Huh? Pitting people who have lost their homes? Geez, what a dick.
PRR. Embarrassing fellow liberals since 2002.
John Mace. Embarrassing the human race with his pretentious and vapid comments since birth. Explain to me once more, btw, how you’re not a conservative, you’re an open-minded moderate, smack in the middle of the political spectrum–that’s always brings a smile to my face, you clueless dolt. You’re totally transparent, and you still spout that nonsense, just as if anyone buys it. Well, newbies do–you had me thinking you were a decent human being, my first two or three years here, until I caught on to your trolling technique.
A lot of devasted communities weren’t in the evacaution zones, the storm surge can up beyond the A evacuation zones.
And if you look at the map there are HUGE areas of Brooklyn coast that aren’t zone A and many of those communities were pretty well trashed
I’m going to skip past all the name calling etc. and address the OP.
You have (according to the OP) a group of people who have said in the past that FEMA doesn’t work and other options should be put in place (which aren’t currently).
Now they are hit with a disaster, and do not appear to be getting appropriate relief and are saying that FEMA isn’t working… they wish there were other options in place (which aren’t currently).
I’m not saying I agree or disagree with getting rid of FEMA, I just don’t see the hypocritical nature of this.
I’m not pitting them for their hypocrisyas much as I’m pitting them because accepting federal relief doesn’t make accepting federal relief more palatable in principle to them. For the most part, they opposed it vigorously in the past, accept it now as their due, and will continue opposing it for others in the future.
And again, if no one fits my description, then this pitting is an utter waste of time and energy. But if I am describing even one Staten Islander accurately with the above three-part characterization, then that’s whom I’m pitting here. I personally believe I am describing accurately several thousand Staten Islanders here, but I could be wrong–that’s only my opinion.
And to your point-- their complaint about FEMA are much more about how much money is expended making it available quickly to recipients. The federal can keep relief materials (blankets, food, generators, etc.) on hand in great numbers and move it to disaster areas quickly much more efficiently each state can store smaller numbers of such material, or purchase it (or acquire through donation or borrow it from other states). Same with money allocated for major disasters–the feds can put their hands on fifty states’ contributions to disaster relief immediately, while states can only access those funds they have allocated for disaster relief. Same with know-how–FEMA knows how allocation goes best, since they do it all the time, while states have to re-invent the wheel since individually, they may be dealing with it for the first time in a decade or more.
Look. Here’s the thing. Taxes are what they are now, whether or not one opposes current tax policy. And the services offered by government for emergency relief, among other things, are there.
If you can find your (entirely made of straw) Staten Island Tea Partier, who is utterly opposed to government relief of any kind whatsoever, that person is still as entitled to all available services as I, a liberal in good standing, am. He or she has presumably been paying taxes and generally existing as a good citizen, albeit one with a different political view point from you or me.
To say otherwise is to use the same kind of logic as those ridiculous conservaties who say that any wealthy person who is in favor of higher taxes is a hypocrite because he or she doesn’t send a check to the IRS to make up the difference between actual tax rates and what that person believes their tax rate should be.
Me, I hope Staten Islanders get all the help they need as fast as possible, no matter who they’re going to vote for on Tuesday.
But their current situation and the response they have been witnessing in an actual emergency rather than in theory doesn’t seem to bear this out though.
Really? I haven’t heard a lot of “I was opposed to federal aid before, on principle, but now I see that sometimes federal aid is a good thing, going to help people deserving of aid, not just losers and freeloaders and cheats, like I used to think.” Have you?
I admit I don’t understand the objective of focusing emergency relief to State control.
I get that smaller entities might better be able to administer resources, but it’s not like hurricanes respect state lines and at that point relief needs to go where it’s needed, which has fuck all to do with where it was previously funded.
I think that’s because of the garbage dump.
d&r
crickets
Mace is right. Same thing happened in the pitting of OMG.
Sorry–got mixed up in responding.
There’s nothing to respond to. He disagrees with me. He can say what he likes. I don’t know what to say to someone whose point seems to be that this thread, which has gotten 75 responses in two days, didn’t go very far, because I’m such an idiot. What kind of response would be desired? People HAVE responded to it, and he’s a big doody-head? Okey-dokey.
Well, I don’t know, you could address any of his points 1 through 6. Maybe try to refute them, or something? But maybe for you it’s just all about tallying the # of responses you can generate.
You bring up the failure of my thread to get any responses, and then you try to make it as if I’m concerned about that subject? What an asshole you are.
I have no response to his first six points. They are assertions that I don’t accept. “Demonization”? What’s that? When righties don’t like an argument, they accuse people of demonizing. When Romney wants to defend Ryan (or maybe the other way around) he says “He’s not a demon.” Well, no one actually accused either one of being a demon, so he’s on safe ground there. LIkewise, I haven’t accused anyone of being a demon, but arguing against what I actually do say is not so easy. So you take the easy path and argue that I’m demonizing. Fine. Go ahead. But don’t expect me to waste much effort arguing against you. You’re an idiot. I will discuss whether you are an idiot, an asshole, a moron, a twerp, a jackass, and a shit-for-brains, because that’s easy to do. Open a Pit thread entitled “Is Truman Burbank an imbecile?” and we can discuss it there.
“You bring up the failure of my thread to get any responses.” (Try reading for comprehension, it is a simple thread and yet you conflate two posts by two different posters).
Out of his 6 points, you address one, and then start calling names. Talk about 'taking the easy path".
Sorry, you forgot to attribute that quote you just made. I’m not sure I’ve heard anyone say it before now. Maybe a different paraphrase is that FEMA is too big and too full of red tape to effectively respond to an emergency, but if I’m paying for it I expect a benefit from it. Meanwhile I’m sitting in a house with no power that may have been shifted off of its foundation and would love to have a few gallons of drinkable water.
I can’t believe I’m defending an opinion I don’t necessarily support but I don’t see how you can say they are wrong in their opinion that FEMA isn’t working for them in this case. Maybe you are convincing me to sway my opinion?
I don’t think I have, but that’s a lot of commas and they’re silent so it’s hard to tell.