Thursday, November 01, 2012
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Then Hurricane Sandy hit the East Coast, and Romney realized that he was once again that he was on the wrong side of yet another issue. So, he's trying to mislead Americans, yet again, by saying he does support FEMA and federal relief funds. As Sabrina Siddiqui reports for "The Huffington Post," the Romney campaign is saying:
Governor Romney believes that states should be in charge of emergency management in responding to storms and other natural disasters in their jurisdictions,” said campaign spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg. “As the first responders, states are in the best position to aid affected individuals and communities and to direct resources and assistance to where they are needed most. This includes help from the federal government and FEMA.Notice how the position opposing federal help remains except for a sentence hastily added at the end saying "This includes help from the federal government and FEMA." I'm so disgusted with all these "fiscal conservatives" saying government is horrible, incapable and a waste of tax dollars--until they need government help. Then they try to backtrack like Willy Coyote after realizing he ran off the cliff!! Romney must think Americans are all too stupid to notice him changing positions faster than a prostitute in Amsterdam!!
Romney's FEMA failure during Hurricane Sandy gives us a glimpse into how he would handle disasters as President of the United States. It doesn't look good. His short-sighted views on cutting emergency relief programs expose his weaknesses as a politician. He might be able to lead a board-room full of executives but he's clueless as a national leader.
Monday, October 29, 2012
As Hurricane Sandy Pounds East Coast, Romney Plans to Cut Federal Disaster Funds from FEMA. Calls Funding FEMA "Immoral."
During a presidential primary debate earlier this year, Mitt Romney forcefully called for the end of FEMA. That is the national emergency management department of the U.S. government. Romney stated that such activities should be left to the states to manage. He went even further to say the best option would be to privatize disaster relief:
"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 the opposite question, what should we keep?" "Including disaster relief, though?" debate moderator John King asked Romney."We cannot -- we cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids," Romney replied. "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.It's reckless for Mitt Romney to call for cutting disaster relief funds at the national level. Especially while calling for a reduction in taxes paid by the ultra-rich. His idea is make the rich even richer at the detriment to disaster relief programs. He simply has no idea how massive and expensive these storms can be. No one state alone has enough money to repair a major disaster, such as after Hurricane Katrina. It would bankrupt some states if they were forced to pay for the entire clean-up and rescue efforts. It's disgusting that Romney would rather states go bankrupt and families move than make his rich buddies pay a little extra in taxes to stand with our neighbors to provide disaster assistance. Whatever happened to "United we stand?" Romney would change that phrase to "You're on your own."
Privatizing disaster relief programs is just as dangerous. It makes victims of devastating storms pay higher and higher prices for assistance, especially if they live in a state prone to natural disasters. And what do citizens do who cannot afford to pay for a private company to help them? Are we just going to let them drown or wander around homeless? That is an unfair economic burden to place upon people whose house was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Romney then talks about morality. What would Jesus think? Would he rather we focus on people, or money? Helping our brothers and sisters or ignoring them?
There is a pattern here with Mitt Romney. First we heard him callously telling the auto industry to go bankrupt, which would have made an improving economy in Ohio and Michigan slide back into a recession. Now he's turning his back on millions of voters who live in disaster prone areas of the country: Florida, Virginia, the earthquake zones on the west coast and any state with a high, wildfire risk, (Colorado and other western state). If you believe that we should help our fellow Americans regardless of their state, you need to vote for President Obama. In a Romney world, we're all on our own, which is great for the uber-rich but devastating for the rest of us. Stand with your fellow Americans and vote for President Obama.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Bush, speaking at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, said the US military was at the "beginning stage" of its offensive in Iraq as the last of the 30,000 extra troops he ordered into Iraq arrived this month.
GOI: If we're in the "beginning stage" then the "middle stage" should begin about September when things will be "reassessed" and the "final stage" should take place the day that Bush walks out of the White House. You watch--it'll happen.
By ANDREW BRIDGES
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Farmed seafood joined tires, toothpaste and toy trains on the list of tainted and defective products from China that could be hazardous to a person's health.
The Food and Drug Administration announcement was only the latest in an expanding series of problems with imported Chinese products that seemingly permeate U.S. society.
Beyond the fish, federal regulators have warned consumers in recent weeks about lead paint in toy trains, defective tires, and toothpaste made with diethylene glycol, a toxic ingredient more commonly found in antifreeze. All the products were imported from China.GOI: Antifreeze?? Oh that's nice. I guess that's a new flavor. You know, mint, regular or antifreeze. At what point does this become an issue of national security?? One would think that the safety of the American people would be an issue of national security. That being said, why should we be surprised when this lack of government regulation is coming from a government that is run by a president who's party has outright disdain for the idea of government in the first place!! As Thom Hartmann says, (and I'm probably paraphrasing a bit here) "You can't govern if you're against the idea of government." It sounds like the FDA under the Bush Administration is running it via "faith based" methods and I guess that's what they're trying to tell us--pray to "God" that you're food is safe.
This from the same government that brought us the FEMA Katrina nightmare.
This is what we get when we spend a major chunk of our federal budget on an endless war and a ballooning military industrial complex. This is what we get when we farm out jobs to a country that has nearly no standards, uses child labor and no worker rights. I'm tired of people whining about how much American union workers get paid--you get what you pay for, o.k.?? Do we want quality products that are made by Americans under strict regulations or cheap junk from a country that couldn't care less about our safety and that of our children? I think the answer is obvious.
This is what happens when we let the market forces of the multi-national, uber-corporations run rampant.
Here's a thought--if it's costs too much because it's made in America under rigorous standards then maybe you don't need it.
---End of Transmission---