Aa
Cantor: No emergency disastor relief without cuts
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/cantor_no_emergency_disaster_r031861.php
If you can’t watch clips online, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News this morning to confirm what he and his office have been saying all along: Republicans won’t allow emergency aid in the wake of Hurricane Irene unless Democrats meet GOP demands: dollar-for-dollar spending cuts elsewhere.
In the interview, the dimwitted Majority Leader tried to make this sound like common sense — instead of an unprecedented move. Remember, no modern Congress, regardless of which party was in the majority, has ever demanded offsets in response to American natural disaster, not even Tom DeLay’s.
Cantor also said House Republicans have “already” dealt with this by approving $1 billion in disaster aid in May, paying for it by cutting funds for a renewable energy program. Whether the Majority Leader understands what he’s saying or not is unclear, but the costs associated with the weekend’s hurricane will far exceed $1 billion.
Let’s also not lose sight of the larger context here. As far as Eric Cantor is concerned, launching wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do not need to be paid for. Tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires do not need to be paid for. Bailing out Wall Street does not need to be paid for. But when American communities are struck by a natural disaster, all of a sudden, House Republicans discover a new standard: if Democrats want to help affected areas, the GOP has some demands that must be met.
And in case this story isn’t quite mind-numbing enough, also note that FEMA has been forced to temporarily suspend “some payments to rebuild roads, schools and other structures destroyed during spring tornadoes in Joplin, Mo., and Southern states and other recent natural disasters” in order to respond to Hurricane Irene.
That this is happening in the wealthiest nation in the world, simply because the Republican Party has been taken over by charlatans and fools, is a national disgrace.
For all of our differences over party, ideology, and creed, we know that when disaster strikes and our neighbors face a genuine emergency, America responds. We don’t ask what’s in it for us; we don’t weigh the political considerations; we don’t pause to ponder the larger ideological implications.
We act. It’s who we are; it’s what we do.
Or it was, right up until Americans elected a radicalized House majority.
If you can’t watch clips online, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News this morning to confirm what he and his office have been saying all along: Republicans won’t allow emergency aid in the wake of Hurricane Irene unless Democrats meet GOP demands: dollar-for-dollar spending cuts elsewhere.
In the interview, the dimwitted Majority Leader tried to make this sound like common sense — instead of an unprecedented move. Remember, no modern Congress, regardless of which party was in the majority, has ever demanded offsets in response to American natural disaster, not even Tom DeLay’s.
Cantor also said House Republicans have “already” dealt with this by approving $1 billion in disaster aid in May, paying for it by cutting funds for a renewable energy program. Whether the Majority Leader understands what he’s saying or not is unclear, but the costs associated with the weekend’s hurricane will far exceed $1 billion.
Let’s also not lose sight of the larger context here. As far as Eric Cantor is concerned, launching wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do not need to be paid for. Tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires do not need to be paid for. Bailing out Wall Street does not need to be paid for. But when American communities are struck by a natural disaster, all of a sudden, House Republicans discover a new standard: if Democrats want to help affected areas, the GOP has some demands that must be met.
And in case this story isn’t quite mind-numbing enough, also note that FEMA has been forced to temporarily suspend “some payments to rebuild roads, schools and other structures destroyed during spring tornadoes in Joplin, Mo., and Southern states and other recent natural disasters” in order to respond to Hurricane Irene.
That this is happening in the wealthiest nation in the world, simply because the Republican Party has been taken over by charlatans and fools, is a national disgrace.
For all of our differences over party, ideology, and creed, we know that when disaster strikes and our neighbors face a genuine emergency, America responds. We don’t ask what’s in it for us; we don’t weigh the political considerations; we don’t pause to ponder the larger ideological implications.
We act. It’s who we are; it’s what we do.
Or it was, right up until Americans elected a radicalized House majority.
They are Sheeple, and will continue to hear what they want to hear, and see what they want to see.
Point out facts, and they will respond with rhetoric, finger-pointing and name-calling.
Point out facts, and they will respond with rhetoric, finger-pointing and name-calling.
I've got to agree with el and R Glass on this. What the man said was logical. It sounded nowhere dear as dire as the article above mentions. Did anyone else notice how fast the article went away from the point of financially covering THIS emergency to Cantors stand on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq... (and Libya too I suppose.)
Also, did anyone take noet to the fact that whoever wrote this article was really quick to say that FEMA had to quit rebuilding roads and the likes after the tornado's in Missouri??? Couldn't be because they have to find funding, could it?
Look folks, this money has to come from somewhere. Organizations like FEMA only get so much money to operate on yearly.... that money is supposed to cover it's operational costs. If there is more destruction and more emergencies than FEMA is prepared for..... that money has to be raised (taken) from other parts of the nations budget. That's how this thing works. It's how its worked since it's inception
Also, did anyone take noet to the fact that whoever wrote this article was really quick to say that FEMA had to quit rebuilding roads and the likes after the tornado's in Missouri??? Couldn't be because they have to find funding, could it?
Look folks, this money has to come from somewhere. Organizations like FEMA only get so much money to operate on yearly.... that money is supposed to cover it's operational costs. If there is more destruction and more emergencies than FEMA is prepared for..... that money has to be raised (taken) from other parts of the nations budget. That's how this thing works. It's how its worked since it's inception
I can't get the video to come up. It might be just my computer, not sure. Does anyone have a hard copy to be read? I tried googling with no success. Thanks.
I have to eat crow, I was in fact responding to the article above , I watched it on TV and actually I do see his reasoning ,he's usually a good guy I did wonder what was going on ..This has been the main sticking point where does all the spending come from ..Maybe Buffet and Gates will shell out some to help ....
I was going to drop it, but I just can't. The very last thing the author of the article says is "right up until Americans elected a radicalized house majority". That statement is numbing, and very biased. The Americans elected a radicalized house during the Bush administration. Does anyone remember Pelosi, Reid and company??? Pretty radicalized change there.
See folks, here's the deal. For every action there's a reaction. With politics it is like a pendulum. It swings this way, then it swings that way, then it swings this way, then it swings that way. Radicalism is what breeds radicalism on the other side. It's been this way for eons.
The above article isn't as much journalism as it is biased journalism. The author is Steve Benen who is a left wing columnist who has been on left wing shows like Rachel Maddow and Sam Seder, been on NPR.... POTUS....Huffington Post. All of them are left leaning organizations. This guy writes his blog in the Washington Monthly, whose owner clearly defines the publications stand as "left of center".... Oh, the founder also wrote speeches for Clinton..... so tell me how the article isn't biased again?
See folks, here's the deal. For every action there's a reaction. With politics it is like a pendulum. It swings this way, then it swings that way, then it swings this way, then it swings that way. Radicalism is what breeds radicalism on the other side. It's been this way for eons.
The above article isn't as much journalism as it is biased journalism. The author is Steve Benen who is a left wing columnist who has been on left wing shows like Rachel Maddow and Sam Seder, been on NPR.... POTUS....Huffington Post. All of them are left leaning organizations. This guy writes his blog in the Washington Monthly, whose owner clearly defines the publications stand as "left of center".... Oh, the founder also wrote speeches for Clinton..... so tell me how the article isn't biased again?
Sorry but I didn’t have any luck finding another link. I thought I found one but I got Rick Rolled. I did find a couple of biased ones that just showed sound bites of what he said, (of course trying to make it look like something he didn’t say.)
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
