Mrs.PatsFanInVa

During one of the Republican presidential debates Mitt Romney was asked if he'd "shutter" FEMA and end federal disaster relief....his answer, ""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 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."

He then went on to add that privatizing disaster relief would be an even better solution.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2036198.html

Last night, faced with the current impending disaster, (which will affect several critical swing states) his campaign seemingly reaffirmed his opinion by issuing the following statement:

"Gov. Romney wants to ensure states, who are the first responders and are in the best position to aid impacted individuals and communities, have the resources and assistance they need to cope with natural disasters."

Add this to his heartless response to a victim of September's flooding in Louisiana when she told him she'd lost everything in the storm and asked him what could be done and he told her to "Go home and call 211," and you may have the makings of an "October Downfall."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1848432.html

Triumph

Mrs, everytime the Fed government is invloved you can be sure that there will be waste and corruption.

'Breathtaking' Waste and Fraud in Hurricane Aid - New York Times

Patters

That was under Bush, so thanks for reminding us why Republican policies are so disastrous. They overspend, waste money, and don't even protect people.

At any rate, sometimes it's only the government that can marshal the resources necessary to deal with major natural disasters, and frankly now would be a great time for the right to argue against FEMA (great for Obama that is).

Triumph

The old battle cry " Its was Bush's fault" is getting tired. But, I understand its all you libs have left at this juncture with Obamas defeat inevitable.

The point is that government is not the answer to everything and that Romney is right to end wasteful spending and corruption by FEMA when he gets elected next Tuesday.

DarrylS

The commentary you posted was from the Bush era...

__________________
"Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.

Patters

Everyone supports ending wasteful spending and corruption, but the reality is that the reason we know about wasteful spending and corruption at the federal level is because it is highly transparent. There is vastly more corruptions and wasteful spending at the state level and the private corporate level; it gets exposed every now and then (such as in the early years of the current recession), but by and large it's buried. Overall, the federal government has no choice but to be quite honest, because it can't get away with much. If we give more power to the individual states and private corporations, we make it easier for corruption and wastefulness to fester.

khayos

If anything, this storm will hurt Obama.

#1: it hits populations that give him strong support; extended power outages may prevent them from voting.

#2: frustration at relief/recovery efforts will be directed at whomever's in charge -- it's likely that Obama will get some negatives and not deserve it.

DarrylS

__________________
"Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.

Patters

Actually, politically, I see it is as quite the opposite:

- Obama's main risk is that FEMA bungles things badly, but I don't think that will happen.
- Romney's main risk is the fact that white guys (his base) are generally suburban or rural, so will have more trouble getting to the polls; in addition, home owners more than urban dwellers will have a lot more to deal with in the aftermath of the storm in terms of repairs, so may be less motivated to vote.
- Romney's strategy has been to flood the airwaves with ads in these last two weeks, but now that will seem insensitive to some degree and will be upstaged by the storm to an even larger degree.
- Obama will get a lot of positive free coverage, just by virtue of being president.

IllegalContact

20B to GM *cough cough*

And god knows how much to failed green companies.

__________________
“ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.