Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Mitt and the Private sector beats FEMA in fixing Sandy

Posted 1 year ago on Oct. 31, 2012, 12:19 a.m. EST by brightonsage (4494)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

This is the perfect opportunity for Mitt. He has said, 'send disaster relief back to the states. Or send it to local government. Or better yet, private enterprise.

Well, the governors of the states devastated by Sandy can choose help from any source they want, from FEMA, they push it to local governments, they can do it themselves or as Mitt says, better yet, they can make a deal with the private sector. And who better to help them make that deal, than the Mittster?

He can show how much better people can be rescued from their flooded homes by Goldman Sachs or B of A. He can show how the raging fires in Queens can be better fought by Chipotle and Best Buy. He can can rescue the babies from the hospital built by the founder of Home Depot whose generators failed, by marshaling the resources of Fox News.

It is his claim that disaster relief is better provided by the private sector and now is the time to show it. There is plenty to be done. Go ahead Mitt, which state do you want as your demonstration project? New York? New Jersey? Too big? Massachusetts, naw, too much of an insider there. Virginia? Connecticut? Maryland? Still too big? Delaware? Rhode Island? Grab it and run.

I am dying to see how this works. A state facing an instantaneous loss of $10 -30 billion, 8 million without power and a half a million homeless, issues a request for proposals while a hurricane bears down. Or a quake gets quietly ready to shake the stuffing out of, say Missouri (New Madrid again). They get 10-30 or 3000 bids to evaluate and they watch presentations from the N-best bidders..... How could FEMA ever compete with this?

Mitt suggested this in the GOP primary. Have you read the paper he put out explaining in great detail ... What he hasn't? Not a peep? Never mind.

Yep, should be all ready for the disaster....... right after the next one. Love to see really well thought out solutions. Don't you?

174 Comments

174 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Isn't this what Jeb Bush is involved in down in Florida?

They can't handle the excursions that they have had in the public sphere now. They sure as hell can't handle things of this nature.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

That should be made obvious by a step by step explanation of how their "plan" would work. This is true of all of their plans. The devil, my friends, is in the lack of details,

[-] 2 points by WSmith (2091) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

"Handle" or solve or help are the last things they care about.

The entirety of their concern is contained in two small words "votes and money."

Jeb is worrisome. Jeb-Christy 2016, ew...

[-] 4 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

It's about the ability to steal from the public coffers. Nothing more and nothing less. But, you know........people aren't going to see the shit for what it is until it is too late.

[-] 0 points by Brython (-146) 1 year ago

It's really a sad state of affairs.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Yep and I find myself frustrated with people that advocate this.

[-] -1 points by Brython (-146) 1 year ago

It's a circle of mismanagement, waste, and corruption that begins with the people and ends with the people.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Agreed. However, there comes a point where it becomes willfull ignorance to recognize that mismanagement. Everytime the private interferes with the public this occurs.

[-] -1 points by WSmith (2091) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

I'm not here for the donuts.

(what happened to hitgirl?)

[-] -1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I have no idea.

[-] 2 points by elf3 (2506) 1 year ago

I'd love to see how that's going to work - well first I think you have to have some great big government coffers (or the elected authority to do so) to waive in front of the private sector noses right? Without that there is no other motivation - corporations are not part of the community (they are parasites) parasites need a host to suckle from - they need our tax dollars. Romney seeks to filter our tax dollars through the private sector that may be being left out of the speeches. He wants to let them feed from us.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Mitt could just pull a Georgie W, buy awarding no bid contracts to Haliburton and XE (Blackwater).

But I like the way you think here. I agree with GirlFriday Below, "This is an Opportunity for Corporate Welfare" and "Activating the Old Boy Network".

Watch Out though, Mitt has a reputation for No Transparency, No Documentation of how Money I spent, and No Audit Trail.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

The only thing that could save us would be the IG's, Inspectors General, of the agencies. But if/when catastrophe happens and nobody shows up, we start looking for the money and then comes the torches and pitchforks.

I just want him to try and explain how he wants us to think it will work before we buy the swine in the sack (pig in a poke).

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Yes, these guys are all hot air, and no details on any semblance of a plan. You're right ...If we can get them to stick their neck out while they are all puffed up ...then they can blow the election.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

I believe it is happening. Buying $5,000 worth of water, canned goods and other props to hand out to supporters for them to hand back, in a sham of disaster relief theater is exposing them for what they are. Snake oil salesmen, is insulting to the fake snake.

http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/17612-romney-s-hurricane-relief-effort-was-as-fake-as-ryan-s-soup-kitchen-photo-op

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Don't limit the mittens effort - let him run a private effort to repair storm damage and take care of the people affected by the storm - all of the damage - all of the people.

Go for it mittens - show us all how it gets done - WhoooHooo.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Get the camera's. Get the microphones. Boil water! Tear up those white sheets we were using as ceremonial uniforms.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

aAAHHAAHAHAHEEheheheeheehoooo................

[-] 1 points by JackHall (401) 1 year ago

There is much more to being US President than creating jobs, and reducing the national debt.

Mitt Romney doesn't understand how the federal government works.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-sandy-fema-romney-20121101,0,6048942.story

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

News Flash: He doesn't understand how business works! Anybody who has been involved with a vulture capitalist, knows that they don't know how business works. The butcher doesn't raise cattle. He knows how to make big pieces of a cow into smaller pieces. He doesn't know how to pull a calf, or insert a trocar into a bloated cow to save her life. A VC can steal your patent or technology. He can lay off the talent that makes your company unique. He can cut the quality assurance that protects the reputation of your products. He can steal your pension fund, cancel your insurance and fail to pay the payroll taxes.

He can't build the loyalty of a team that must share the sacrifice, work 24/7 to fix a process that has gone adrift. He can mortgage the future and walk away from the ash heap with all of the cash in his pocket. But that's about it.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

God that is a great OP. People like MR want to privatize everything because private = profit. So that is the prism through which they filter their reality. People are not a part of the equation. People interfere with the vi$ion of profit$. So it's better to just ignore that annoying little tidbit. It gets in the way.

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Well the government has had 5 years to learn how to prepare for disasters and here we have 2 states that have massive damage. So, where does the responsibility lie when it comes to "taking care of businesses" in these states?

Is it the responsibility of the federal government or the state government?

In other words directly after the disaster who are going to be the first responders - it's going to be the people of the state - not the federal government. Where is the manpower going to come from to rebuild those areas - it wil come from the people of the states not the federal government.

The only job of the federal government during a disaster is to provide the states the necessary support to save lives.

It's the states responsibility to provide temporary food and shelter for refugees and any other necessities that may be required.

It's the states that takes the lead in disasters and the federal governments job to provide back-up.

Do you want federal employees rebuilding houses or private business and private citizens rebuilding houses?

So to say that it's the federal governments job to be the one that will re-build a state after a natural disaster is complete and utter stupidity - it's the job of the people and businesses in the state affected.

If the federal government was that smart and efficient we wouldn't have a 16 trillion dollar debt and 47% of the population receiving supprot from the federal government. Private businesses can and will do it much better and it will cost less

If you don't believe me just compare job for job cost per employee on a federal job compared to a private sector job.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

I don't think you are laying this out very well. Let me try a little ...maybe you will like this.

1) Declaration of Emergency allows Money to flow.
2) Most of the money will come from Insurance and from the Federal Government.
3) Shelters and food had to be in place before the disaster, FEMA is prepared for that, but the state should have structured who will have those responsiblities before the event, some federal buildings may have a designation as a shelter or storm shelter.
4) When the money flows, it is probably civilian construction and laborers who would get paid to do yard clean up and house construction (just from what I remember).
5) City and State workers probably are best suited to get power and streets clear. Line workers are called in from out of state and they are private businesses arent' they?

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

You don't have a clue - do you? It has been reported that the insurance fund is "depleted" meaning there may be "no money" to rebuild. So you as a taxpayer will pay. Shelters and food were in place not by FEMA but by the locality - they are the ones who set up those places - FEMA don't own them.

As far as when the money flows - it flows to private contractors in all aspects of jobs required - not just "yard clean up" as you indicate.

City and State workers are not "construction workers" so they don't have a clue as to what's required to get things up and running - contractors are the ones that put things back into operation. Line workers only work on the feed lines to the areas affected. Construction workers work on the individual units (houses, office buildings, etc)

So as you can see - local contractors/people not government do the ground work.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

I still prefer my layout even if you have some corrections.

My city workers do a great job here. But in an emergency like Sandy or Katrina, you need tons of extra help. ANd Laborers come for across the country to earn money under the table or on top of the table, as wage earners or as subcontractors.

Too bad you don't like structure in your writing people might think you are more professional.

You are another asshole.

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Tell me oh wise Middleaged one, what experience do you have dealing with the government, government contracts or private businesses, or private business contracts for that matter? Care to enlighten us?

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Nice job there.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Thanks.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Private business is more expensive because they need to make profit. And no private corp can handle the massive work required after a disaster like this.

Progressives = "we're in this together"

Conservatives = "you're on your own"

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Where do you get your information from? For your information, it costs less to use private sector businesses and the private sector will be the ones to rebuild NY/NJ. Who rebuilt NO after Katrina - it wasn't the government - it was the people, contractors and other civilians who provided the skills and labor necessary to do the job.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

My opinion is that private corps gauge people in times of disaster. So I get my info from experience.

And no private corp can handle the massive work required after a disaster like this.

Progressives = "we're in this together"

Conservatives = "you're on your own"

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Tell me of one time when the Federal Government re-built a city after a disaster? Who was it that re-built NO?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

The fed govt rebuilt the levees, sea walls, other infrastructure, State govt did other rebuilding, Both levels of govt provided loans, grants, insurance cause private corps wouldn't/couldn't touch it.

Progressive = "we are in this together"

conservative = "your on your own"

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

There is a thing called a non sequitur. Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.[1] In a non sequitur, the conclusion could be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. All formal fallacies are special cases of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal definition. Many types of known non sequitur argument forms have been classified into many different types of logical fallacies.

Historically, FEMA was working extremely well under Clinton. Bush dismantled it and used it as a playground for cronies. It has been effectively reconstituted except for a few Bush appointees who "borrowed in" to some civil service positions in FEMA, and are still incompetent. They have gotten rid of the fomaldehyde contaminated trailers etc. and are doing a good job. The partnership between FEMA, state and local resources have worked out their roles and responsibilities and it is working well. Listen to Christie.

Fine tuning, sure, always room for that. tearing it up and having states invent 50 different solutions or giving a corrupt crony contract to Halliburton costing three times as much is hardly an improvement. There are a whole lot of things the government can do better and more efficiently than Halliburton can. Compare the cost of a soldier to one of Xe's contractors. Often they are the same person. at $45,000. vs $150,000.????? Nope, I don't believe you. But I won't call you names. I just see no evidence that you have a qualitatively better or cheaper solution.

[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

How about staying on point - how about staying current - lets look at what's going on today with regard to NY and NJ disaster - not 4 years ago or 10 years ago.

How hard is that to do - lets focus like a lazer on what's going on right now -

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

And avoid any uncomfortable evidence from history that might suggest that we are making suggestions that have been thoroughly discredited by events in the recent past.This would give us license to make the same mistakes all over again.

Or, we could focus like a laser on data from reality that indicate that some things may be structurally well designed and only need competent people, properly motivated, to keep them working well.

Refraining from putting words in others mouths in order to create a straw man to knock down might actually be constructive.

Rereading poorly thought out diatribes (see above) we have previously written might be an avenue for self improvement.

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Has nothing to do with "history" but all to do with what's going on now.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Everything has a historical context. Sometimes it is relevant, involving the same principles, and can prevent repeating errors. Sometimes it is embarrassing for that reason, but the lessons may still be important. Too important to ignore to avoid the embarrassment. Sometimes you drop the context right on your foot and it feels like a bullet.

[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

http://www.examiner.com/article/apply-the-axe-to-fema-there-is-a-better-way

Here's another link explaining WHY Fema is so inefficient and bleeding cash instead of help. Got ahead and vote it down with my others. For people who want so much to REALLY help the people who are devastated by disaster, you sure like to denigrate any information that might improve their chances of getting it.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

If you had the choice of giving the money to FEMA or the Red Cross and Salvation Army, which one would you give it to?

[-] 0 points by freakyfriday (179) 1 year ago

SA. hands down. They don't pay their directors near as much! The Red Cross is a sin on how much they pay the paper pushers and FEMA is part of .gov., enought said

[-] 0 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

I have the choice and give to the Red Cross, however FEMA does perform a necessary function. It is interesting that the insurance industry doesn't seem interested in providing that function. I am not aware that they had put together a national shared entity that would stockpile the necessary physical assets and the transportation assets to get them where they need to be in a timely way, before FEMA existed or in parallel with it. Are you?

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Although there is something about FEMA, a huge agency with unlimited resources, made for "disasters" that is a bit scary.

Seems how our gov is signing things like indefinite detention, starting wars all over for 12 years straight, torturing and even assasinating Americans, and grasping for more power by the year, something about this seems like its going to end badly.

You can rest assured that this agency that is under the label of helping the public, is simply going to be the go to agency that rounds up the people when war comes here, just like the Japanese getting rounded up during WWII.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You're afraid Fema is gonna round you up?

Wow.

Have you ever been diagnosed with paranoia?

Please don't be afraid. We'll be fine.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Im just going off of what happens to societies as they fall from grace, the legislation that has been passed the last 12 years, and what this country has done numerous times in the past.

The state was throwing occupiers in jail left and right. You see how they beat some of em? What happens when people decide they've had enough? The state has already shown that they dont care.

Throw in the stuff I mentioned in the first paragraph and put the pieces together.

[-] 0 points by freakyfriday (179) 1 year ago

You are a leftist. Your remark is SO predictable

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

The correct answers are always more predictable. The wrong one's are unpredictable. Leftists are more inclined to be driven by facts and logic (rationality) than ideology, ergo predictable.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Leftist, progressive solutions are the only way out of the right wing, conservative mess we are now in.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

No, I'm not.

[-] 0 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

I have dealt with FEMA. Even went to their hollowed out mountain where the helos fly right in and out. People operating out of what looks like old barracks, no compounds wrapped in barbed wire and I still think they are necessary and they aren't preparing for something nastier than natural disasters, as far as I could tell. Having heard the conspiracies, I looked pretty closely, too. People seemed well intentioned.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Fema! Red Cross & Salvation Army are both religion connected!

Issat the right answer?

How about you?

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Red Cross, not so much. SA, no, not the right answer. The system isn't perfect, that's for sure but there are a lot of faith based corruption to be weeded out.

Caring for our fellow humans should never involve bait with hooks in it. Fewer fish would be caught, if hooks were naked.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I suppose I have given to RC & SA, Andonly FEMA through my taxes.

I think his question is really about big govt. He would rather cut FEMA to save a few bucks in histaxes like Romney.

He frequently sounds like Repubs.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Christie wanted to cut taxes until his state was destroyed, but now....It isn't such a bad thing. The private sector hasn't called him three times in one day to offer help, so that guy he called a liar is looking pretty welcome just now. I would prefer to cut the things I don't use until I need them, then I would like to pay last month's premium for benefits totaling 100 years worth.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Jon Stewart had a great bit on Christie last night. Whatta a joke.

(I was talkin about HC)

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

I'll check it out. It was great.

[-] 1 points by WSmith (2091) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

These are facts and issues that are sensitive to caring human beings. Rombot is a predator capitalist, tragedies and needy people are photo ops. "Always be closing!"

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

"Props" is the word you are searching for. It is short (and uncaring) for "properties".The American serfs for the privileged class.

"They were happier as slaves."

[-] 1 points by WSmith (2091) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Mitt Romney disguises campaign events as 'storm relief,' Obama receives praise:

http://www.examiner.com/article/mitt-romney-disguises-campaign-events-as-storm-relief-obama-receives-praise-1

I actually worked in the "Property Department" in the studios: A photo op (sometimes written as photo opp), short for photograph opportunity ( photo opportunity), is an opportunity to take a memorable and effective ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_op

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Roger that.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Yes, Roger this. Well said, WSmith.

[-] 1 points by WSmith (2091) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Get out the up and down ballot Vote!

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 1 year ago

They're just a bunch of entitled 47%ers (the people affected by the storm) who weren't wearing their magic underwear.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

That is Right. You may have a Backlash against Republicans and a Record Democrat Vote for Obama as these Storm Victims taste bureaucratic indifference ...perhaps for the first time since 9-11. Certainly there are people with healthcare issues from 9-11.

[-] 0 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

The power of prayer.

[-] 1 points by Shule (1976) 1 year ago

Let us see if Mitt will loosen his belt a bit, and donate a couple million of his own bucks to some relief effort.

Maybe he can quit asking me for five dollars for his campaign every other day. I mean like why is he asking me for five bucks in the first place? I thought he was the millionaire.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Millionaire, the oligarch's minimum age earner. I wonder how much that rental truck and the rented canned goods cost? $29.99 per day and $.75 per mile? And $1.00. case for 2 hours. Can you write off campaign, oops, disaster relief, expenses?

[-] -2 points by 1sealyon (434) 1 year ago

As a percentage of income Romney has given a lot more money to charitable causes than Obama and Biden combined (both are 1 % ers). Maybe it is their turn to cough up some cash:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81529.html

[-] 1 points by Shule (1976) 1 year ago

Yeh, Obama has been asking me for some bucks too. I don't get it.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

http://occupywallst.org/forum/occupy-sandy/

Wow...look at the list of things that the OWS post is asking for. Seems like "Mittens" wanted to put all those things on a bus or truck and send them to New York, and MSNBC thought that was OUTRAGEOUSLY wrong. FEMA will take care of things! The Red Cross will fix it! Government will take care of this!

Bull crap. Local, PRIVATE citizens like the people in OWS will ALWAYS have to step forward and do what the government is not capable of, and they do it 10 times faster as well. Even OWS can see that people are hurting and the government is NOT there for them even 4 days later. WAKE UP.

Private citizens and organizations are the ones pushing through to those in need and providing truckloads of supplies to the people who need them. New York's government officials are busy hosting a freaking RACE.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

He just bought them for the photo opp. No plan to actually send them to, where was that hurricane again, oh New Jersey. Isn't that where that governor who is now telling the truth is? That was what was outrageous. FEMA? Don't need that! Energy? All of the above, (except renewables). Planned Parenthood for women's health care? Don't need that. Energy? All of the above (except for biofuels.) Contraception? Don't need that. Viagra? All of the above. Race? No, they need a few cans of beans from OHIO. Can't get them any place closer. Efficiency? Don't need that. Photo Opps? All of the above.

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Can't WAIT for you to tell me how logical and effective it is to set up and collect donations etc IN THE EXACT SAME AREA WHERE A hurricane is currently taking place, where was that? Oh...New Jersey. Because the people living IN New York surely have a SURPLUS of all those items hanging around and will just open their windows and toss them to each other across the flooded streets! Outrageous is exactly what YOU and your paranoid delusions are.

In OHIO on TUESDAY Oct 30th, (where Romney actually WAS at the time-you idiot) instead of giving the campaign speech he had planned to give, and after everything was in place to give it, INSTEAD he turned it into a fund raising/donation for Sandy event and sent out word asking attendees to bring food, water, donations etc. and they did. The "photo" you reference was taken at that event. Did he also hire the attendees AND give them money in order for them to pre-purchase the stuff they brought THEMSELVES to the rally spot? Did he issue FAKE credit cards for them to use to "pretend" to call the RED CROSS number displayed in HUGE numbers on the jumbo tron screens too??

Where the HELL do you get off attempting to convince people that YOU KNOW what was "actually planned"??? Stating that there was no "plan to actually send them"??? Are you a habitual liar or just this desperate?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/10/30/msnbc-trashes-romney-collecting-food-and-supplies-sandy-victims#ixzz2Aoy9BldZ

BUT, in VIRGINIA on SUNDAY Oct 28th, Romney campaigners and staff loaded the Romney campaign bus with supplies and donations in Arlington Virginia (collected at all of their Virginia offices) and sent them to New York. But what? NO CAMERAS??? No Press????? gasp!...what a great photo op that could have been!

http://twitchy.com/2012/10/28/romney-campaign-using-romney-bus-for-east-coast-storm-relief-efforts/

Romney was doing what people like him ALWAYS have done. Prepare. Help. Support. Give up their time and money spent (on the rally that didn't happen) to do what is right. And all the LEFT did is what they have ALWAYS done-lie, mock, condescend, and spin.

At least we know which side you fall on.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Two blogs with no evidence. Hmmmm? Good.

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Wow...if I use google images for "Romney Sandy donations" I get all kinds of photos taken by average PEOPLE as well as press showing Mr Romney loading those supplies into Penske trucks....Here's a video from an ABC affiliate and their news report. Not a blog.

http://www.abc22now.com/shared/news/top-stories/stories/wkef_vid_9674.shtml

Now, how about some evidence proving that there was "no plan to actually send them..."

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

What a comedy of errors. What dishonesty. Just so that he could claim he is not having a campaign rally.

Fool.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

What do you suppose the chances are of any of Romney's campaign staff serving in a Romney administration? It should be less than their chances of serving in an Obama administration, sine they have done more for Obama than for Romney. But then there isn't much chance of there being a Romney administration. So...

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Except that the repubs ARE cheating.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2012/4766

And let's not forget the Tagg owns Ohio e voting machines rumors.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

I am amazed that with all of the voter supression that the MSM doesn't ask ANY of the candidates about what their party is doing. Of course they are cheating. It is the unwritten plank in their platform. They are all about jobs, jobbing every voter they can. And when they get in, they will create all of those jobs by eliminating women's rights.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

LOL. i am amazed as well. I know there are hundreds of lawyers all over the country. & I know the tea party, true the vote campaign is planning thousands of challenges so this will be a long election I think.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Well Romney obviously did know of such a plan when he answered the question. I definitely saw videos on TV of the Romney folks handing out the supplies to attendees, and in the same continuous images, them handing them back to other Romney folks and Romney, so the staging was blatant. If you are curious you can find them. I have more important things to do. Did they actually go to New Jersey? Or stay in Ohio?

I would have been more impressed to see Romney signing a big heavy check to the Red Cross. His contributions to the LDS I consider the same as one to American Crossroads. Feed a man a fish, with a hook in it.....Teach a man to feed other men fish, with hooks in them...

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

OK, we forgive you. Even a well executed straw man is still a straw man.

They are obviously not mutually exclusive, except in your mind. If you lived on Staten Island, I am sure you would say help from every potential source, is still not going to be enough. The cold is coming and now I have absolutely nothing and no income to go with it.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

sigh

Good luck with all that.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Even abject hopeless is still hopeless.

[-] -1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

But help from every potential source is BETTER than waiting for or expecting ONE or TWO sources to "get to you when they can". ANYONE with a brain in their head knows that. Or SHOULD.

The straw man here is the idea that the Federal government is the best and most efficient way to help people on a local level. It's beyond naive to think it ever could be. But hey-let's mock and make false claims about people who immediately jump into action because they want to HELP and help quickly because it's a natural instinct for them to do so.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by freakyfriday (179) 1 year ago

Katrina.....cost us taxpayers about a quarter million/NO citizen. No matter WHAT has caused global warming, it's happening and folks need to get over living 50 yards from the water. Instead of rebiuilding, it's time to MOVE. Even early homo sapiens figured that out

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Could be Ins refusing coverage in those area's anyhow ( they ain't gonna pay if they can help it ) will cause further investigation to either force coverage or change consideration on sea level rise.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

There was a short blurb about that - on air today as they were talking about repetitive storm damage in areas.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Absolutely - consider what would need to be done to protect the shoreline - and you would not be seaside ( not really ) anymore. The view would likely be gone - hidden by a massive sea wall - and how far down would that need to be planted - so that it did not get undermined.

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Are you saying that the Pentagon is NOT part of the government? It would still be viewed as "government response".

And yet with all that "institutional memory"-you know, gleaned from past disasters, FEMA wasn't in place, wasn't ready, and STILL hasn't reached everyone that needed them and it's been a WEEK for crying out loud. YOUR LEADERS are in charge of this one sweetie-and your non-Republican Bloomberg expected things to be so under control that the Marathon could take place as normal! Rich and out of touch and NOT a republican.

I'm not talking about ad hoc groups you moron. I'm talking about organized and completely prepared community response teams unique to each location. Those people LIVING THERE are the "institutional memory" and the INSTANTANEOUS responders.

As far as quality science goes-even Democrats will admit that building HOUSES on or near the shore line of ANY body of water is going to cause water related problems at some point. It always has and it always will, just like building communities on top of fault lines and tornado tracks will.

Your "expanded government" has been UNABLE to stop such things from happening won't be able to PREVENT them in the future. It certainly hasn't responded with ANY greater efficiency or aid than in the past. At some point common sense is a greater asset than "institutional memory" can ever be.

And I really and truly and sincerely couldn't care less if you hate me or call me names. Really.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

looked up hurricane history

they seem more common in modern times

http://www.nyc.gov/html/oem/html/hazards/storms_hurricanehistory.shtml

Tropical storms have been on the rise since 1995, and a record 15 hurricanes made their way into the North Atlantic in 2005.

[-] -2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

And? 8000ish years ago, sea levels rose rapidly in catastrophic and land altering ways as the last glacial period ended and the GLOBE started WARMING!!!! I never hear anyone screaming about the meters of land that are connected to New York, Florida, Texas, California etc that are now under water but were not in the past! Why is that I wonder?

Lack of unfrozen land used to be a problem, it's far more common in modern times. Dinosaurs used to roam the earth, and it was much hotter. Dinosaur free living is the norm in modern times, and the world got a whole hell of a lot colder between then and now.

What caused the huge and altering GLOBAL changes of the past? (hint-there is no possible way that it was humans or fossil fuel burning/consumption)

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

carbon dioxide in the atmosphere ?

methane release from melting ice?

[-] -2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

No way! Human beings and their precious herds of COWS etc and fuel based industries are the ONLY MAJOR contributors of Co2 and methane in the atmosphere....aren't they?

So HOW did such phenomenal and globe altering events START at all without HUMANS and COWS and CARS??? It's almost like you're saying that there were OTHER sources of such things at work on this planet back then!??

But if THAT is true....then scientists must have valid, inarguable proof that all of those other influences from the past STOPPED or HALTED or DISAPPEARED completely after humans showed up and started wreaking havoc on the place! Otherwise, they'd look STUPID trying to convince the whole world that the current global warming is HUMAN CAUSED.

Where would I find that evidence?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Oh - and in case you were still confused about the upswing in co2 caused in relation to the earths warming :

Warmer oceans release CO2 faster than thought - environment - 25 ... www.newscientist.com/.../dn20413-warmer-oceans-release-co2-faster... Apr 25, 2011 – The oceans' vast stores of carbon dioxide can escape into the ... 30 per cent of human carbon dioxide emissions and hide it in their depths.

On Carbon Monoxide emissions :

Carbon Monoxide Facts | Carbon Monoxide Emissions www.carbonmonoxidekills.com/26/carbon_monoxide_emissions Carbon Monoxide Facts - Information about Carbon Monoxide emissions.

ALSO - Methane from permafrost ( at 11 minutes 15 seconds into the program:

James Hansen: Why I must speak out about climate change | Video ... www.ted.com/talks/james_hansen_why_i_must_speak_out_about_cli... TED Talks Top climate scientist James Hansen tells the story of his ... cited links organisations funded exxonmobil tenth has co authored papers exxon linked .... at so no do i consider myself expert on subject in any way but i have read in the it ..... of co2 created by man having a maybe because there is no scientific evidence ...

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Now you're not even finishing sentences or making sense.

Nor are you giving me ANY reason to believe your statements: "the massive man made release of CO is in fact releasing massive quanities of methane ( worse green house gas then co or co2 ) for what used to be permanently frozen ground - you know that stuff up around the Arctic?"

and

"But you being such an expert I would have figured that you already knew that man's "major" contribution has been co ( not only contribution ) and the results caused by the subsequent thaws ( methane release )."

Prove to me with scientific evidence that CO-not Co2-is man's "major" contribution and the results caused by the subsequent thaws (releasing methane).

You're the one who appears to be confused

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Apparently you are doing your usual song and dance of denial - 1st you ask for information - then when you are presented with information - you don't look into it - no - instead you just make lame comments.

Denial of reality problems MUCH ?

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

I asked for SPECIFIC information.

That CO-not Co2-is man's "major" contribution and the results caused by the subsequent thaws (releasing methane).

Deflecting and distractions are your problems.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Bitsy - I am not gonna (try to ) discuss with you anymore as you appear to be brain dead or something. I will however continue to point out your BS as I come across it. Now don't go away mad - just go away.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

How do cows contribute co2 I mean besides breathing ( and if that is the reason - why call them out at all as all living animals - humans as well exhale co2? Are farmers lighting their cow's methane farts ( no that would not be it - that would be co - so you have a problem with cows breathing?)? Oh - and another oops? Industry creates co.

I thought I would respond to this comment of your as you have not copied and pasted my incorrect(?) comment.


[-] -1 points by BetsyRoss (-307) 2 hours ago

No way! Human beings and their precious herds of COWS etc and fuel based industries are the ONLY MAJOR contributors of Co2 and methane in the atmosphere....aren't they?

So HOW did such phenomenal and globe altering events START at all without HUMANS and COWS and CARS??? It's almost like you're saying that there were OTHER sources of such things at work on this planet back then!??

But if THAT is true....then scientists must have valid, inarguable proof that all of those other influences from the past STOPPED or HALTED or DISAPPEARED completely after humans showed up and started wreaking havoc on the place! Otherwise, they'd look STUPID trying to convince the whole world that the current global warming is HUMAN CAUSED.

Where would I find that evidence? ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Blind rage truly is blind I guess.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Are you raging? and it makes you blind? Well that goes a ways towards explaining your failure to learn over this last year. I think that you can get treatment - got ins?

[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Nice try. But we're still here with you NOT addressing your statement about it being CO-not CO2-CO. Cough up the evidence and stop pontificating about everything else under the sun.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I did not say it had nothing to do with co2 - that would be "your" personal brain fart.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

yes. there have been great extinction eras without humans caused by other life forms

one of the first extinctions occurred when algae over oxygenated the oceans

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

CO acts much the same way as CO2 only CO is more toxic. And methane is an even more powerful green house gas.


[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (13360) 2 minutes ago

co2 is particular adept at absorbing heat from the suns radiation ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

because CO is toxic it does not stay in the atmosphere nearly as long

CO2 absorbs the earths thermal radiation

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

CO Bitsey CO ( carbon monoxide )

Oh but by cause and effect - the massive man made release of CO is in fact releasing massive quanities of methane ( worse green house gas then co or co2 ) for what used to be permanently frozen ground - you know that stuff up around the Arctic?

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

I'm sorry....wasn't talking to you. And Matt said carbon dioxide. CO2 DK CO2

Please show me all the scientific uproar over CO causing massive quantities of methane to be released.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

It is the thawing that is doing the major methane release - as you should know by now from all of the various reports that have been provided to you when you are making your Fred S heritage/Cato/Koch/BP/Exxon/Shell/Halliburton rounds. But you being such an expert I would have figured that you already knew that man's "major" contribution has been co ( not only contribution ) and the results caused by the subsequent thaws ( methane release ).

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

All of the various reports are about C02....not CO. Man's major contribution is CO2-carbon dioxide. NOT carbon monoxide.

CO is a weak and minor greenhouse gas.

Everyone knows this. The scientists know this.

I'm going to just chalk up this post to your bitterness with me causing some kind of brain condition which rendered you so blindly eager to contradict me that you lost all sense of reason for a moment. I'm going to give you the benefit of that doubt. And you can admit you made a mistake and all will be well.

But if you continue to defend the statement that "co is man's "major" contribution to global warming"...you're going to have to cough up more reports and research on it, and demonstrate some kind of consensus in the scientific community about carbon monoxide over carbon dioxide.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Gee Fred I am shocked and amazed at your reply. NOT

[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Well then Wilma....enlighten me. And enlighten all those scientists who are so distracted with CO2 that they are failing to even bother to study and report on CO anywhere....

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Here you go Bitsey - Bash your head against this - should be a piece of cake as that is what you like to do - as you have consistently shown over this past year:

CO2 Meter - CO and CO2 – What's the difference? www.co2meter.com/.../1209952-co-and-co2-what-s-the-difference Aug 27, 2009 – CO and CO2 – What's the difference? It's easy to understand why people confuse CO-carbon monoxide and CO2-carbon dioxide. The names ...

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Yeah. I know the differences. I know people mix them up all the time.

But scientists don't. And physics professors don't. And scientific publications don't.

You did. And rather than admit it, you're going to keep digging and digging and trying to cover up a simple, easy to explain mistake with piles and piles of bullcrap. Why?

[-] -1 points by andover4 (-33) 1 year ago

dickie, carbon dioxide enables life on earth. humans breathe in oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide, trees take in carbon dioxide and produce oxygen, and around and around it goes.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Edit - I can conjecture that CO2 is bandied about ( incorrectly ) as CO2 is less toxic and is naturally occurring ( healthy for plant life ) whereas CO not so much - CO is a byproduct of transportation and industry and of fossil fuel burning power plants Forrest fires and such as well.

CO2 is so much more friendly and a part of nature - I am sure the fossil fuel industry ( industry in general and transportation ) would rather people thought of CO2 and not CO.


[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-304) 2 minutes ago

I know exactly what CO is. And I think YOU got carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide mixed up here and now want to attempt to weasel your way out of admitting that.

Surely even though you "cannot explain to me why the news talks about c02 rather than c0", you can explain to me why the scientific websites and global warming websites talk about Co2 rather than CO. Are they dumb and making common mistakes? Are they making endless charts and graphs showing Co2 instead of CO on purpose?

Why do all the science books and course tell us that CO does not naturally occur in the atmosphere? That means it's not a greenhouse gas like you insinuated above!

Why don't they tell us that all it takes to make CO into CO2 is an extra oxygen molecule-which happens when it's exposed to air-not ignition/burning???

Why aren't they telling us about the CO we're putting into the air??? CO is a flammable gas!!!! Why hasn't the earth's atmosphere burst into flames considering how much of it would have to be in the air in order to melt the ice caps???

In conclusion....no one here has presented the CO argument to me ad-nausea in this forum over the past year. BECAUSE THEY'RE SMARTER THAN YOU are.

But let's see how deep you're willing to dig this hole.....I can hardly wait! ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

"Edit - I can conjecture that CO2 is bandied about ( incorrectly ) as CO2 is less toxic and is naturally occurring ( healthy for plant life ) whereas CO not so much - CO is a byproduct of transportation and industry and of fossil fuel burning power plants Forrest fires and such as well."

"CO2 is so much more friendly and a part of nature - I am sure the fossil fuel industry ( industry in general and transportation ) would rather people thought of CO2 and not CO."

Oh...so now it's conjecture. And yet even all those people who are yelling about global warming, all those scientists......they are ALL bought out by the fossil fuel industry to the point where they say CO2 instead of CO?????

Do you know what a catalytic converter is? Or what it does? Or when they became standard in most industries?

You're going to stick to the premise that YOU know more about climate science and atmospheric science than EVERYONE else who has published research on co2 rather than just admitting that YOU made the exact common mistake you attribute to others-including all of your fellow OWS posters here in the past year?

My God....and you think I have an ego issue to deal with???

[-] -1 points by KevinLark (-103) 1 year ago

It's em darn cow farts, exterminate all of them

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I can not explain to you why the news talks about co2 rather then co. It is a dumb and common mistake - people get carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide mixed up all of the time or think that they are the same thing with a different name - but co is one ignition/burning event short of being co2.

Edit - I can conjecture that CO2 is bandied about ( incorrectly ) as CO2 is less toxic and is naturally occurring ( healthy for plant life ) whereas CO not so much - CO is a byproduct of transportation and industry and of fossil fuel burning power plants Forrest fires and such as well.

BTW - all of this has been covered and presented to you and others ad-nausium over this last year on this forum. Play dumb if you want as you really have a tuff time playing smart with your pro-fossil fuel posts ( or should I say anti-green energy posts ). Anyway I am tired of your persistent BS.

[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

I know exactly what CO is. And I think YOU got carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide mixed up here and now want to attempt to weasel your way out of admitting that.

Surely even though you "cannot explain to me why the news talks about c02 rather than c0", you can explain to me why the scientific websites and global warming websites talk about Co2 rather than CO. Are they dumb and making common mistakes? Are they making endless charts and graphs showing Co2 instead of CO on purpose?

Why do all the science books and course tell us that CO does not naturally occur in the atmosphere? That means it's not a greenhouse gas like you insinuated above!

Why don't they tell us that all it takes to make CO into CO2 is an extra oxygen molecule-which happens when it's exposed to air-not ignition/burning???

Why aren't they telling us about the CO we're putting into the air??? CO is a flammable gas!!!! Why hasn't the earth's atmosphere burst into flames considering how much of it would have to be in the air in order to melt the ice caps???

In conclusion....no one here has presented the CO argument to me ad-nausea in this forum over the past year. BECAUSE THEY'RE SMARTER THAN YOU are.

But let's see how deep you're willing to dig this hole.....I can hardly wait!

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

co2 is particular adept at absorbing heat from the suns radiation

[-] -3 points by KevinLark (-103) 1 year ago

Oh no!!!!!! cow farts are killing us all, HELP

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

Do you know the tale of yeast?

On grape sugars, they would feast,

contemplating what life means

and suffocating in the well,

on alcohol that they expelled,

and never did they guess the purpose of champagne

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58817488&postcount=4132

[-] 0 points by KevinLark (-103) 1 year ago

And you dems / libs call Rep the fear mongers

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

and I call the 2 party candidates fear mongers that support the military industrial complex

[-] 0 points by KevinLark (-103) 1 year ago

The military industrial complex belongs to the "master of the drones" and killing innocent bystanders and the master of the drones is obama

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

http://gov.aol.com/2012/07/18/feds-work-fema-private-sector-team-up-to-combat-disasters/

Are you all really this uninformed? Mitt Romney doesn't HAVE to explain what he means, it's ALREADY being done. To HUGE acclaim from ALL involved.

Do you NOT understand how the private sector's resources are critical to recovering from disasters as quickly as possible? READ this article and understand HOW the "private sector" can and DOES ALREADY partner with FEMA and the difference it makes for the PEOPLE who have been hit so hard.

Our state had a huge wildfire problem this summer. Our rural firestations were not equipped to handle how fast these fires spread and it took 24-48 hours for the GOVERNMENT to come in, set up, and start offering "aid" of any kind to the displaced homeowners and firefighters.

Having several friends who worked as volunteer fighters, we knew that the men needed sack lunches, water and things like burn gel and quick snacks up on the front lines and they simply could not stop fighting for even more than 5 minutes at a time. So we sent out calls into our COMMUNITY for help. Within 2 hours-not 24, not 48-TWO hours a truck pulled up in front of our firehouse from the local WALMART. It was filled with cases and cases and cases of water, Gatorade, batteries (for walkie talkies) snacks, lip balm, first aid supplies and everything else the guys needed. We were stunned. And Wal-mart LEFT a "disaster response employee" on site at the fire station for two days who would call in the smallest request or need to the store if anything was needed or ran low and another truck would show up. ALL FREE OF CHARGE.

The volunteers made sandwhiches, filled coolers with water bottles, and made "front line packs" for the guys in the field so quickly and so efficiently, that they ended up taking hundreds of sack lunches to the local high school where evacuated families were staying, along with supplies like toilet paper, toothbrushes, toys etc. ALL of this took place BEFORE the Government was anywhere close to being able to help these people. And there's no way that our guys could have got the fire under control as fast as they did without that kind of immediate response.

THAT is what Romney is talking about. Not bidding on contracts, or trying to get "deals"-privately owned companies who have the man power, the supplies, and the transport necessary to get in there NOW and start helping IMMEDIATELY without having to wait for Washington DC and FEMA to get their act together and show up and then coordinate from the outside.

The people who know and work with those communities ALREADY are priceless resources just waiting to help and all you can do is cry "FRAUD" and "DEALS" rather than supporting EVERY effort available to help those in need. You really are amazing. The next time your home is under water or your kids are hungry and cold or you have no idea where you're going to sleep-I hope you'll stand up to your holier than thou convictions and REFUSE anything and everything that isn't handed to you by a government/FEMA employee.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

And how do they do it with out a partner? Or was what the Mittser said totally meaningless?

[-] -1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

The PARTNERS would be in the STATES where the disasters happen. The STATE would have disaster relief funding of their own and work within their own states and resources to recover. Giving tax dollars to the FEDERAL government, and then having the government have to return that money to the states is inefficient, creates redundant and ineffective jobs-that TAKE some, if not MOST of that money to pay for those jobs.

Bloomberg BusinessWeek shows this transcript exchange from a debate:

"Consider the transcript (PDF) from the CNN/WMUR debate in which Romney issued the following exchange about FEMA:

“JOHN KING: What else, Governor Romney? You’ve been a chief executive of a state. I was just in Joplin, Mo. I’ve been in Mississippi and Louisiana and Tennessee and other communities dealing with [disaster], whether it’s the tornadoes, the flooding, and worse. FEMA is about to run out of money, and there are some people who say, ‘Do it on a case-by-case basis,’ and some people who say, you know, ‘Maybe we’re learning a lesson here that the states should take on more of this role.’ How do you deal with something like that?

“ROMNEY: Absolutely. Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better. Instead of thinking in the federal budget, what we should cut—we should ask ourselves the opposite question. What should we keep? We should take all of what we’re doing at the federal level and say, what are the things we’re doing that we don’t have to do? And those things we’ve got to stop doing, because we’re borrowing $1.6 trillion more this year than we’re taking in. We cannot—

“KING: Including disaster relief, though?

“ROMNEY: We cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we’ll all be dead and gone before it’s paid off. It makes no sense at all.”

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-10-30/does-mitt-romney-want-to-get-rid-of-fema

Why is it that you automatically ASSUME that getting rid of FEMA means Romney wants to STOP HELPING PEOPLE RECOVER from disasters? That's not even a logical leap. He wants to give the states-and the people affected-a faster, easier, more affective and MUCH LESS bureaucratic way to get help than the behemoth of the Federal Government.

Using your exact logic, I ask-Why is it that you want to protect and demand the worst,least effective, slowest, most difficult assistance possible for people in urgent need of relief?

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Your premise is, as they say in a hurricane, all wet. The military is the best example of your error. Compare the cost of soldiers vs contractors. These days we have about the same numbers of each in theater. Go dig out the numbers and you will see that the efficiency of the military labor is far greater than that of the contractors. The over head of FEMA isn't very large either. The states don't have the emergency gear for the large disasters and if they had to have enough in each state, they couldn't afford it. Havinga smaller amount and moving it around is more efficient. Do you have an MRI system in your basement? It is the insurance principle pooling of large resources for larg3e needs is the best way. Economies of scale are what the oilgarch's push when it suits their proposes, just not when it serves the public good. Consolidation for efficiency is good. Consolidation to extort the customers is bad. If the private sector wants to offer disaster relief in competition with FEMA they can. They can offer Medicare advantage plans, and they do, but they want the subsidy with it because they can't compete otherwise.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

mittens wants to do away with FEMA - where have you been?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Don't care about that story - mittens wants to do away with FEMA - and let the private sector do it all - to date the private sector does not do it all. This post is addressing what mittens wants ( it is not about what is currently in place ). A shining moment for mittens if he could pull off a successful private stunt ( like taking care of all of the people and all of the damage caused by this natural disaster ) - all on his own initiative.

Dance mittens DANCE.

[-] -1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

You wouldn't acknowledge it if he did! You'd call it a publicity stunt or claim that he was buying off voters. If you don't like someone, NOTHING they do is ever good enough.

The man CANCELED a campaign stop and organized food, water, clothing and other supplies for Sandy victims. The big screens that would have been used to at that event instead ran messages asking for attendees to text the Red Cross to donate $10 each He sent his own campaign bus to help transport supplies and offered up all of his campaign offices as temporary shelters if needed.

And MSNBC ripped him a new one for doing it. "Photo op", "campaign tactic". For all we know he might very well BE sending money and helping out in huge ways. But it wouldn't matter if it came to light that he'd sent millions to the east coast and coordinated hundreds of volunteers to help. You'd just rag about it or something else because you are small, petty, stupid, completely biased human beings.

Oh...but HEY-nice "photo op" of President Obama in the Situation Room at the White House looking all pensive and concerned about Sandy before he hit the campaign trail again. Where the hell are the photos of him in the Situation Room the night 24 American embassy workers were taking fire and begging for help?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Yeah I saw him standing in front of the cameras getting his mitts on the relief bags ( adding another step in the process ) taking a look inside ( so I suppose he might have some idea of what was in them ) and then passing them on ( slowing down the whole process for some air time PR ). Kinda like his little buddy ayn washing clean dishes for some air time PR.

[-] 2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

See? Doesn't really matter what anyone does if it's not what YOU think they should do.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Bitsy Bitsy Bitsy - when are you gonna start pasting links to advertizing for Mobil Shell Exonn Halliburton and company etc etc etc etc etc? You are so obvious.

[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

And you are SOOOOOOOOO incredibly arrogant, assumptive, paranoid, blind, and illogical.

http://politicker.com/2012/11/staten-island-borough-president-dont-give-money-to-the-red-cross/

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I would expect that from you Bitsy. As you are fond of displacement.

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Fond of a scientific principle in which the mass of one thing is replaced with the mass or volume of another thing? Pretty much indifferent on displacement really.

I am however fascinated by the mind, but if you were talking about something more along the lines of projection, I wouldn't say I'm "fond" of it necessarily. Making false accusations about other people (like claiming they work for or promote Mobil, Shell, Exxon, Halliburton etc) is one of it's hallmarks. You do that 24/7. Of course, not all people who behave like that are experiencing true psychological projection. In true PP, the person doing it isn't doing it consciously or on purpose. It's a defense mechanism of the sub conscious type, so such people really couldn't or shouldn't be blamed for their behavior as if they do it on purpose.

And some people are just arrogant, assumptive, paranoid, blind and illogical on purpose for a variety of reasons.

Want to discuss it more?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

You seem like an intelligent person - you throw out lots of information - but you are a poor communicator - as - IF YOU ARE NOT - you really have a knack for giving people the impression that you are a corpoRAT shill.

You also share much in common with Odin and VQ as you are all very stubborn - and you have a tendency to hear only what you want to hear.

[-] -2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

You know, I'd think that the ONLY people who would get the impression that I am a corpoRAT shill, are the ones who have a tendency to THINK they hear only what they want to hear.

You're one of maybe a handful of people I've met in my entire life that has ever expressed a problem with the way I communicate. How odd.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Who is one of your heros again? Heartland Institute the CATO Institute and who? Ummm - Christopher Monckton(?) and perhaps Fred Singer(?) I think I have heard you repeating his talking points or I should correctly say Their talking points.

And you are gonna mock me for spelling? You are so lame.


[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-264) 4 minutes ago

I expected to be welcomed here with open arms? Really? Tell me more about what I expected and continue to expect! Oh please! Enlighten me further, oh ye who is far wiser than I am, but cannot spell martyr...and doesn't know what displacement is....

I DID however expect that FACTS would be viewed as FACTS and that the only people who might think that FACTS are confrontational would be people who lie habitually or can't stand being wrong.

I expected that people who ignored what was actually said and then pretended to be able to read the minds and motives of whoever wrote it through a computer screen would be viewed as crazy...or arrogant, assumptive, blind, paranoid or illogical.

But by now I've grown to expect you to continue while marshaling reinforcements! Let the tail declarations continue! ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

You're simply selective about what you choose to reply to in any post.

I've pointed this out before, and you ignored it. You exhibit classic NPD traits, much like other 1%ers.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Bam - Baby - BAM

Ummm I think.

NPD?

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

I'm sorry. Is there some rule of etiquette somewhere that establishes the criteria that all of everything must or should be replied to? I'm unaware of one so if you could point it out, that would be very helpful.

I also missed any articles that might have been published on the topic of Credible and Accurate Psychology/Psychiatry Diagnosis Possible through online forum interaction, even by complete strangers.

I look forward to your non-selective and attentive reply to this post.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

That is just the thing Bitsy - I am not the only individual here that thinks you are full of yourself. You are another of those who when told by everyone that they have a tail - you deny it and tell everyone that they are wrong.


[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-267) 1 minute ago

Let's see... I made a comment, and you took it upon yourself to "translate" it into something completely opposite of what I actually said, while at the same time expecting everyone else to take YOUR words at face value and accept it as truth that you "have always been a very good judge of character."

Another shining example of hypocrisy prancing around in full costume while acting like it's invisible. You're an insult to the people who read this forum because you actually think they will buy into your BS just as much as you do. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] -1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Oh no! A number of individuals agree on something...that automatically makes it a FACT in your book doesn't it DKA? In fact, the more people who adopt a specific point of view or position, the MORE TRUE it becomes right?

Especially if you and Builder have anything to do with it! Because it's obvious that everything that spills out of your mouth or gets typed into your keyboards couldn't possibly be anything other than golden kernels of truth and honesty! In fact, if the two of you, or even 50 of YOUR closest friends tell me that I have a tail-then I certainly MUST HAVE ONE!

Talk about full of yourselves....

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Now see ? That is funny - as I have always been a very good judge of character - so when "you" say:

I've made it a personal goal to fill my life with people who are intelligent, honest, open minded and open hearted.

It translates instead as - ever since I was very young I looked for those who would not question or argue with me.

In fact I would think it very likely that your nickname as a child was - Little Miss - and that was shortened after long use from - Little Miss Know it All.


[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-267) 11 minutes ago

Maybe-just maybe-it's because I've made it a personal goal to fill my life with people who are intelligent, honest, open minded and open hearted. The kind of people who have learned that what we think and what we believe must be challenged if we are ever to learn anything else.

In that process, one learns that people exhibit distinguishable patterns and that certain types of people can be identified easily by their habits and their words and their tactics, no matter how cleverly they think their motives are hidden.

The people who really know me, also know that. And you don't know me. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Let's see... I made a comment, and you took it upon yourself to "translate" it into something completely opposite of what I actually said, while at the same time expecting everyone else to take YOUR words at face value and accept it as truth that you "have always been a very good judge of character."

Another shining example of hypocrisy prancing around in full costume while acting like it's invisible. You're an insult to the people who read this forum because you actually think they will buy into your BS just as much as you do.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Maybe - just - maybe - the people who know you gave up trying to tell you anything years and years and years ago - perhaps it has been so long that you have forgotten?

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Maybe-just maybe-it's because I've made it a personal goal to fill my life with people who are intelligent, honest, open minded and open hearted. The kind of people who have learned that what we think and what we believe must be challenged if we are ever to learn anything else.

In that process, one learns that people exhibit distinguishable patterns and that certain types of people can be identified easily by their habits and their words and their tactics, no matter how cleverly they think their motives are hidden.

The people who really know me, also know that. And you don't know me.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I also figure that you are somewhat of a masochist or do you think of yourself as a marter?

You come to this forum and are purposely confrontational with everyone besides your fellow shills - and what(?) - you expect that everyone should welcome you with open arms? OH wise one where have you been?

I think that you are the one who is full of herself!!!


[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-267) 4 minutes ago

Oh no! A number of individuals agree on something...that automatically makes it a FACT in your book doesn't it DKA? In fact, the more people who adopt a specific point of view or position, the MORE TRUE it becomes right?

Especially if you and Builder have anything to do with it! Because it's obvious that everything that spills out of your mouth or gets typed into your keyboards couldn't possibly be anything other than golden kernels of truth and honesty! In fact, if the two of you, or even 50 of YOUR closest friends tell me that I have a tail-then I certainly MUST HAVE ONE!

Talk about full of yourselves.... ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] -1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

I expected to be welcomed here with open arms? Really? Tell me more about what I expected and continue to expect! Oh please! Enlighten me further, oh ye who is far wiser than I am, but cannot spell martyr...and doesn't know what displacement is....

I DID however expect that FACTS would be viewed as FACTS and that the only people who might think that FACTS are confrontational would be people who lie habitually or can't stand being wrong.

I expected that people who ignored what was actually said and then pretended to be able to read the minds and motives of whoever wrote it through a computer screen would be viewed as crazy...or arrogant, assumptive, blind, paranoid or illogical.

But by now I've grown to expect you to continue while marshaling reinforcements! Let the tail declarations continue!

[-] -2 points by andover4 (-33) 1 year ago

dickie is a liberal, which is mental disease.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Bendover4 andover4 andover4 abuse - chiming in are ya?

[-] -2 points by andover4 (-33) 1 year ago

poor , pathetic dickie, the poster child for the lack of mental stability of ows.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (28124) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Whatsamatta Bendover4 Iritated(?) or just feeling a bit chafed? Forget your KY?

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Yep. I'm sure his "reasonable" and "non insulting" persona will pipe up here soon.

[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Great response - It's interesting to note that the way a person comments about a situation says a lot about that person. It's apparent that those who made dispariging comments about Romney don't know very much about businesses and how the private sector works.

But you can be sure that they know a lot about how the government works because they have been taught that the govenment is their saviour and business is evil.

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

Yep...and here's how well the Red Cross seems to be helping out-

http://politicker.com/2012/11/staten-island-borough-president-dont-give-money-to-the-red-cross/

And how some of the most recognizable "lefties" party on, completely ignoring those in need just miles away-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2226124/Hocus-Pocus-star-Bette-Midler-hosts-extravagant-French-themed-Halloween-party-New-York.html

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

Mitt is definietly on the hot seat now because of his policies on disaster relief.

[-] 0 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Stop praying the gay away and erase the storm damage. All together now. On three! Oh, and throw those urban early ballot boxes in the bay.

[-] 0 points by 1sealyon (434) 1 year ago

Hurricanes have historically been a boon for private industry, mostly funded by insurance money:

http://www.realtor.org/sites/default/files/reports/2006/hurricanes-impact-on-housing-and-economic-activity-case-study-florida-2006-04.pdf

[-] 0 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

When is the last time, in the year following a natural disaster, that the rates have gone down? And what is the margin that they can collect above the payouts of benefits? The ACCA limits them to 15% but in casualty insurance the sky is not even the limit.