The force of two Romneys
Gov. Romney said states and the private sector could handle disasters, until one hit in the waning days of the campaign. Grab the Etch A Sketch.
Hurricane Sandy claimed the lives of at least 38 Americans, cut the power to millions of homes and businesses along the East Coast, shut down transit systems and ruined untold millions of dollars worth of infrastructure. At times like these, Americans look to their government to lead rescue and restoration efforts.
Virginia is no exception. Before Sandy’s fierce winds penetrated Virginia, Bob McDonnell did what is expected of a governor. He asked President Obama for a “pre-landfall” emergency declaration from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
October 31, 2012 - 6:23 AM
Give Mitt a couple of days. He will change his position on FEMA. I bet some time today he will say that this Federal program is essential!
Emergency services in times of disasters fall to state and local agencies and that is where it belongs.
The problem with FEMA is that when they step in with funds, massive federal regulations kick in as to how the money will be spent.
Local and state agencies know best how to spend recovery money for their own local populations and businesses much better than Washington.
The only legitimate role for a federal agency in disasters is to supply money to states if state funds are depleted and then stay the hell out of the way.
You have GOT to be kidding? But I know you are not. Do you seriously think New Jersey can fund their recovery alone? Or should? Really? This is a good time to point out the difference in people who understand what government is for and those who despise it in all forms apparently.
The head of FEMA is a political appointee and subject to political influence.
Remember when the tornado blasted through Pulaski Co. in the spring of 2011? The area was denied any FEMA benefits.
Was that because of the fact that Virginia is primarily red state and southwest Virginia threw Rep. Boucher out of office and replaced him with a Republican?
Remember how FEMA wasted millions on temporary housing that was unsuitable for occupancy and millions wasted due to fraud and abuse that supposedly was for the victims of hurricane Katrina?
Local and state officials are better equipped to handle disasters than federal bureaucrats.
(Yes, Christina, I have read the editorial). Twice, and still cannot find the meat. (Where’s the beef?).
From the accusational title to the trite talking points Etch A Sketch remarks, where do you show Romney contradiction?
Surely you realize all concerned must act within the system as it exists at any given time. How is suggesting possible reform of future system(s) contrary to this reality?
Whether stopping the back-and-forth flow (and bureaucratic dilluting) of funds to and back from the fed (with strings attached) is a good idea or not is debatable.
But where does suggesting such a debate/discussion/reform/change predicate a contradiction with the need to address the present situation within present parameters?
#2 “Emergency services in times of disasters fall to state and local agencies and that is where it belongs.”
I guess that’s why Bobby McDonnell wants federal help.
I bet Obama wishes he had an etch-a-sketch for Libya.
FEMA needs a major overhaul! They denied funds to Glade Springs, VA after the tornadoes ripped through there. The amount of damage there was undeniable. Yet, as John R points out, they were continually denied. They want to play politics with natural disaster and it is government in its worse form when that happens. States and localities should be able to run relief efforts more efficiently.
The denial for the Glade Springs and other tornadoes remains perplexing. It came at the time when FEMA was low on funds and during the same time period in which Romney made his remarks and Rep. Eric Cantor was calling for corresponding offsets in the federal budget if FEMA received more funds. So there were more politics in play than whether a state is red or blue. (Virginia, BTW, went for Obama in 2008.)
The people who literally want to use the government to circumvent the right to individual privacy and reproductive choice as well as deny gay rights, speaking of FEMA and “play politics with natural disaster” or “subject to political influence” is too ironic for words.
And NOW “all concerned must act within the system as it exists at any given time” but just a few months ago who was being excoriated for unilaterally not accepting outside money because they supported campaign finance reform?
I see Romney is not the only weather-vane around.
BTW, there was no “suggesting such a debate/discussion/reform/change”, there was only Romney saying he would end it.
…“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,” Mr. King said. “How do you deal with something like that?”
Romney’s response: “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.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2012/1030/Did-Mitt-Romney-suggest-eliminating-FEMA-video
THAT is what Romney said, now he simply refuses to answer the question.
#9 Romney’s remarks swayed the Obama denial? Low on funds? How do we stand now, deficit & debt, to then?
Why then but not now?
I don’t suppose the 2012 election figures in.
Conservatives want government out of everything except the bedroom. They want to control what I do with my own body.
#12 – I’m a Conservative, jane, and I really don’t give a darn what you do with your body.
That pretty much blows your comment out of the water, doesn’t it?
#13 ” I’m a Conservative, jane, and I really don’t give a darn what you do with your body….” …which pretty much makes you an exception that proves the rule, Michael.
#14 – “…which pretty much makes you an exception that proves the rule, Michael.”
Nah…it just proves that people make ridiculous generalizations.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/29/Obama-s-Sequester-Slashes-Funds-for-FEMA-Flood-Management
But that’s right, he said during the last debate that the sequesteration wouldn’t happen.
How does an exception prove a rule? I’ve never understood that statement.
(for the record, I also don’t care about jane’s body)
#15 “it just proves that people make ridiculous generalizations…”
Yep, and you’re living proof:
http://blogs.roanoke.com/roundtable/2012/10/tim-kaine-for-u-s-senate/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
snip: “18.#16 – “Perhaps the editorial staff should take notice and make sure that their editorial staff covers both sides of the aisle when writing editorial comments.”
I won’t hold my breath…
Comment by Michael —”
http://blogs.roanoke.com/roundtable/2012/10/tuesday-open-thread-214/
snip: “you will never succeed in taking away from an achiever in order to give to someone who isn’t…I do NOT support handouts to the lazy…
Comment by Michael ”
http://blogs.roanoke.com/roundtable/2012/08/friday-open-thread-210/
snip:”It’s a shame that you and others of the “tolerant” party want to shut him up.
That says a lot about you.
Comment by Michael”
http://blogs.roanoke.com/roundtable/2012/08/wednesday-open-thread-213/
snip: “Lord knows the media of the left would never do anything they could to portray the GOP as racists, would they?
Comment by Michael”
So who’s zooming who, Michael?
#10 More circular sophistry.
“Working within the system……” was to (most) people an obvious reference to the fact that if you want/need assistance now, that is the system in place. It does not preclude the ability to discuss other or reforming such system(s).
Sending it back to the states does not “end it”. That is where the money came from & where it gets spent.
And, again, I did not advocate a position. I took issue with the presentation of the editorial.
Whether you personally “give a darn” or not Michael, many conservatives in the TP/R Party have worked tirelessly to interfere with what a woman chooses. That is not a generalization, it is the truth.
#19 And not sending it to DC to be laundered first to support 40+ new czars goes a long way in a state budget.
89Hoo, as I understand it, “an exception that proves the rule” is saying that the existence of an outlier or exception in a specific example proves that a general rule must exist.
If you say, “I’m a Conservative, jane, and I really don’t give a darn what you do with your body”, that makes you the exception which proves that conservatives in general do care what Jane or other women do with their bodies, which is the rule. Otherwise, there would be no need to deny it and therefore no outlier in the conservative mindset on the issue.
#18 – Despite your attempt to prove me wrong, Steve, none of those comments were broad generalizations to the level of Janes comment.
Concerning the editorial staff, that’s what? 5 or 6 people?
I did not call all people or a specific group of people lazy. If a lazy person expects something from me, they won’t get it. If the shoe fits…
Concerning shutting up Clint Eastwood, I was pointing out that Sandi and others who have spoken out want to shut hijm up. Again, I did NOT say “The left wants to shut him up”.
I will give you, however, that I did make a generalization concerning the media…albeit a correct one.
Perhaps you could use your time more wisley than digging through archives…to no avail.
#20 – Jane did not say “many” conservatives, Sandi…she said conservatives, as in all of them.
She’s wrong.
Obama’s budget for fiscal 2013 sought a CUT in FEMA of $641.5 million or 6.02%.
FEMA needs to be overhauled, not abolished. Like all federal programs it has grown too large and inefficient.
State and local officials should be in control of disaster relief, they know their own cities and neighborhoods better than the feds ever could and they also know that the local citizens will hold them responsible. The feds should help only with money.
Big bureaucratic federal agencies are more costly and more likely to do things wrong. Just ask the citizens of New Orleans.
Sophistry is “subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation”. There is nothing subtle or deceptive about saying, “take something from the federal government”. He said it. It is clearly what he wanted to do (who the hell knows what he wants to do today, one cannot keep up with the way the flips flop). If you take it away from the federal government, FEMA is no more. There may be fifty SEMA’s in its place, but you still end FEMA.
Couldn’t care less Jane.
#20 All choices produce consequences. It seems to me the philosophy of the left is to equate abortion on demand, preferably paid for by others…..birth control paid for by others….with choice, or freedom.
When “Virginia” makes poor choices, who pays? Sure, we all make mistakes & appreciate help & compassion.
But where is the left on other freedoms? Why promote poor choices?
By the way, I’m all for birth-control. At the same time I can see & respect (and agree with) opinions that it is not an entitlement & those who disagree with birth-control should not be forced by government to support & promote such.
The idea that anyone is proposing taking away access to birth-control is absurd.
There is no reason anyone should be forced to support abortion.
“Virginia” can make her own choices, but in many cases needs to make better choices & take responsibility for those choices.
You actually think so many conservatives are pro choice that it is wrong to say conservatives are anti choice?
You actually think that so many conservatives do not care what any woman or gay couple does such that it is wrong to say they do? Really?
Speaking of sophistry, how is not supporting choice, thinking abortion should be illegal or even really, really hard to get not wanting to control what women do with their own body?
Could you elaborate on the rules of “ridiculous generalizations” Michael? Please, do tell us how many actual people you have to be making “a general statement, law, principle, or proposition” about before it is accepted as a
plain generalization, a broad generalization and a ridiculous generalization? It always helps to know the rules, even if some people ignore them.
#28 I know it is a liberal catch phrase to say “what women do with their body”, but all conservatives understand that the law allows abortion and until that law is changed, we understand that women will get abortions and that is between them and their God when it is all said and done. We truly don’t care what you “do with your body” man or woman. We simply don’t feel our tax dollars should pay for it.
Nice try jerome, but that is far from the reality that most TP/R candidates and elected representatives work for, espouse and support. Working to change the law is not understanding or respecting the law. Wanting to force no choice on a woman is not “don’t care what you “do with your body”. Your tax dollars already do not pay for it.
#31 “Your tax dollars already do not pay for it.” Really?
http://www.huliq.com/10280/tax-money-abortions
http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2011/04/the-latest-fight-over-federal-tax-dollars-and-abortion.html
http://www.presentationministries.com/brochures/AbortTax.asp
http://www.mrc.org/node/41100
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/carolplattliebau/2012/09/02/the_real_abortion_extremists
How many messengers need be shot?
#26 I don’t need to look up words before using them. If I don’t know what they mean, I don’t use them.
As to your “definition” I suggest you check the primary definition, rather than cherry-picking secondary ones.
Thanks for all that effort, but one will do:
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/
“ “by law, Title X funds may not be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning.” Medicaid funding is restricted by the Hyde Amendment to only abortion cases involving rape, incest or endangerment to the life of the mother. Some states use their own funds under Medicaid to go beyond that. Seventeen states and, until recently, the District of Columbia pay for “medically necessary” abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute. The federal budget deal now bans Washington, D.C., from using its funds to pay for abortions.“
Well, that didn’t take long. The weathervane flips again.
35 – hehe…that is funny…
@ #33, maybe you do. As a matter of fact…I did. I even quoted it in my answer.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sophistry
Or do you propose we only use your approved dictionary too?
And here I thought “cherry-picking” was a conservative fav! Is it a peeve that a secondary definition does not “count”? Or should you tell the dictionaries?
35- Wow, that’s a “raw”, I mean, “real” story there.
“The Raw Story describes itself as progressive”
“Raw Story’s original reporting has also been referenced by MSNBC’s Ed Schultz and Lawrence O’Donnell,[6] The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, Real Time with Bill Maher and Countdown with Keith Olbermann”
Wonder why anyone would say something about FEMA?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/fema-misspent-millions-in_n_220487.html
“Wow, that’s a “raw”, I mean, “real” story there.”
Are you denying it’s accuracy, or just blaming the messenger? Do your arms get tired from shaking that etch-a-sketch?
#38 I hope you enjoy the Mitt Romney rally this morning in Roanoke!
#34 Thank you.
#38 Thank you.
#23 “Despite your attempt to prove me wrong, Steve, ” First off, my name’s Steven, NOT Steve. If you’re going to rag on me, then at least do me the simple courtesy of getting my name right.
“none of those comments were broad generalizations to the level of Janes comment.” Oh really? You sure could have fooled me. Most of what followed in post #23 was the sort of mincing and parsing of words that would do Bill Clinton proud.
“or just blaming the messenger”
Now, WHO first said, etch-a-sketch? It was NOT Gov. Romney. It was one of his aides, right? You might call him, a messenger. Do you need a teleprompter to read where this all started?