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.
So this is another one I have been thinking alot about. I guess I can kinda see what he is trying to say...the amount of money they have is a finite amount, and you should live within your means.
But Brice, your post hit home for me. I, like most people on here, live on a budget. And we work really hard to stay within that budget. But I can tell you this..if my family, friends or God forbid, my child was in trouble, I would rack up that credit card, take out a second mortgage, whatever I had to do to rescue them. Because people come first. Not saying I wouldn't have to make some sacrifices later to pay for it...I know I would. But I would take care of the rescue and rebuilding first and sort it out later. I think the final straw on this for me was just watching the news, and seeing that several towns (somewhere hit by the hurricane, I missed the beginning) are completely cut off..no road access. They are out of food, clean water, etc. Take care of these people, get them out of there. Figure out the cuts later.
Maybe that is what he meant, but I can see how the way the message was delivered has enraged many. Perhaps the timing of his speech was off? Especially with so many without electricity, clean water, food....I don't know, I guess for me it's people first, money later. Again, yes, other cuts may have to be made...but later. THis was not the time to speak this way. Just my opinion.
But Brice, your post hit home for me. I, like most people on here, live on a budget. And we work really hard to stay within that budget. But I can tell you this..if my family, friends or God forbid, my child was in trouble, I would rack up that credit card, take out a second mortgage, whatever I had to do to rescue them. Because people come first. Not saying I wouldn't have to make some sacrifices later to pay for it...I know I would. But I would take care of the rescue and rebuilding first and sort it out later. I think the final straw on this for me was just watching the news, and seeing that several towns (somewhere hit by the hurricane, I missed the beginning) are completely cut off..no road access. They are out of food, clean water, etc. Take care of these people, get them out of there. Figure out the cuts later.
Maybe that is what he meant, but I can see how the way the message was delivered has enraged many. Perhaps the timing of his speech was off? Especially with so many without electricity, clean water, food....I don't know, I guess for me it's people first, money later. Again, yes, other cuts may have to be made...but later. THis was not the time to speak this way. Just my opinion.
This one really bites me. Do you know what the E in FEMA stands for? Emergency.... And I dont know if anyone realizes this but Irene is up to 7 Billion right now and lo and behold, Katia is on her way.....with more forming behind her. Idiot is what he is.
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.
Let it start in Virginia......
Let it start in Virginia......
I didn't refudiate the site/article with another site. I simply showed the common sense approach. The finger pointing and name calling can go on all day. Basically the guy said the money has to come from somewhere.
Let me try to paint a picture here, then pose a question or two. FEMA is a government agency. Government agencies run off of budgets. Without any budgets, all agencies can run rough shot so the budgets are set as parameters in which to operate. When an agency like FEMA goes over their budget, they need to find money elsewhere.
So, if you're going to find money within an established budget (do we even have one yet?) wouldn't you have to take money allocated for somewhere else?
Hypothetically, let's say your power bill is all of a sudden $30 higher than it ever has been. You take a look at the bank account and there just isn't a spare $30 sitting around.... do you not pay the power bill, or do you look at your budget and see where you can make some cuts. "Entertainment budget is $50 for the month, so I wont go to the movies like normal...there's $25 and I will buy lower cost items at the grocery store to make up the other $5". Is that not something you would do, or would you let them cut the power off?
Americans adjust their budgets all of the time. Why not the government? All that guy is saying is that the money has to come from somewhere. He is telling the truth!!! Would it have been better if he just lied? I do not get the beef here...hell, there isn't one. A far left wing activist/writer and his left wing blog started this.
Let me try to paint a picture here, then pose a question or two. FEMA is a government agency. Government agencies run off of budgets. Without any budgets, all agencies can run rough shot so the budgets are set as parameters in which to operate. When an agency like FEMA goes over their budget, they need to find money elsewhere.
So, if you're going to find money within an established budget (do we even have one yet?) wouldn't you have to take money allocated for somewhere else?
Hypothetically, let's say your power bill is all of a sudden $30 higher than it ever has been. You take a look at the bank account and there just isn't a spare $30 sitting around.... do you not pay the power bill, or do you look at your budget and see where you can make some cuts. "Entertainment budget is $50 for the month, so I wont go to the movies like normal...there's $25 and I will buy lower cost items at the grocery store to make up the other $5". Is that not something you would do, or would you let them cut the power off?
Americans adjust their budgets all of the time. Why not the government? All that guy is saying is that the money has to come from somewhere. He is telling the truth!!! Would it have been better if he just lied? I do not get the beef here...hell, there isn't one. A far left wing activist/writer and his left wing blog started this.
So you complain of a biased site and refudiate it with another biased site? Oh okay! What I heard was pretty much the same thing the article is saying, short version of course. Any other links that are not biased?
Try this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SqIwTlXTK7U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SqIwTlXTK7U
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.
