Republicans against disaster relief - does that include hurricanes like Isaac?

[Harry Dresden]

Ron Paul.

Ron Paul: The Feds Should Have No Role In Disaster Relief

Now apologize to Mr. dean and to the board in general for being such an a-hole.

how come you never ask "Mr.Dean" to apologize to the board for some of the bullshit he throws up here that he cant back up?......and in general for being such an ass hole?

As I pointed out before.....Ron Paul isn't a Republican......he's a Libertarian.

yea ok.....but that has nothing to do with what i was asking ....Cardone....or whoever it was...

 

[mudwhistle]

how come you never ask "Mr.Dean" to apologize to the board for some of the bullshit he throws up here that he cant back up?......and in general for being such an ass hole?

As I pointed out before.....Ron Paul isn't a Republican......he's a Libertarian.

yea ok.....but that has nothing to do with what i was asking ....Cardone....or whoever it was...

Asking rdean to apologize is like telling a dog to quit licking it's balls. It ain't gonna do any good.

 

[rightwinger]

how come you never ask "Mr.Dean" to apologize to the board for some of the bullshit he throws up here that he cant back up?......and in general for being such an ass hole?

We can't forget Eric Cantor who blocked disaster relief for Hurricane Irene

Eric Cantor: Federal Hurricane Disaster Relief Would Have To Be Offset By Spending Cuts - Business Insider

Course you must not have read the article.

Cantor said that he wanted any possible relief.....IF THERE WAS ANY NEEDED.....to be offset by spending cuts.

That means he didn't want us to borrow the funds needed for that relief. He wanted it to be already in the Treasury and slotted for something else that wasn't an emergency. You know......like trips to Hawaii for the GSA and such.

That is not blocking relief in any shape or form, numb-nuts.

Not quite...

He predicated relief on finding spending cuts

 

[mudwhistle]

We can't forget Eric Cantor who blocked disaster relief for Hurricane Irene

Eric Cantor: Federal Hurricane Disaster Relief Would Have To Be Offset By Spending Cuts - Business Insider

Course you must not have read the article.

Cantor said that he wanted any possible relief.....IF THERE WAS ANY NEEDED.....to be offset by spending cuts.

That means he didn't want us to borrow the funds needed for that relief. He wanted it to be already in the Treasury and slotted for something else that wasn't an emergency. You know......like trips to Hawaii for the GSA and such.

That is not blocking relief in any shape or form, numb-nuts.

Not quite...

He predicated relief on finding spending cuts

Which is the same as saying the spending shouldn't be borrowed. It should be already in the Treasury.

You don't see the difference?

How many times have you fuckwads talked about Bush borrowing money for two wars???


Just how retarded can you get?

You can't figure anything out without your lib sources to help you, can you?

 

[Erand7899]

It is sad that anyone would play politics with people's lives like this.

Never used to happen, disaster relief used to be a bipartisan issue.

So sad.

It is sad. Maybe we should have thought about that before we got 16 TRillion dollars worth of debt racked up.

Maybe, but we should still give it, regardless of the debt. There are other ways to save money with the debt.

Except for emergency response to save lives and restoration of necessary public services, I am totally opposed to federal disaster aid.

When someone can explain to me why a family who loses their home in a house fire is not entitled to federal aid, while 100 families who lose their homes in a larger disaster are entitled to federal aid, I might change my mind. Are those 100 families more equal than the one family? Do they suffer more?

 

[Harry Dresden]

As I pointed out before.....Ron Paul isn't a Republican......he's a Libertarian.

yea ok.....but that has nothing to do with what i was asking ....Cardone....or whoever it was...

Asking rdean to apologize is like telling a dog to quit licking it's balls. It ain't gonna do any good.

yea your right.....he doesnt even stick with the dam threads he starts....

 

[Harry Dresden]

It is sad. Maybe we should have thought about that before we got 16 TRillion dollars worth of debt racked up.

Maybe, but we should still give it, regardless of the debt. There are other ways to save money with the debt.

Except for emergency response to save lives and restoration of necessary public services, I am totally opposed to federal disaster aid.

When someone can explain to me why a family who loses their home in a house fire is not entitled to federal aid, while 100 families who lose their homes in a larger disaster are entitled to federal aid, I might change my mind. Are those 100 families more equal than the one family? Do they suffer more?

i have Fire Ins. on my place in the Homeowners Ins......i believe its mandatory out here.....so that could be why....

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Tropical Storm Isaac gains strength, expected to become hurricane Sunday | Fox News

Republicans blocked an effort Monday by Senate Democrats to quickly pass a $7 billion aid package for victims of recent natural disasters like Hurricane Irene, tornadoes in the Midwest and the South and floods along the Mississippi, Missouri and other rivers.

Republicans block disaster relief bill | Capitol Hill

One by one, GOP senators representing states that suffered disaster damage–including North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, Texas Sen. John Cornyn, Alabama Sens. Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions, and Mississippi Sens. Thad Cochran and Roger Wicker–swiftly dashed the hopes of their constituents by voting against the relief package.

Republicans Block Disaster Relief to Their Own States

Democrats had hoped to use to replenish the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s depleted disaster fund. Democrats needed 60 votes to advance the measure.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/us/13brfs-disasteraid.html

You would think Republicans would be fine not helping Blue States, but not helping Red States? Doesn't that piss their base off?

REMEMBER, IT'S DEMOCRATS THAT THE REPUBLICAN BASE OWE FOR GETTING DISASTER RELIEF. Democrats fight for the Republican base. And they don't even know it. The Republicans leadership is not on the side of the "little people".

Yes, Republicans are against federal disaster relief. They have no trouble accepting it when its available to them - but they are against it.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Tropical Storm Isaac gains strength, expected to become hurricane Sunday | Fox News

Republicans blocked an effort Monday by Senate Democrats to quickly pass a $7 billion aid package for victims of recent natural disasters like Hurricane Irene, tornadoes in the Midwest and the South and floods along the Mississippi, Missouri and other rivers.

Republicans block disaster relief bill | Capitol Hill

One by one, GOP senators representing states that suffered disaster damage–including North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, Texas Sen. John Cornyn, Alabama Sens. Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions, and Mississippi Sens. Thad Cochran and Roger Wicker–swiftly dashed the hopes of their constituents by voting against the relief package.

Republicans Block Disaster Relief to Their Own States

Democrats had hoped to use to replenish the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s depleted disaster fund. Democrats needed 60 votes to advance the measure.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/us/13brfs-disasteraid.html

You would think Republicans would be fine not helping Blue States, but not helping Red States? Doesn't that piss their base off?

REMEMBER, IT'S DEMOCRATS THAT THE REPUBLICAN BASE OWE FOR GETTING DISASTER RELIEF. Democrats fight for the Republican base. And they don't even know it. The Republicans leadership is not on the side of the "little people".

Please name even one Republican that has ever said they were against Federal Disaster Relief.

Just one.

Either that or you could just STFU and stop spewing Lies.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul's federal disaster relief plan: Kill FEMA - latimes.com

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Democrat disaster relief is predicated on democrat support. That's why Texas was denied disaster relief.

That's why relief for Joplin was cut to give more to the east coast (democrat) victims of Irene.

I call bullshit.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

There are at least 70 known Marxists/Communists/Socialists/Progressives in the party.

Progressives? So now progressives are a bunch of commies, as well?



Who do you think would be more disturbed to find out he was a communist? The Progressive, Theodore Roosevelt, or the socialist George Orwell?

 

[StevenC]

What a bunch of horseshit.

Earlier Monday, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said Republicans will attach a disaster aid package to must-pass legislation for keeping the government fully running past Sept. 30. That stopgap spending bill is likely to advance next week.

The money for relief will be there.

And why did the dems want 7 billion when Obama didn't even ask for that much.
This is pure gimmickry be the dems,

 

[skookerasbil]

Democrat disaster relief is predicated on democrat support. That's why Texas was denied disaster relief.

That's why relief for Joplin was cut to give more to the east coast (democrat) victims of Irene.

I call bullshit.

s0n............a big ass storm is heading your way. Time to go. Thats what you do when a mega-storm is heading to a city vbelow sea level!!! If we're all seeing you on the roof of the Superdome in 2 days, nobody is going to give a shit this time!!! You can swim the fuck out. Nobody is coming for your fat ass.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Democrat disaster relief is predicated on democrat support. That's why Texas was denied disaster relief.

That's why relief for Joplin was cut to give more to the east coast (democrat) victims of Irene.

I call bullshit.

s0n............a big ass storm is heading your way. Time to go. Thats what you do when a mega-storm is heading to a city vbelow sea level!!!

I actually live above sea level. But don't let facts blur your reality.

If we're all seeing you on the roof of the Superdome in 2 days, nobody is going to give a shit this time!!!

No one gave a shit last time. In fact, sick fucks like you took pleasure in it.

You can swim the fuck out. Nobody is coming for your fat ass.

That's for the kind words. I just hope your family never has to endure a natural disaster with you present.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[Please name even one Republican that has ever said they were against Federal Disaster Relief.

Just one.

Either that or you could just STFU and stop spewing Lies.

Ron Paul.

Ron Paul: The Feds Should Have No Role In Disaster Relief

Now apologize to Mr. dean and to the board in general for being such an a-hole.

you first.

Show me where I've attacked someone based on outright falsehoods and I will apologize. Otherwise, mind your own business.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[Please name even one Republican that has ever said they were against Federal Disaster Relief.

Just one.

Either that or you could just STFU and stop spewing Lies.

Ron Paul.

Ron Paul: The Feds Should Have No Role In Disaster Relief

Now apologize to Mr. dean and to the board in general for being such an a-hole.

Well, he didn't have the character to apologize, but he did have the sense to shut up.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

All the Republicans who voted against it, obviously. Starting with Eric Cantor.

Problem is usually this is a scam. They put stuff in bills to make them unable to pass. It's called a poison pill.

In legislative debate, a wrecking amendment (also called a poison pill amendment or killer amendment) is an amendment made by a legislator who disagrees with the principles of a bill and who seeks to make it useless (by moving amendments to either make the bill malformed and nonsensical, or to severely change its intent) rather than directly opposing the bill by simply voting against it.

An important character of wrecking amendments is that they are not moved in good faith. The proposer of the amendment would not see the wrecked legislation as good legislation and would still not vote in favour of the legislation when it came to the final vote, even if the amendment were accepted. Motives for making them include allowing more debate, delaying the enactment of the legislation, or just sometimes a straightforward attempt to make the initiator of the legislation give up.

Some opponents of particular amendments will describe them as wrecking amendments because they regard the amendments as undermining the unity of the original proposal. Proponents of the amendment may seek to deny the charge by saying that the original proposal brings together different steps, and while personally they oppose all the parts, some parts are even worse than others and legislators should have an opportunity to consider them separately.

Wrecking amendments can pick up more votes than motions against, because observers tend to focus on who voted in favour and against the Bill in the final count, rather than looking at the amendments made during the passage through the legislature. Therefore it can be a wise tactic to try to introduce wrecking amendments at as many opportunities as possible.

​

Wrecking amendment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How Politicians Play Dirty Tricks: The Poison Pill Gambit

If you are going to try to prove something, prove it's related. Don't just assume or imagine.

The truth is, and we both know it, Democrats are more likely to "help" Americans. Not so with Republicans. Unless it's millionaires. They love to help millionaires. I can provide many links proving that. But I don't have to because we both already know it to be true. Right? At least you can agree with that.

Obama hasn't done a damn thing about Katrina-when he should have, and said he would have. Now he's using it for political gain.

Remember the oil spill? That relief was PATHETIC. The Democrats don't give a crap about relief either.

 

[Sinjorri]

It is sad that anyone would play politics with people's lives like this.

Never used to happen, disaster relief used to be a bipartisan issue.

So sad.

because there are poison pilsl attached that they dont show you, so they humanize it which gets the lips all emotioned up and they go on a rampage and say things like you do.

If i gave you 20,000 for your disater but i tack on u have to give up ur car religion, and change hte name of your first born for the money, would u take it?


there are tons going on u dont see and still u make silly statements without knowing the facts, heres a fact TM wont bring up to anyone, no one really knows all the facts, theres a fact to understand.

 

[Sinjorri]

Problem is usually this is a scam. They put stuff in bills to make them unable to pass. It's called a poison pill.

In legislative debate, a wrecking amendment (also called a poison pill amendment or killer amendment) is an amendment made by a legislator who disagrees with the principles of a bill and who seeks to make it useless (by moving amendments to either make the bill malformed and nonsensical, or to severely change its intent) rather than directly opposing the bill by simply voting against it.

An important character of wrecking amendments is that they are not moved in good faith. The proposer of the amendment would not see the wrecked legislation as good legislation and would still not vote in favour of the legislation when it came to the final vote, even if the amendment were accepted. Motives for making them include allowing more debate, delaying the enactment of the legislation, or just sometimes a straightforward attempt to make the initiator of the legislation give up.

Some opponents of particular amendments will describe them as wrecking amendments because they regard the amendments as undermining the unity of the original proposal. Proponents of the amendment may seek to deny the charge by saying that the original proposal brings together different steps, and while personally they oppose all the parts, some parts are even worse than others and legislators should have an opportunity to consider them separately.

Wrecking amendments can pick up more votes than motions against, because observers tend to focus on who voted in favour and against the Bill in the final count, rather than looking at the amendments made during the passage through the legislature. Therefore it can be a wise tactic to try to introduce wrecking amendments at as many opportunities as possible.

​

Wrecking amendment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How Politicians Play Dirty Tricks: The Poison Pill Gambit

If you are going to try to prove something, prove it's related. Don't just assume or imagine.

The truth is, and we both know it, Democrats are more likely to "help" Americans. Not so with Republicans. Unless it's millionaires. They love to help millionaires. I can provide many links proving that. But I don't have to because we both already know it to be true. Right? At least you can agree with that.

Obama hasn't done a damn thing about Katrina-when he should have, and said he would have. Now he's using it for political gain.

Remember the oil spill? That relief was PATHETIC. The Democrats don't give a crap about relief either.

he ignored the gulf, whats more to show people how pathetic this guy is. at what point do you say okay what do you consider the line to be to tell u Obama is not a president for some of these libs. its silly. katrina or irene?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

If you are going to try to prove something, prove it's related. Don't just assume or imagine.

The truth is, and we both know it, Democrats are more likely to "help" Americans. Not so with Republicans. Unless it's millionaires. They love to help millionaires. I can provide many links proving that. But I don't have to because we both already know it to be true. Right? At least you can agree with that.

Obama hasn't done a damn thing about Katrina-when he should have, and said he would have. Now he's using it for political gain.

Remember the oil spill? That relief was PATHETIC. The Democrats don't give a crap about relief either.

he ignored the gulf,

No he didn't.