Ron Paul says tornado victims should not get aid

[rightwinger]

I don't believe your ridiculous proposition has ever been before a court, but if you're looking for precedent I can help you...

In 1893, when a massive drought afflicted Texas farmers, Cleveland categorically refused to grant federal aid to the victims. He issued an eloquent written justification for his decision:
Cleveland’s words skillfully represent the contrast between the effects brought about by the voluntary generosity of private parties and those created through the exercise of the coercive powers of government. Private individuals, when not hindered by government intervention, have a choice in how to allocate their funds among the various purposes that they deem to be of importance.

Sorry....but your argument is a FAIL

Grover Cleveland was acting as chief executive. The fact that he told flood victims to fuck themselves has no Constitutional bearing

It was a drought, not a flood, and if there was no constitutional authority then, there is no Constitutional authority NOW.

I am afraid there is Constitutional authority to help Americans in times of need. Again, the General Welfare clause allows Congrees to do what they determine is in the best interests of the General Welfare of the people. It has been used for a hundred years and upheld by the courts

Libertarians who only look out for themselves may not like it....but it is the law of the land

FEMA is an authorized federal agency. If you disagree with it's Constitutionality, you are welcome to challenge it in court

 

[saveliberty]

What is the policy on federal disaster aid for tornado damage? Insurance should cover most losses. Are we going to cover multi-car fog accidents? I had ice storm damage last year. Where's my check?

 

[Dr.Drock]

I don't see how ron paul is wrong. Americans have big hearts, and can donate on their own accord. Also, the state governments have natural disaster plans. Some of you just love the nanny government... The question is why.

Bitching about FEMA during Katrina, then getting on here and posting about how great federal aid is, doesn't make perfect sense to you?



Why not?!?!?!??!?!

because FEMA would have done quite well with Katrina....but Bush was a racist.....and he wanted to control the balck population...

So he intentionally impeded FEMAS success.

Everyone knows that...how come you dont?

Great point, boy do I feel like a dummy .

All the individual changes Obama personally made to FEMA, truly heroic.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Sorry....but your argument is a FAIL

Grover Cleveland was acting as chief executive. The fact that he told flood victims to fuck themselves has no Constitutional bearing

It was a drought, not a flood, and if there was no constitutional authority then, there is no Constitutional authority NOW.

I am afraid there is Constitutional authority to help Americans in times of need. Again, the General Welfare clause allows Congrees to do what they determine is in the best interests of the General Welfare of the people. It has been used for a hundred years and upheld by the courts

Libertarians who only look out for themselves may not like it....but it is the law of the land

FEMA is an authorized federal agency. If you disagree with it's Constitutionality, you are welcome to challenge it in court

The General Welfare clause doesn't mean what you think it does, you should read what Madison wrote about it, after all, he wrote the fucking thing.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Seems to me that the great ultra advocates of states rights tried all this once before and they got their asses kicked.
It was a good thing that the president of the UNITED STATES back then was a compasionate man. Maybe it was to bad he didn't go with, to the victor goes the spoils.
For those who seem to be such strong proponents of the Consitution...you sure seem to forget quite a bit of how it reads.
Refresh your memory.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
With all of the posts from the teaparty or rightwingers there is one common thread.
MY money.
Everything else is up for grabs

That's a lie.

All the gov't cuts we push for, we want you to get the same tax reduction benefits that we get. I don't want you to be forced to pay for certain gov't programs i like, which is exactly what you promote and advocate for. You want me to pay for what you want, I want you to receive the same tax deduction that I get.

What's the more selfish position there?

It is more selfish for those who have the means and the power to take more are selfish.
That is the true selfish attitude among this country.
Really, if President Lincoln had taken everything from the south like the rightwingers and neo cons like to think today, it so would have been a different story in this land.
Imagine! Former black slaves having the ground given to them that those awful slave owners had in their possession. TO THE VICTOR GOES THE SPOILS!
Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need.

What am I "taking" by getting to keep more of my own money I earned? Selfish is demanding gov't pay for your programs, even when ppl don't want to.

Generosity is voluntarily giving money on your own free will, robbery is taking money and giving to others against their will. Seems pretty common sense to me.

 

[GoneBezerk]

A town being leveled is a wee bit more serious than you losing your car in a fog wreck. You can have 50 cars damaged in a wreck and it still doesn't equal the damage of people losing their town/homes/businesses/lives from a tornado going for miles.

Insurance will cover most of the damage but a town being gone causes havoc like loss of normal services to actually live. The Feds should only help the state and city officials get things stabilized then leave, not hang around like with Katrina giving out money to people.

What is the policy on federal disaster aid for tornado damage? Insurance should cover most losses. Are we going to cover multi-car fog accidents? I had ice storm damage last year. Where's my check?

 

[Dr.Drock]

What is the policy on federal disaster aid for tornado damage? Insurance should cover most losses. Are we going to cover multi-car fog accidents? I had ice storm damage last year. Where's my check?

Great point, in fact yesterday my shirt got rained on, will gov't pick up my dry cleaning tab?

Come to think of it, it was very widespread rain, where's our relief fund?

 

[GoneBezerk]

I wish there was a way for kooks like you to be tagged so that we could quit protecting you from terrorists and not help you during natural disasters.

When you whine about the US military killing terrorists overseas, we could just single you out here for terrorists to find you while leaving us alone, because "you don't like your tax dollars killing terrorists overseas."

Also, we can just tag you and your personal goods for not being supported when a natural disaster hits your trailer. The Feds will just say, he didn't want us to find him a place to sleep after the tornado sent his trailer airborn.

 

[saveliberty]

A town being leveled is a wee bit more serious than you losing your car in a fog wreck. You can have 50 cars damaged in a wreck and it still doesn't equal the damage of people losing their town/homes/businesses/lives from a tornado going for miles.

Insurance will cover most of the damage but a town being gone causes havoc like loss of normal services to actually live. The Feds should only help the state and city officials get things stabilized then leave, not hang around like with Katrina giving out money to people.

What is the policy on federal disaster aid for tornado damage? Insurance should cover most losses. Are we going to cover multi-car fog accidents? I had ice storm damage last year. Where's my check?

The ice storm here was very widespread. No aid. So the government has a policy or just picking winners and losers?

 

[Dr.Drock]

I wish there was a way for kooks like you to be tagged so that we could quit protecting you from terrorists and not help you during natural disasters.

When you whine about the US military killing terrorists overseas, we could just single you out here for terrorists to find you while leaving us alone, because "you don't like your tax dollars killing terrorists overseas."

Also, we can just tag you and your personal goods for not being supported when a natural disaster hits your trailer. The Feds will just say, he didn't want us to find him a place to sleep after the tornado sent his trailer airborn.

What's the difference between wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay someone else's home insurance costs and wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay for Obamacare?

If millions have a disastrous medical issue, like cancer, or hundreds or thousands have a natural disaster issue, what's the difference? Shouldn't your "principles" lead you to support Obamacare?

If people need help, just assume charity and local gov'ts aren't enough and just tax everyone else to pay for it, what's the difference?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Ron Paul says tornado victims should not get aid | 11alive.com

Nuts. My heart goes out to the people in tornado alley and I have no problem with my tax dollars going to help the survivors rebuild their lives.

"The people who live in tornado alley, just as I live in hurricane alley, they should have insurance," Paul said on the program. Only a fool wouldn't.

Paul insisted the Federal Emergency Management Agency does not help out in situations like this, and that sending money and sending FEMA into disaster areas like the areas affected last week were "not efficient." How true is that? They are sill cleaning up New Orleans

"To say that any accident that happens in the country, send in FEMA, send in the money, the government has all this money -- it is totally out of control, and it's not efficient," Paul said. completely true.



libs; get your house destroyed = cash in insurance + cash in on Fed funds = votes for the (D)


ahh to be like Peter Pan....

This brings up a question. My mortgage holder requires I carry insurance on my home, with them listed as a co-beneficiary. Is this just something only some financial institutions have in place, or is this a general practice?

 

[GuyPinestra]

I wish there was a way for kooks like you to be tagged so that we could quit protecting you from terrorists and not help you during natural disasters.

When you whine about the US military killing terrorists overseas, we could just single you out here for terrorists to find you while leaving us alone, because "you don't like your tax dollars killing terrorists overseas."

Also, we can just tag you and your personal goods for not being supported when a natural disaster hits your trailer. The Feds will just say, he didn't want us to find him a place to sleep after the tornado sent his trailer airborn.

What's the difference between wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay someone else's home insurance costs and wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay for Obamacare?

If millions have a disastrous medical issue, like cancer, or hundreds or thousands have a natural disaster issue, what's the difference? Shouldn't your "principles" lead you to support Obamacare?

If people need help, just assume charity and local gov'ts aren't enough and just tax everyone else to pay for it, what's the difference?

But... but... but... That's DIFFERENT!!!

 

[Dr.Drock]

I wish there was a way for kooks like you to be tagged so that we could quit protecting you from terrorists and not help you during natural disasters.

When you whine about the US military killing terrorists overseas, we could just single you out here for terrorists to find you while leaving us alone, because "you don't like your tax dollars killing terrorists overseas."

Also, we can just tag you and your personal goods for not being supported when a natural disaster hits your trailer. The Feds will just say, he didn't want us to find him a place to sleep after the tornado sent his trailer airborn.

What's the difference between wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay someone else's home insurance costs and wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay for Obamacare?

If millions have a disastrous medical issue, like cancer, or hundreds or thousands have a natural disaster issue, what's the difference? Shouldn't your "principles" lead you to support Obamacare?

If people need help, just assume charity and local gov'ts aren't enough and just tax everyone else to pay for it, what's the difference?

But... but... but... That's DIFFERENT!!!

That's about the answer i expect.

 

[GoneBezerk]

If an ice storm takes down power in a state/city for awhile, causes massive wrecks, etc then many times Governors ask for Federal help.

Driving on an icy road and wrecking isn't a Federal problem until it affects thousands of people.

A town being leveled is a wee bit more serious than you losing your car in a fog wreck. You can have 50 cars damaged in a wreck and it still doesn't equal the damage of people losing their town/homes/businesses/lives from a tornado going for miles.

Insurance will cover most of the damage but a town being gone causes havoc like loss of normal services to actually live. The Feds should only help the state and city officials get things stabilized then leave, not hang around like with Katrina giving out money to people.

What is the policy on federal disaster aid for tornado damage? Insurance should cover most losses. Are we going to cover multi-car fog accidents? I had ice storm damage last year. Where's my check?

The ice storm here was very widespread. No aid. So the government has a policy or just picking winners and losers?

 

[Dr.Drock]

If an ice storm takes down power in a state/city for awhile, causes massive wrecks, etc then many times Governors ask for Federal help.

Driving on an icy road and wrecking isn't a Federal problem until it affects thousands of people.

A town being leveled is a wee bit more serious than you losing your car in a fog wreck. You can have 50 cars damaged in a wreck and it still doesn't equal the damage of people losing their town/homes/businesses/lives from a tornado going for miles.

Insurance will cover most of the damage but a town being gone causes havoc like loss of normal services to actually live. The Feds should only help the state and city officials get things stabilized then leave, not hang around like with Katrina giving out money to people.

The ice storm here was very widespread. No aid. So the government has a policy or just picking winners and losers?

Every winter driving on icy roads affects thousands of people.

Try again.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Kook, insurance companies will rebuild a home, but they cannot turn on the electricity, shelter people, keep law and order, when a town has been destroyed.

You are so fucking stupid.

Obamacare is not the same as the Feds propping a city back on its feet. You kooks think any help by the Feds is illegal.

I hope you lose your home....that would be justice.

I wish there was a way for kooks like you to be tagged so that we could quit protecting you from terrorists and not help you during natural disasters.

When you whine about the US military killing terrorists overseas, we could just single you out here for terrorists to find you while leaving us alone, because "you don't like your tax dollars killing terrorists overseas."

Also, we can just tag you and your personal goods for not being supported when a natural disaster hits your trailer. The Feds will just say, he didn't want us to find him a place to sleep after the tornado sent his trailer airborn.

What's the difference between wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay someone else's home insurance costs and wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay for Obamacare?

If millions have a disastrous medical issue, like cancer, or hundreds or thousands have a natural disaster issue, what's the difference? Shouldn't your "principles" lead you to support Obamacare?

If people need help, just assume charity and local gov'ts aren't enough and just tax everyone else to pay for it, what's the difference?

 

[Paulie]

If an ice storm takes down power in a state/city for awhile, causes massive wrecks, etc then many times Governors ask for Federal help.

Driving on an icy road and wrecking isn't a Federal problem until it affects thousands of people.

A town being leveled is a wee bit more serious than you losing your car in a fog wreck. You can have 50 cars damaged in a wreck and it still doesn't equal the damage of people losing their town/homes/businesses/lives from a tornado going for miles.

Insurance will cover most of the damage but a town being gone causes havoc like loss of normal services to actually live. The Feds should only help the state and city officials get things stabilized then leave, not hang around like with Katrina giving out money to people.

The ice storm here was very widespread. No aid. So the government has a policy or just picking winners and losers?

Lol there's a threshold wherein the federal government then automatically assumes authority.

What article and section is that in?

 

[GoneBezerk]

Dumbfuck, if an ice storm damages Chicago to the point where the power goes out and people starting dying....then the Feds will help out.

They could care less about your car in the ditch unless it is a danger to many people, but they will help if hospitals can't keep patients alive with no power, no water, no heat, etc.

If an ice storm takes down power in a state/city for awhile, causes massive wrecks, etc then many times Governors ask for Federal help.

Driving on an icy road and wrecking isn't a Federal problem until it affects thousands of people.

The ice storm here was very widespread. No aid. So the government has a policy or just picking winners and losers?

Every winter driving on icy roads affects thousands of people.

Try again.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Federal support is given when a state Govt asks for the help.

The state is the lead within their own state but the Feds are there to help with heavy lifting.

But dumbfucks like you should run to the carnage and tell everyone it's no big deal and for the Feds to leave town.....

If an ice storm takes down power in a state/city for awhile, causes massive wrecks, etc then many times Governors ask for Federal help.

Driving on an icy road and wrecking isn't a Federal problem until it affects thousands of people.

The ice storm here was very widespread. No aid. So the government has a policy or just picking winners and losers?

Lol there's a threshold wherein the federal government then automatically assumes authority.

What article and section is that in?

 

[Paulie]

Federal support is given when a state Govt asks for the help.

The state is the lead within their own state but the Feds are there to help with heavy lifting.

But dumbfucks like you should run to the carnage and tell everyone it's no big deal and for the Feds to leave town.....

If an ice storm takes down power in a state/city for awhile, causes massive wrecks, etc then many times Governors ask for Federal help.

Driving on an icy road and wrecking isn't a Federal problem until it affects thousands of people.

Lol there's a threshold wherein the federal government then automatically assumes authority.

What article and section is that in?

FEMA doesn't care if it's asked or not. If FEMA wants to come in and take over the situation, they will whether they're welcome or not.

What's with the hostility bro? It's just the internet. Calm down and go get laid or something.