Sandy relief bill does not get voted on

[jillian]

OK, confirmed. Well I guess that is how it will come down.
U.S. House sets votes on Sandy storm aid-Rep. King - AlertNet

Elizabeth Warren, Senator Elizabeth Warren, in one day.

Sweet.

Perhaps pure embarrassment is finally getting these guys off their asses.

it's only 9 billion dollars.

and it's a different congress later in the month.

 

[Vast LWC]

They were free to purchase renters insurance, which would provide them with another place to live.

The citizens of New York are free to raise taxes for repair of public spaces. The people of Indiana are not obligated, but they are free to voluntarily contribute.

So because you stole from me yesterday, I should not protest when you attempt to steal from me today. Got it...

Too bad these delusional folks didn't put their money towards insurance premium payments. That way, they'd get the money needed for repairs and we wouldn't have to steal from anyone. Hey, how about that...

No-one is "stealing" anything.

Let's say you had a generous old uncle, who, out of the goodness of his heart, has been helping you with your cost of living expenses for the last 20 years or so.

Now, that uncle's wife suddenly has a heart attack, and the uncle can't afford to pay the medical bills, or his rent for that matter.

Are you then going to turn around and tell him to go **** himself?

What kind of insensitive bastard would do something like that?

Or do basic human tendencies toward kindness and reciprocity just go right out the window, when large groups of people are concerned, with you?

 

[eflatminor]

They were free to purchase renters insurance, which would provide them with another place to live.

The citizens of New York are free to raise taxes for repair of public spaces. The people of Indiana are not obligated, but they are free to voluntarily contribute.

So because you stole from me yesterday, I should not protest when you attempt to steal from me today. Got it...

Too bad these delusional folks didn't put their money towards insurance premium payments. That way, they'd get the money needed for repairs and we wouldn't have to steal from anyone. Hey, how about that...

No-one is "stealing" anything.

If money isn't handed over on a VOLUNTARY basis, it's stealing...no matter what you want to call it.

Let's say you had a generous old uncle, who, out of the goodness of his heart, has been helping you with your cost of living expenses for the last 20 years or so.

Now, that uncle's wife suddenly has a heart attack, and the uncle can't afford to pay the medical bills, or his rent for that matter.

Are you then going to turn around and tell him to go **** himself??

No, I would VOLUNTARILY help him out. Now, if in my efforts to help out my uncle, I rob my neighbor of his piggy bank, it's stealing, no matter if I give that money to my uncle or not.

What kind of insensitive bastard would do something like that?

Steal from people under the guise of charity? From what you've advocated, you would be that kind of insensitive bastard. Good luck with that.

Or do basic human tendencies toward kindness and reciprocity just go right out the window, when large groups of people are concerned, with you

Whether it's one guy or many, I am a charitable person. I give VOLUNTARILY to charitable organizations and I've donated my time and talents. I have NEVER stolen from another to support MY idea of charity. Basic human kindness teaches me that theft is wrong. I see you've missed that basic lesson.

 

[eflatminor]

They were free to purchase renters insurance, which would provide them with another place to live.

insurance policies don't cover 'acts of G-d', which hurricanes are considered.

Insurance ABSOLUTELY covers storm damage, be they from hurricanes, tornadoes or other storms. I'd suggest you were merely mistaken, but we know what a lying sack of shit you really are.

it's funny how you hacks only whine when it comes to blue states...

More evidence you're a lying ****. I have NEVER advocated for so called 'disaster relief' for any state. That's what insurance is for. Buy it or deal with the consequences.

 

[tjvh]

They were free to purchase renters insurance, which would provide them with another place to live.

insurance policies don't cover 'acts of G-d', which hurricanes are considered.

there has never been a state that waited 66 days for disaster relief. it's funny how you hacks only whine when it comes to blue states... which give more money to the feds than they take...

as opposed to your red states whcih suck up more resources than they pay in.

You are so wrong with regards to Insurance companies not covering acts of God.
Homeowner's Insurance Guide: Insurance Coverage: Know Your Choices

 

[RoadVirus]

I don't know why some are bitching that Boehner walked away from this. Obama went back to vacation without signing the Fiscal Cliff deal. Even if the House passes the Sandy bill now, it will still have to sit on Obama's desk until he decides to get back to work.

 

[Vast LWC]

I don't know why some are bitching that Boehner walked away from this. Obama went back to vacation without signing the Fiscal Cliff deal. Even if the House passes the Sandy bill now, it will still have to sit on Obama's desk until he decides to get back to work.

LOL, the man works through Christmas and New Years, and when he finally takes a few days off to spend with his family, it's all his fault that the legislation that should have been passed MONTHS AGO will take a couple of extra days more to sign.

Classic, just classic.

 

[Vast LWC]

Well eflat, I guess it's all a matter of your world-view.

I see my taxes as a contribution to making the United States a better, stronger nation.

You see them as someone stealing your money.

I guess if you're an anarchist, your point of view makes sense.

Admittedly, some tax revenue is misused, and THAT is something I'll complain about. But as far as I'm concerned, no-one is stealing anything from me.

 

[Antares]

Please feel free to show that its all Republican pork...

I saw that this passed the Senate the other day. Apparently it had not passed the house and the house will not vote on it. I just heard several bills be approved that were nowhere where not near as important as this bill is.

The bill is over $60 billion. Over half of it is loaded with pork. Garbage completely unrelated to storm damage.
The disgust of some House members crossed the aisle.
This crap had ZERO to do with party or ideology.

The fact the House Speaker Boehner walked away from this is disgusting. Yes, the fiscal cliff was a huge accomplishment but to throws this off as "too much work" for them to do is a true shame of our system. I would hope Obama mentions the victims of Sandy tonight.

Oh, and that 'pork' was put in there to get republicans votes. So was that just a ploy so now they can say it is full of pork?

You are against it because it costs too much? This might just end up being a battle cry in further votes. Republicans who are undecided will remember this bill and say, "When I needed the republican leadership it turned their back on me."

 

[eflatminor]

Well eflat, I guess it's all a matter of your world-view.

I see my taxes as a contribution to making the United States a better, stronger nation.

You see them as someone stealing your money.

No, I'm quite happy to pay my taxes so that the federal government can carry out its duties as required by the Constitution. When that money is used not to carry out the enumerated powers but to buy votes and support from people who didn't do what was required of them to insure their own property, THAT'S theft.

I guess if you're an anarchist, your point of view makes sense.

No, not an anarchist, just someone that thinks the federal government should follow the law. But thanks for throwing out that over-the-top hyperbole. Very helpful.

Admittedly, some tax revenue is misused, and THAT is something I'll complain about. But as far as I'm concerned, no-one is stealing anything from me.

From those that are not voluntarily contributing, it's theft. But we'll make note that if someone robs you and takes your money, it's okay by you as long as they give your money to charity.

 

[Antares]

Seriously, stop typing honey you are stupid.

They were free to purchase renters insurance, which would provide them with another place to live.

insurance policies don't cover 'acts of G-d', which hurricanes are considered.

there has never been a state that waited 66 days for disaster relief. it's funny how you hacks only whine when it comes to blue states... which give more money to the feds than they take...

as opposed to your red states whcih suck up more resources than they pay in.

 

[Vast LWC]

But thanks for throwing out that over-the-top hyperbole.

Because calling all taxes "theft" isn't "over-the-top hyperbole"?

 

[eflatminor]

But thanks for throwing out that over-the-top hyperbole.

Because calling all taxes "theft" isn't "over-the-top hyperbole"?

Now you're just lying. I made it very clear that I do not consider "all taxes" theft. Nobody is calling for no taxes. We just want those taxes to be used to carry out the federal government's required duties, nothing more. Giving our money to others because they neglected to buy insurance is unlawful and yes, is theft.

You should look into the case of Texas Seed Bill, where President Cleveland vetoed a bill to help farmers suffering from drought. He rightly saw no Constitutional authority to take from some taxpayers just to give it to others. Private charity then stepped in and gave far more to the farmers than was to be appropriated in the bill he vetoed. Just another example of how free people will ALWAYS respond to an emergency better than central planners.

 

[Rambunctious]

It is a pork bill

 

[Vast LWC]

Now you're just lying. I made it very clear that I do not consider "all taxes" theft. Nobody is calling for no taxes. We just want those taxes to be used to carry out the federal government's required duties, nothing more. Giving our money to others because they neglected to buy insurance is unlawful and yes, is theft.

You should look into the case of Texas Seed Bill, where President Cleveland vetoed a bill to help farmers suffering from drought. He rightly saw no Constitutional authority to take from some taxpayers just to give it to others. Private charity then stepped in and gave far more to the farmers than was to be appropriated in the bill he vetoed. Just another example of how free people will ALWAYS respond to an emergency better than central planners.

Article I, Section 8:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States.

I can think of nothing to which the "General Welfare" clause applies to more than assisting American citizens, and rebuilding the infrastructure, in the event of a massive natural disaster.

Certainly this would be much more applicable to the section than most of the giant, bloated military budget that based on the premise of "defense", when it's main purpose seems to more one of policing the planet.

Of course, you folks like to pretend that the General Welfare clause never existed. Unfortunately for you, hundreds of years of successive Supreme courts have proven that that is not the case.

 

[eflatminor]

Now you're just lying. I made it very clear that I do not consider "all taxes" theft. Nobody is calling for no taxes. We just want those taxes to be used to carry out the federal government's required duties, nothing more. Giving our money to others because they neglected to buy insurance is unlawful and yes, is theft.

You should look into the case of Texas Seed Bill, where President Cleveland vetoed a bill to help farmers suffering from drought. He rightly saw no Constitutional authority to take from some taxpayers just to give it to others. Private charity then stepped in and gave far more to the farmers than was to be appropriated in the bill he vetoed. Just another example of how free people will ALWAYS respond to an emergency better than central planners.

Article I, Section 8:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States.

I can think of nothing to which the "General Welfare" clause applies to more than assisting American citizens, and rebuilding the infrastructure, in the event of a massive natural disaster.

Certainly this would be much more applicable to the section than most of the giant, bloated military budget that based on the premise of "defense", when it's main purpose seems to more one of policing the planet.

Of course, you folks like to pretend that the General Welfare clause never existed. Unfortunately for you, hundreds of years of successive Supreme courts have proven that that is not the case.

Tell us, if the general welfare clause was meant to allow government to do all the things you advocate, what was the point of enumerating federal powers and making it crystal clear those were the only powers through the 10th amendment?

 

[mikegriffith1]

And the House shouldn't vote on the Sandy relief bill until the Dems remove all the candy and pork from it. Much of the funding in that bill is for things that have nothing to do with Sandy. Good for the Republicans for insisting that the Sandy bill be just for Sandy-related expenses.

 

[Vast LWC]

Tell us, if the general welfare clause was meant to allow government to do all the things you advocate, what was the point of enumerating federal powers and making it crystal clear those were the only powers through the 10th amendment?

Because the General Welfare clause does not allow Congress to legislate for the general welfare of the country, but it DOES allow them to collect and spend money in order to benefit the general welfare of the country.

General Welfare Clause : Legal Definition

 

[Vast LWC]

And the House shouldn't vote on the Sandy relief bill until the Dems remove all the candy and pork from it. Much of the funding in that bill is for things that have nothing to do with Sandy. Good for the Republicans for insisting that the Sandy bill be just for Sandy-related expenses.

What pork, specifically?

(See previous posts in the thread to avoid repeating what's already been gone over.)

 

[Antares]

Lets start with EVERYTHING that does not DIRECTLY pertain to Sandy....

I feel bad for you son, I really do.

You feel the need to swallow all the jizz Bammy tosses your way.

And the House shouldn't vote on the Sandy relief bill until the Dems remove all the candy and pork from it. Much of the funding in that bill is for things that have nothing to do with Sandy. Good for the Republicans for insisting that the Sandy bill be just for Sandy-related expenses.

What pork, specifically?

(See previous posts in the thread to avoid repeating what's already been gone over.)