African American ****. They're black. Not African American.

Obama is African American

isadore;1309628 wrote:Obama is African American

Or is he American-Kenyan hmmmm:rolleyes:

gut;1309611 wrote:Neither can a government, really. Not everything, not into perpetuity. But regardless, what do you have to say about taxpayers footing the bill - taxpayers that chose NOT to live in the path of a hurricane or tornado? Shouldn't we really be talking about federally mandated insurance, or would it be wrong to force people to buy insurance?

The effects of those national disasters are felt around the country and in the economy, whether it is crops, farms, or loss of professional services. In today's interconnected world, one event can have an impact on the U.S. economy.
And as the storms become more frequent (whether man made or by nature, but we seeing an uptick in crazy storms), it is the feds responsibility to insure the damage is limited and does not drag down the U.S. economy.

Besides, is it not the duty of the federal government to protect it's citizens?

I'm more than willing to pay a little more for FEMA response to disasters than big sexy national security responses for terror events that are low probability.
And, the real mission of DHS and FEMA should be to coordinate fed, state, and local first responders.

ptown_trojans_1;1309633 wrote: Besides, is it not the duty of the federal government to protect it's citizens?

What exactly about disaster relief is really protecting citizens? Are states really incapable of providing security and safety?

And, no, I don't really believe that the national taxpayer should have to subsidize people for the risks they incur living along the coast. What you say about national economic effects are true, but it's also true that rebuilding creates a lot of jobs and economic activity in those areas. I'm writing a big check while another area gets most of the benefit.

Just saying, if anyone wants to talk about "fair share" the midwesterner gets the shaft in this case.

ptown_trojans_1;1309633 wrote:And as the storms become more frequent (whether man made or by nature, but we seeing an uptick in crazy storms), it is the feds responsibility to insure the damage is limited and does not drag down the U.S. economy.

Sandy was a Cat 1 storm (the lowest level) but particularly large. The storm veered hard left. Nothing crazy about it. Hurricanes happen. Don't even get me started on how humans are to blame for this. As far as the Feds being responsible for storms not dragging down the economy I'd say that's more up to state & local governments, private agencies, and the spirit of the American people. The mindset the the Feds are there to "save the day" is nonsense.

ptown_trojans_1;1309633 wrote:Besides, is it not the duty of the federal government to protect it's citizens?

It's the duty of the Federal government to preserve the republic by defending the Constitution. I'm fairly certain the nation's Founders intended to protect the citizens through common defense but they never envisioned FEMA.

ptown_trojans_1;1309633 wrote:And, the real mission of DHS and FEMA should be to coordinate fed, state, and local first responders.

There ya go....multiple bloated intrusive Big Gumbint at its finest. I'd rather let state and local first responders do their effin jobs without typical Fed bureaucratic interference. You assume that the American sheeple are too inept to take care of themselves. Only the benevolent Federal government is smart enough to take care of us. :rolleyes:

Sorry P-Town I strongly disagree. I've always respected your opinions, knowledge, experience, and intelligence. We don't always agree but I seriously think you live waaaayyyy too close to the Borg hive ship for your own good.

I don't think that government providing disaster relief is out of the realm of conservative thinking. I think most are comfortable that a limited government providing for the citizens what they and the states cannot, is not unacceptable. That said, I don't know enough about the logistics and what is involved in disaster relief...and I dare say most of us here don't either. It is certainly worthy of a discussion in a debt saddled nation.

I think it is particularly galling that democrats have used the storm for political purposes to cherry pick a 3 sentence blurb in a primary discussion about FEMA to fabricate a supposed Mitt Romney position on it and insinuate that he would necessarily dismantle it.

I can't say for sure, and I'm not going to take the time to research it, but I would suspect a lot of what FEMA is today, came in response to the Katrina disaster, and most of those positive changes came in the Bush Administration.
I don't really care if it did or didn't...I just find it irritating that this is even a politcal topic right now.

gosh a ruddies its romney, he wants to abolish fema in the debate, now he doesn't, just so many issues. and then he calls off his campaign, has an event supposedly to help the victims of sandy, but really a chance to show his political propaganda.

BoatShoes;1309186 wrote:Wealthy states like California or New York would probably do ok if it were block granted but poorer states like Alabama and Missouri would have had a difficult time without federal assistance during those horrible tornadoes.

Whoops, not only is liberal California completely broke, so is New York; imagine that.

http://news.yahoo.com/york-governor-ask-federal-government-cover-sandy-storm-200420294.html;_ylt=A2KJ3CaGXJJQjHEAdIbQtDMD

isadore;1309738 wrote:gosh a ruddies its romney, he wants to abolish fema in the debate, now he doesn't, just so many issues. and then he calls off his campaign, has an event supposedly to help the victims of sandy, but really a chance to show his political propaganda.

Riiiiiigggghhhhhttttt....which is why Obama resumes campaigning today. I guess the crisis is over and it's time for him to get back to the only job he's ever known.

gut;1309767 wrote:Riiiiiigggghhhhhttttt....which is why Obama resumes campaigning today. I guess the crisis is over and it's time for him to get back to the only job he's ever known.

after being actively involved in aiding those caught in this disaster. after receiving the deep heart felt thanks of Governor Chris Christie for his help, president obama returns to the campaign trail. In the wake of the storm romney puts the phony label of aid to disaster victims for a campaign event. soon he will be able to return to his career of corporate raider destroying workers lives and collapsing American businesses.

isadore;1309805 wrote:after being actively involved in aiding those caught in this disaster. after receiving the deep heart felt thanks of Governor Chris Christie for his help, president obama returns to the campaign trail. In the wake of the storm romney puts the phony label of aid to disaster victims for a campaign event. soon he will be able to return to his career of corporate raider destroying workers lives and collapsing American businesses.

The business world can't afford to lose someone like Romney. He's a model for the rest of the world.

believer;1309685 wrote:Sandy was a Cat 1 storm (the lowest level) but particularly large. The storm veered hard left. Nothing crazy about it. Hurricanes happen. Don't even get me started on how humans are to blame for this. As far as the Feds being responsible for storms not dragging down the economy I'd say that's more up to state & local governments, private agencies, and the spirit of the American people. The mindset the the Feds are there to "save the day" is nonsense.



It's the duty of the Federal government to preserve the republic by defending the Constitution. I'm fairly certain the nation's Founders intended to protect the citizens through common defense but they never envisioned FEMA.



There ya go....multiple bloated intrusive Big Gumbint at its finest. I'd rather let state and local first responders do their effin jobs without typical Fed bureaucratic interference. You assume that the American sheeple are too inept to take care of themselves. Only the benevolent Federal government is smart enough to take care of us. :rolleyes:

Sorry P-Town I strongly disagree. I've always respected your opinions, knowledge, experience, and intelligence. We don't always agree but I seriously think you live waaaayyyy too close to the Borg hive ship for your own good.

1. When Thomas Jefferson was President the United States Congress first appropriated federal money for disaster relief when they appropriated money for devastating local fires in New Hampshire. So, the founding fathers why they were still in our government managed emergencies/disasters from the federal level.

2. The purpose of FEMA is to coordinate disaster relief in the even that state and local resources become overwhelmed

3. The governor of the state has to ask for help in order for FEMA to come in unless it involves federal property. i.e. Why FEMA is no where to be found when a state's rights blowhard like Gov. Rick Perry waits forever to ask FEMA for help with wildfires.

So no...it's not about the "benevolent federal government taking care of us"...FEMA is today's manifestation of federal aid when state and local resources are overwhelmed and is congruent with uses of the federal purse done by early Congresses with Founding Fathers in them.

QuakerOats;1309762 wrote:Whoops, not only is liberal California completely broke, so is New York; imagine that.

http://news.yahoo.com/york-governor-ask-federal-government-cover-sandy-storm-200420294.html;_ylt=A2KJ3CaGXJJQjHEAdIbQtDMD

You don't really know what it means to be a "wealthy" state I suppose. Lemme guess, you think the United States is broke but a country living in squalor but no national debt is rich. Shouldn't you be knocking on doors or something?

hasbeen;1309810 wrote:The business world can't afford to lose someone like Romney. He's a model for the rest of the world.

he has the perfect combination of insincerity and greed to be a success there. the sooner he returns to that world the better. he won't have to associate with the 47% any more.

isadore;1309819 wrote:he has the perfect combination of insincerity and greed to be a success there. the sooner he returns to that world the better. he won't have to associate with the 47% any more.

He also has a good combination of experience and business know-how.

hasbeen;1309810 wrote:The business world can't afford to lose someone like Romney. He's a model for the rest of the world.

For what it's worth this is what Ronald Reagan's former budget director, himself a former private equity exec, has to say about Mitt Romney's "business career"

hasbeen;1309841 wrote:He also has a good combination of experience and business know-how.

I bet you think a commodities speculator knows a lot about farming too.

hasbeen;1309841 wrote:He also has a good combination of experience and business know-how.

where is lack of character and compassion will be most appreciated and used.

And Obama handed out pamphlets in Chicago...

Great. Grand. Wonderful.

I guess Mr. Stockman forgot about him running the State of Massachusetts and the Olympics.

BoatShoes;1309845 wrote:For what it's worth this is what Ronald Reagan's former budget director, himself a former private equity exec, has to say about Mitt Romney's "business career"

That might be how Stockman did it. And, indeed, there are PE firms that operate that way. Bain and others do not - firms that tend to be filled with former consultants and business execs, as opposed to leverage/chop firms typically filled by former Wall Street guys. It's two pretty distinct models for private equity.

BoatShoes;1309845 wrote:For what it's worth this is what Ronald Reagan's former budget director, himself a former private equity exec, has to say about Mitt Romney's "business career"

BoatShoes;1309848 wrote:I bet you think a commodities speculator knows a lot about farming too.

I'm just trying to keep Isadore going. See below.

isadore;1309849 wrote:where is lack of character and compassion will be most appreciated and used.

this doesn't make sense, sir.

BoatShoes;1309818 wrote:You don't really know what it means to be a "wealthy" state I suppose. Lemme guess, you think the United States is broke but a country living in squalor but no national debt is rich. Shouldn't you be knocking on doors or something?

Lemme guess, we are effectively insolvent as we cannot meet our obligations [without the benefit of the printing press], but not to worry, we can spend and regulate our way out of this cesspool. Thanks again for your keen insight. Do all the trial lawyers in your neighborhood have their obligatory obama and brown signs in their yard and associated bumper stickers affixed to their 'practical' Volvos?

ptown_trojans_1;1309633 wrote:And as the storms become more frequent (whether man made or by nature, but we seeing an uptick in crazy storms), it is the feds responsibility to insure the damage is limited and does not drag down the U.S. economy.

I'm more concerned about those same feds dragging down our economy by enacting legislation in reaction to "man made climate change" than I am any natural disaster.

BoatShoes;1309815 wrote:1. When Thomas Jefferson was President the United States Congress first appropriated federal money for disaster relief when they appropriated money for devastating local fires in New Hampshire. So, the founding fathers why they were still in our government managed emergencies/disasters from the federal level.

2. The purpose of FEMA is to coordinate disaster relief in the even that state and local resources become overwhelmed

3. The governor of the state has to ask for help in order for FEMA to come in unless it involves federal property. i.e. Why FEMA is no where to be found when a state's rights blowhard like Gov. Rick Perry waits forever to ask FEMA for help with wildfires.

So no...it's not about the "benevolent federal government taking care of us"...FEMA is today's manifestation of federal aid when state and local resources are overwhelmed and is congruent with uses of the federal purse done by early Congresses with Founding Fathers in them.

I had to check myself a few times before I agreed with BoatShoes, but I largely agree with this.

I Wear Pants;1309385 wrote:I've pissed off isadore and Quaker in the same thread. That probably means I'm doing something right.

TRUTH!