PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Virginia Congressman says SCREW JOPLIN!


gblowfish
05-25-2011, 09:54 AM
Nice guy. Nothing like compassionate conservatism.
http://tinyurl.com/3trjvsd

Here's a morsel:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Monday that if Congress passes an emergency spending bill to help Missouri's tornado victims, the extra money will have to be cut from somewhere else.

"If there is support for a supplemental, it would be accompanied by support for having pay-fors to that supplemental," Mr. Cantor, Virginia Republican, told reporters at the Capitol.

blaise
05-25-2011, 09:55 AM
So, he's saying there's a budget?

Hydrae
05-25-2011, 09:56 AM
So, he's saying there's a budget?

with no emergency fund for, you know, emergencies.

Discuss Thrower
05-25-2011, 09:56 AM
Cut it from the foreign aid we give to shithole places like Pakistan...?

blaise
05-25-2011, 10:04 AM
So, the other people are compassionate, just not compassionate enough to pull the money from somewhere else?

"We need to be compassionate! How dare you not help!"

Ok, let's pull that money from one of your programs.

"Whoa, now wait, let's not be that compassionate."

FishingRod
05-25-2011, 10:10 AM
Joplin virtually destroyed by tornado
Views: 23,608
Posted By gblowfish
Not sure if this was posted earlier or not. Very...

Not sure if this was posted earlier or not. Very cool before and after views using Google Maps, street level.

Total destruction. Amazing.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2011, 10:10 AM
Cut it from the foreign aid we give to shithole places like Pakistan...?

Great idea! I know that Americans would donate generously to them even if the govt doesn't do anything.

Simplex3
05-25-2011, 10:17 AM
All this says is that the feds need to spend less than they take in every year so that there is extra cash for unplanned for situations. It's not being dick-ish, it's being practical.

Cave Johnson
05-25-2011, 10:36 AM
The first place we should look, earmarks from Rep. Cantor's district.

vailpass
05-25-2011, 11:00 AM
All this says is that the feds need to spend less than they take in every year so that there is extra cash for unplanned for situations. It's not being dick-ish, it's being practical.

X1

Simplex3
05-25-2011, 11:02 AM
X1

So you want to not put any extra weight on my comment?

Brock
05-25-2011, 11:02 AM
All this says is that the feds need to spend less than they take in to take in more than they spend every year so that there is extra cash for unplanned for situations. It's not being dick-ish, it's being practical.

fyp to be more in line with their perspective

vailpass
05-25-2011, 11:31 AM
So you want to not put any extra weight on my comment?

When wishing to express complete agreement is the proper response 'X2'?

ROYC75
05-25-2011, 12:16 PM
Nice guy. Nothing like compassionate conservatism.
http://tinyurl.com/3trjvsd

Here's a morsel:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Monday that if Congress passes an emergency spending bill to help Missouri's tornado victims, the extra money will have to be cut from somewhere else.

"If there is support for a supplemental, it would be accompanied by support for having pay-fors to that supplemental," Mr. Cantor, Virginia Republican, told reporters at the Capitol.

Dag-gum gblowfish, just a little overkill here?:hmmm:

FishingRod
05-25-2011, 12:22 PM
Dag-gum gblowfish, just a little overkill here?:hmmm:

My thoughts on gblowfishe’s comment were roughly as accurate

Bwana
05-25-2011, 12:25 PM
What a concept, trying to figure out a way to pay for it in advance, rather than spending money that we don't have. It's not like he said it wouldn't happen, we all know it will.

Radar Chief
05-25-2011, 12:27 PM
X1

+1, X2, ^This, or my favorite "Yup". ;)

Brock
05-25-2011, 12:32 PM
What a concept, trying to figure out a way to pay for it in advance, rather than spending money that we don't have. It's not like he said it wouldn't happen, we all know it will.

Although I'm certain absolutely nothing would have been said if it were his voters suffering.

vailpass
05-25-2011, 01:33 PM
+1, X2, ^This, or my favorite "Yup". ;)

Fugging new math! :cuss:

SNR
05-25-2011, 01:55 PM
Fugging new math! :cuss:Word filter evasion. Offensive.

RedNeckRaider
05-25-2011, 01:59 PM
What a concept, trying to figure out a way to pay for it in advance, rather than spending money that we don't have. It's not like he said it wouldn't happen, we all know it will.
.

SNR
05-25-2011, 02:04 PM
Were you on Cantor's ass during the Alabama tornados, gblowfish?

Simplex3
05-25-2011, 02:05 PM
Word filter evasion. Offensive.

x1

mikey23545
05-25-2011, 02:14 PM
Compassionate liberalism :

Just print up a bunch of hundreds and ship 'em down there!

vailpass
05-25-2011, 02:25 PM
x1

LMAO

redsurfer11
05-25-2011, 03:23 PM
........and Hurricane season starts next week.

Dallas Chief
05-25-2011, 03:27 PM
The first place we should look, earmarks from Rep. Cantor's district.

I agree. How about you provide a list of them and we'll get the bandwagon going? Or are you just spitballin' as usual???

patteeu
05-25-2011, 03:31 PM
Virginia Congressman says I'M GONNA MAKE GBLOWFISH LOOK FOOLISH!

RedNeckRaider
05-25-2011, 03:34 PM
........and Hurricane season starts next week.

Shhhhhhhhhhh i don't want to hear it~

Okie_Apparition
05-25-2011, 03:36 PM
That's what churches are for/tobacco fields not hurt

Cave Johnson
05-25-2011, 03:38 PM
I agree. How about you provide a list of them and we'll get the bandwagon going? Or are you just spitballin' as usual???

Let's go with the TARP bailout his wife's bank received and high speed rail for his district.

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/gop-house-whips-wife-didnt-know-her-b

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5KB7EF5QCPo&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5KB7EF5QCPo&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

Dallas Chief
05-25-2011, 04:54 PM
Let's go with the TARP bailout his wife's bank received and high speed rail for his district.

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/gop-house-whips-wife-didnt-know-her-b

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5KB7EF5QCPo&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5KB7EF5QCPo&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

Not an earmark and not in his district. FAIL!!! Try again...

RedNeckRaider
05-25-2011, 04:59 PM
Not an earmark and not in his district. FAIL!!! Try again...
She can be the Glen Beck of the left!!! You go girl!!! :rolleyes:

vailpass
05-25-2011, 05:00 PM
Not an earmark and not in his district. FAIL!!! Try again...

LMAO

mlyonsd
05-25-2011, 09:26 PM
Cantor is in reality just talking like an adult here.

Brock
05-25-2011, 10:49 PM
Cantor is in reality just talking like an adult here.

Right. With the amount of money these idiots piss away for foreign countries and their little pet projects, we really need to think about where the money is going to come from to help Americans in complete desperation. What he's speaking like is an asshole with nothing to lose by speaking like an asshole. Real gutsy.

johnny961
05-25-2011, 11:16 PM
Cut it from the foreign aid we give to shithole places like Pakistan...?

Exactly. Pakistan aside (thats another sore subject) we have no business dishing out aid to ANY foreign entity before taking care of our own pressing needs at home. IMO there are NUMEROUS places in our current budget to come up with funding for disasters like those in Joplin without increasing overall spending.

patteeu
05-25-2011, 11:56 PM
Exactly. Pakistan aside (thats another sore subject) we have no business dishing out aid to ANY foreign entity before taking care of our own pressing needs at home. IMO there are NUMEROUS places in our current budget to come up with funding for disasters like those in Joplin without increasing overall spending.

We're spending plenty of money to take care of our pressing needs at home. We just need to divert it from the spending that's addressing non-needs and luxuries, which is what Cantor is talking about.

johnny961
05-26-2011, 12:50 AM
We're spending plenty of money to take care of our pressing needs at home. We just need to divert it from the spending that's addressing non-needs and luxuries, which is what Cantor is talking about.

I can't say that I totally disagree with your statement. That being said, I still don't think that it is unreasonable at all to scale back the huge amount of foreign aid that the U.S. dishes out annually when situations at home dictate.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 12:54 AM
So, the other people are compassionate, just not compassionate enough to pull the money from somewhere else?

"We need to be compassionate! How dare you not help!"

Ok, let's pull that money from one of your programs.

"Whoa, now wait, let's not be that compassionate."

Your ignorance is so blinding that you can't see your ignorance.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 12:58 AM
We're spending plenty of money to take care of our pressing needs at home. We just need to divert it from the spending that's addressing non-needs and luxuries, which is what Cantor is talking about.

Thats a fabulous idea. Lets play politics with the budget while thousands are homeless.

johnny961
05-26-2011, 01:06 AM
Thats a fabulous idea. Lets play politics with the budget while thousands are homeless.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. In any major crisis like this we need to cut the political BS and make those funds available asap. Then wrangle over what budget to tap to finance it later.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 07:26 AM
Thats a fabulous idea. Lets play politics with the budget while thousands are homeless.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. In any major crisis like this we need to cut the political BS and make those funds available asap. Then wrangle over what budget to tap to finance it later.

You guys are high. The people making this political are the one refusing to let THEIR program take the cuts to pay for Joplin.

We've been kicking the debt down the road for decades. It has to stop. There will always be an excuse why we can't stop today, and tomorrow never comes.

blaise
05-26-2011, 07:41 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/24/joplin-missouri-tornado-h_n_866242.html

From the article:
"The Obama administration has come under criticism from lawmakers in both parties for being slow to react to the ongoing shortfalls in disaster aid accounts.

"We are monitoring the situation closely and will consider a supplemental request if the need arises," said White House budget office spokeswoman Meg Reilly.

The Obama administration only requested $1.8 billion for the budget year that begins in October, less than half of what will be needed to deal with recovery costs of past disasters like hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Gustav and the massive Tennessee floods of last spring even as the next wave of bills come in. Authorities are beginning to assess the damage and don't have estimates of recovery costs."

FishingRod
05-26-2011, 07:51 AM
I can't say that I totally disagree with your statement. That being said, I still don't think that it is unreasonable at all to scale back the huge amount of foreign aid that the U.S. dishes out annually when situations at home dictate.

While I too agree that it makes little sense to give money to other countries while we are swimming in debt. The 25 billion or so while huge to us little people it is a drop in the bucket of the Federal budget. About .007 ish of it. Additionally that puts us about 20th in the world from a percentage standpoint. It should be addressed but it is just one of many places that we need to make better use of our tax dollars.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 09:18 AM
You guys are high. The people making this political are the one refusing to let THEIR program take the cuts to pay for Joplin.

We've been kicking the debt down the road for decades. It has to stop. There will always be an excuse why we can't stop today, and tomorrow never comes.

I invite you to come to my town, and tell them that they couldn't get any assistance because they couldn't agree what program should be cut.

Garcia Bronco
05-26-2011, 09:31 AM
I invite you to come to my town, and tell them that they couldn't get any assistance because they couldn't agree what program should be cut.

As if you are entitled to assistance. You aren't. Having said that I donated 200 to the Red Cross yesterday.

blaise
05-26-2011, 09:32 AM
I invite you to come to my town, and tell them that they couldn't get any assistance because they couldn't agree what program should be cut.

Why does it have to be cut first? Pay the money and then cut it from somewhere else. The politician's quote doesn't say money shouldn't be given, it says money given should be offset by a cut somewhere else.

blaise
05-26-2011, 09:39 AM
By the way, the article I posted says the disaster relief money they're wanting would be financed by a $1.5 billion cut from a loan program to encourage the production of fuel-efficient vehicles. Why is that so sinister? If we take money from one program to help victims of emergencies it's now tainted and not compassionate?
The reason they have to do it is because there's apparently a shortfall in funding for emergency situations.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 09:45 AM
As if you are entitled to assistance. You aren't. Having said that I donated 200 to the Red Cross yesterday.

You know nothing of mine or my families situation. The only thing you know is from news reports. I urge you to shut the fuck up and thank you for helping out.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 09:46 AM
Why does it have to be cut first? Pay the money and then cut it from somewhere else. The politician's quote doesn't say money shouldn't be given, it says money given should be offset by a cut somewhere else.

Which I can agree with. I don't like the bargaining chip political bs.

FishingRod
05-26-2011, 09:49 AM
Why does it have to be cut first? Pay the money and then cut it from somewhere else. The politician's quote doesn't say money shouldn't be given, it says money given should be offset by a cut somewhere else.

That is generally what they do and I imagine they will. I theory it makes perfect sense. If helping our fellow citizens in a time of need such as this is not damn high up the priority list our government is more out of touch than even I accuse them of being. Now the problem comes after the monies are allocated. Our representatives don’t have a stellar track record of cutting back on something else on order to work with the monies they actually have. It just gets poured into the old bucket of debt.

blaise
05-26-2011, 09:50 AM
Which I can agree with. I don't like the bargaining chip political bs.

I'm sure there was quite a bit of discussion about where the money would come from. That was probably one quote that someone ran with because they wanted to make a headline. From the way I read it they wanted to create a fund for people in Joplin and Tennessee and other places so they could help now and also for future events. Whether he said it or not, I'm sure a discussion had to be had about where the money would come from- taxes, or cut from somewhere else.
I hope you and your family are doing ok.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 09:53 AM
I'm sure there was quite a bit of discussion about where the money would come from. That was probably one quote that someone ran with because they wanted to make a headline. From the way I read it they wanted to create a fund for people in Joplin and Tennessee and other places so they could help now and also for future events. Whether he said it or not, I'm sure a discussion had to be had about where the money would come from- taxes, or cut from somewhere else.
I hope you and your family are doing ok.


Health wise yes. My daughter and grandchild lost everything. Several friends lost everything. Thanks for your well wishes.

FishingRod
05-26-2011, 10:01 AM
Health wise yes. My daughter and grandchild lost everything. Several friends lost everything. Thanks for your well wishes.

As bad as losing all of one’s stuff is, I’m very glad to hear your family’s loss was of things and not the loss of your family. The response I have seen from the general public and their willingness to donate time, money, labor and so on has been pretty encouraging. There really are a lot of good people.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 10:07 AM
As bad as losing all of one’s stuff is, I’m very glad to hear your family’s loss was of things and not the loss of your family. The response I have seen from the general public and their willingness to donate time, money, labor and so on has been pretty encouraging. There really are a lot of good people.

I tell you what, it's brought a tear to my eye for sure.

LOCOChief
05-26-2011, 10:35 AM
Adults look for responsible ways to handle the crisis at hand which include funding the resolution. Suggesting cuts from somewhere else speaks nothing about Cantors compassion or 'lack of" as you say but more about resposibility.

Maybe you'd rather we raise the ceiling, print some more and throw it at the problem.

RedNeckRaider
05-26-2011, 10:40 AM
I guess Barry is doing the same thing. Too busy to stop by for a look. This is just silly~

Taco John
05-26-2011, 10:57 AM
Nice guy. Nothing like compassionate conservatism.
http://tinyurl.com/3trjvsd

Here's a morsel:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Monday that if Congress passes an emergency spending bill to help Missouri's tornado victims, the extra money will have to be cut from somewhere else.

"If there is support for a supplemental, it would be accompanied by support for having pay-fors to that supplemental," Mr. Cantor, Virginia Republican, told reporters at the Capitol.


I don't see how anyone could have a problem with this. The whole tone of current politics is that we are broke and need to be budgeting. Nobody is saying "screw Joplin." They're just saying "how can we pay for it?"

Taco John
05-26-2011, 11:04 AM
Which I can agree with. I don't like the bargaining chip political bs.

It's part of life. I sold an advertising deal to a company yesterday. He told me that he'd have to cut a program they were running this year in order to pay for it. The government shouldn't be able to spend infinitely just because it's the government. People have to pay for this stuff, and right now we've saddled the next dozen generations or more with the debt of the stuff we're paying for today. I feel terrible for the people of Joplin, but to call me evil because I agree that we need to find a way to pay for it only shows a disconnection from reality. Money doesn't grow on trees.

Brock
05-26-2011, 11:08 AM
I don't see how anyone could have a problem with this. The whole tone of current politics is that we are broke and need to be budgeting. Nobody is saying "screw Joplin." They're just saying "how can we pay for it?"

How about "With the money you've been taking from us all our lives".

mlyonsd
05-26-2011, 11:10 AM
Adults look for responsible ways to handle the crisis at hand which include funding the resolution. Suggesting cuts from somewhere else speaks nothing about Cantors compassion or 'lack of" as you say but more about resposibility.

Maybe you'd rather we raise the ceiling, print some more and throw it at the problem.
Absolutely.

Brock
05-26-2011, 11:10 AM
Fact is, if this were a rich, influential congressional district, this discussion isn't happening.

Cave Johnson
05-26-2011, 11:14 AM
Not an earmark and not in his district. FAIL!!! Try again...

Distinction without a difference.

Bowser
05-26-2011, 11:15 AM
Fact is, if this were a rich, influential congressional district, this discussion isn't happening.

Truth.

Cave Johnson
05-26-2011, 11:18 AM
Fact is, if this were a rich, influential congressional district, this discussion isn't happening.

What, you're saying Eric Cantor doesn't respect this guy?

http://www.abchs.com/articles/longarticle.php

HolyHandgernade
05-26-2011, 11:31 AM
All this says is that the feds need to spend less than they take in every year so that there is extra cash for unplanned for situations. It's not being dick-ish, it's being practical.

Using an emotional issue to try and brand yourself as practical is dick-ish.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 11:34 AM
I invite you to come to my town, and tell them that they couldn't get any assistance because they couldn't agree what program should be cut.

Look around. See those Red Cross trucks? The insurance companies on the scene? All the food and supplies being trucked in by various aid organizations?

You're getting help.

The only place government on any level should be involved would be replacing roads, signs, traffic lights, and any government buildings that were destroyed. However, even some of that should have been covered by insurance policies.

And I refuse to take on any guilt here because some other group of assholes can't de-fund the fountain in their to-be-built train museum.

Brock
05-26-2011, 11:38 AM
Look around. See those Red Cross trucks? The insurance companies on the scene? All the food and supplies being trucked in by various aid organizations?

You're getting help.

Yeah, well, fuck all that. The government took the money under the premise that they're there to help when something like this happens. They need to deliver and I don't want to hear any crap about "how we gon pay fer it" when my neighbors are suffering to an intolerable degree.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 11:40 AM
Using an emotional issue to try and brand yourself as practical is dick-ish.

So your solution is to just give them money and forget to try and pay for it?

Listen, nobody is saying they shouldn't get disaster aid. They should. And they are. And they will. But to operate under the guise that the collective finances are cool and putting this on the credit card too isn't going to be a problem is setting everyone in the country for a different disaster.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 11:42 AM
Yeah, well, **** all that. The government took the money under the premise that they're there to help when something like this happens. They need to deliver and I don't want to hear any crap about "how we gon pay fer it" when my neighbors are suffering to an intolerable degree.

And you believed them?

It might also behoove us to look back at all the recent disasters and see how well they delivered.

vailpass
05-26-2011, 11:44 AM
So your solution is to just give them money and forget to try and pay for it?

Listen, nobody is saying they shouldn't get disaster aid. They should. And they are. And they will. But to operate under the guise that the collective finances are cool and putting this on the credit card too isn't going to be a problem is setting everyone in the country for a different disaster.

1(3-1)

patteeu
05-26-2011, 12:40 PM
I can't say that I totally disagree with your statement. That being said, I still don't think that it is unreasonable at all to scale back the huge amount of foreign aid that the U.S. dishes out annually when situations at home dictate.

It's not a huge amount. It's a drop in the bucket compared to the huge amounts we spend on non-essentials at home.

Should we defund the State Department while we're at it? If we're willing to pay cash for diplomacy in the form of hiring diplomats to talk to foreign leaders in order to pursue our national interests, why shouldn't we be willing to pay cash directly to foreign nations to pursue our national interests? It seems to me that we should be trying to find the most cost effective means for pursuing these interests available and if that means turns out to be exclusively diplomacy or exclusively aid payments or exclusively war, then so be it. But if that means turns out to be some combination of all three, then that's all right too.

patteeu
05-26-2011, 12:42 PM
Thats a fabulous idea. Lets play politics with the budget while thousands are homeless.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. In any major crisis like this we need to cut the political BS and make those funds available asap. Then wrangle over what budget to tap to finance it later.

How about planning for these predictable emergencies in advance? If Congress had taken it's job seriously last year, they could have produced a budget with a reasonable amount allocated to emergency relief, but for some reason they decided not to produce a budget at all.

Taco John
05-26-2011, 12:43 PM
How about "With the money you've been taking from us all our lives".

That's a fine enough answer, except that we're spending dollars at least a decade or more into the future now. The money that they've been taking from us all our lives is long spent paying off yesterday's debt.

patteeu
05-26-2011, 12:46 PM
You know nothing of mine or my families situation. The only thing you know is from news reports. I urge you to shut the **** up and thank you for helping out.

Shouldn't you be out there helping dig someone out from underneath the rubble instead of turning potential donors away with your off-putting expressions of entitlement on the internet?

HolyHandgernade
05-26-2011, 12:49 PM
So your solution is to just give them money and forget to try and pay for it?

Listen, nobody is saying they shouldn't get disaster aid. They should. And they are. And they will. But to operate under the guise that the collective finances are cool and putting this on the credit card too isn't going to be a problem is setting everyone in the country for a different disaster.

I'm not offering a solution. I'm simply stating its dick-ish to state your "practical concerns" with reference to genuine human drama and disaster relief when you represent the party that wouldn't budge unless we gave the rich more money by extending the Bush tax cuts. If we are to judge by the latest near government shutdown, I'm sure we can all guess which funds he wants to divert from. In other words, funds that help the general populace from other funds that help the general populace. I'm sure he's not suggesting we review the defense budget over this.

Hearing this tripe from a party that claimed families who earned a combined income in the 200,000s were barely "middle class" but will turn around and demonize teacher union workers who earn less than 100,000 because of their "excessive benefits" is dick-ish. I don't believe the Rebs are economically conservative, I don't believe they hold the economic prosperity of the greater majority of Americans at heart nor their practical well being. I'm not saying the Dems are champions at it, but they are far less dick-ish about it.

I just don't know why the Rebs haven't officially changed their motto to, "We're for the rich, the rest of you can suck it."

vailpass
05-26-2011, 12:55 PM
Shouldn't you be out there helping dig someone out from underneath the rubble instead of turning potential donors away with your off-putting expressions of entitlement on the internet?

This, that, and there.

mlyonsd
05-26-2011, 12:55 PM
I'm not offering a solution. I'm simply stating its dick-ish to state your "practical concerns" with reference to genuine human drama and disaster relief when you represent the party that wouldn't budge unless we gave the rich more money by extending the Bush tax cuts. If we are to judge by the latest near government shutdown, I'm sure we can all guess which funds he wants to divert from. In other words, funds that help the general populace from other funds that help the general populace. I'm sure he's not suggesting we review the defense budget over this.

Hearing this tripe from a party that claimed families who earned a combined income in the 200,000s were barely "middle class" but will turn around and demonize teacher union workers who earn less than 100,000 because of their "excessive benefits" is dick-ish. I don't believe the Rebs are economically conservative, I don't believe they hold the economic prosperity of the greater majority of Americans at heart nor their practical well being. I'm not saying the Dems are champions at it, but they are far less dick-ish about it.

I just don't know why the Rebs haven't officially changed their motto to, "We're for the rich, the rest of you can suck it."Talk about political BS.

SNR
05-26-2011, 01:09 PM
I'm not offering a solution. I'm simply stating its dick-ish to state your "practical concerns" with reference to genuine human drama and disaster relief when you represent the party that wouldn't budge unless we gave the rich more money by extending the Bush tax cuts. If we are to judge by the latest near government shutdown, I'm sure we can all guess which funds he wants to divert from. In other words, funds that help the general populace from other funds that help the general populace. I'm sure he's not suggesting we review the defense budget over this.

Hearing this tripe from a party that claimed families who earned a combined income in the 200,000s were barely "middle class" but will turn around and demonize teacher union workers who earn less than 100,000 because of their "excessive benefits" is dick-ish. I don't believe the Rebs are economically conservative, I don't believe they hold the economic prosperity of the greater majority of Americans at heart nor their practical well being. I'm not saying the Dems are champions at it, but they are far less dick-ish about it.

I just don't know why the Rebs haven't officially changed their motto to, "We're for the rich, the rest of you can suck it."I agree that people making over 250K should be considered rich. If this were 1970.

We've inflated away that wealth so much that those people who make 250K have the same issues as lower middle class families. Paying bills, getting kids through college, saving money on food. The idea behind raising taxes on people who make more than 250K is that you're taking money from people who don't need it. Well, those people caught in the 250-500K bubble now need it. Especially in some states like California.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 01:29 PM
It's not a huge amount. It's a drop in the bucket compared to the huge amounts we spend on non-essentials at home.

Everything is a drop in the bucket, so we can't cut anything. Good plan.

patteeu
05-26-2011, 01:31 PM
Everything is a drop in the bucket, so we can't cut anything. Good plan.

Is that your plan? It's certainly not mine. But that doesn't mean we should start describing "drops in the bucket" as "huge".

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 01:34 PM
I'm not offering a solution. I'm simply stating its dick-ish to state your "practical concerns" with reference to genuine human drama and disaster relief when you represent the party that wouldn't budge unless we gave the rich more money by extending the Bush tax cuts. If we are to judge by the latest near government shutdown, I'm sure we can all guess which funds he wants to divert from. In other words, funds that help the general populace from other funds that help the general populace. I'm sure he's not suggesting we review the defense budget over this.

Hearing this tripe from a party that claimed families who earned a combined income in the 200,000s were barely "middle class" but will turn around and demonize teacher union workers who earn less than 100,000 because of their "excessive benefits" is dick-ish. I don't believe the Rebs are economically conservative, I don't believe they hold the economic prosperity of the greater majority of Americans at heart nor their practical well being. I'm not saying the Dems are champions at it, but they are far less dick-ish about it.

I just don't know why the Rebs haven't officially changed their motto to, "We're for the rich, the rest of you can suck it."

Sorry, but I'm not going to respond by hang-wringing for two reasons. First, I'm not a woman. Second, that won't help anyone.

Next, I'm not a Republican. I'd cut the defense budget. It has to be. But so does the social security net budget.

But go ahead and rail on about class warfare.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 01:35 PM
Is that your plan? It's certainly not mine. But that doesn't mean we should start describing "drops in the bucket" as "huge".

Anything measured in billions is huge. I don't care if there's something standing beside it measured in trillions.

blaise
05-26-2011, 01:36 PM
I'm not offering a solution. I'm simply stating its dick-ish to state your "practical concerns" with reference to genuine human drama and disaster relief when you represent the party that wouldn't budge unless we gave the rich more money by extending the Bush tax cuts. If we are to judge by the latest near government shutdown, I'm sure we can all guess which funds he wants to divert from. In other words, funds that help the general populace from other funds that help the general populace. I'm sure he's not suggesting we review the defense budget over this.

Hearing this tripe from a party that claimed families who earned a combined income in the 200,000s were barely "middle class" but will turn around and demonize teacher union workers who earn less than 100,000 because of their "excessive benefits" is dick-ish. I don't believe the Rebs are economically conservative, I don't believe they hold the economic prosperity of the greater majority of Americans at heart nor their practical well being. I'm not saying the Dems are champions at it, but they are far less dick-ish about it.

I just don't know why the Rebs haven't officially changed their motto to, "We're for the rich, the rest of you can suck it."

You understand the money has to come from somewhere, right?

BucEyedPea
05-26-2011, 01:37 PM
Sorry, but I'm not going to respond by hang-wringing for two reasons. First, I'm not a woman.

LMAO

patteeu
05-26-2011, 01:59 PM
Anything measured in billions is huge. I don't care if there's something standing beside it measured in trillions.

Yeah, OK. I guess you're committed to a kind of minimalist's vocabulary that blurs distinctions between different concepts. That's not for me, but to each their own.

Radar Chief
05-26-2011, 02:00 PM
You understand the money has to come from somewhere, right?

No worries, Obama can just pull more from his stash.

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_Ojd13kZlCA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

blaise
05-26-2011, 02:00 PM
Didn't Obama put something on the White House website after he was elected saying he and Joe Biden would take steps to make sure the government was prepared for disasters like this from now on? That didn't include budgeting for it, I guess.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 02:09 PM
Yeah, OK. I guess you're committed to a kind of minimalist's vocabulary that blurs distinctions between different concepts. That's not for me, but to each their own.

The sheer size of the social safety net and military spending make everything else "small". But you can break each of them into "small" chunks too. So at some level everything is too small to care about when considered in the overall scope.

It's a bullshit argument. Something that is measured in billions is worthy of being cut. There isn't a single government program that would be devastated by a 10% cut tomorrow. They'd just have to order fewer new computers and take fewer junkets.

Cave Johnson
05-26-2011, 02:15 PM
I agree that people making over 250K should be considered rich. If this were 1970.

We've inflated away that wealth so much that those people who make 250K have the same issues as lower middle class families. Paying bills, getting kids through college, saving money on food. The idea behind raising taxes on people who make more than 250K is that you're taking money from people who don't need it. Well, those people caught in the 250-500K bubble now need it. Especially in some states like California.

I understand $250K isn't Manhattan or SF rich. But what if you made $250K/year in Joplin, are you rich?

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 02:17 PM
I understand $250K isn't Manhattan or SF rich. But what if you made $250K/year in Joplin, are you rich?

It's nearly impossible for the feds to parse it out like that.

vailpass
05-26-2011, 02:17 PM
I understand $250K isn't Manhattan or SF rich. But what if you made $250K/year in Joplin, are you rich?

Not any more, your whole cooking operation just blew away along with all your inventory.

mlyonsd
05-26-2011, 02:19 PM
It's nearly impossible for the feds to parse it out like that.Don't give them any ideas.

Cave Johnson
05-26-2011, 02:24 PM
It's nearly impossible for the feds to parse it out like that.

No argument there. I'd be ok with indexing income taxes to cost of living, but that would be nigh unworkable and could conceivably shift the tax burden from the coasts to the midwest/south.

But in the majority of the country (the percentage of which is arguable), $250K per year allows you to send your kids to private school, join a country club, take nice vacations, and live in a large/nice home. That's rich in my book.

blaise
05-26-2011, 02:28 PM
I just hope we can somehow, someday prevent people from taking nice vacations while the less fortunate can barely afford unlimited texting.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 02:32 PM
I just hope we can somehow, someday prevent people from taking nice vacations while the less fortunate can barely afford unlimited texting.

LMAO

RedNeckRaider
05-26-2011, 03:10 PM
I just hope we can somehow, someday prevent people from taking nice vacations while the less fortunate can barely afford unlimited texting.

Much less unlimited data~

RedNeckRaider
05-26-2011, 03:11 PM
I understand $250K isn't Manhattan or SF rich. But what if you made $250K/year in Joplin, are you rich?

You are compared to me~

tooge
05-26-2011, 03:11 PM
I hope an effin tornado hits his freakin town

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 03:12 PM
Not any more, your whole cooking operation just blew away along with all your inventory.

Douche.

trndobrd
05-26-2011, 03:20 PM
No argument there. I'd be ok with indexing income taxes to cost of living, but that would be nigh unworkable and could conceivably shift the tax burden from the coasts to the midwest/south.

But in the majority of the country (the percentage of which is arguable), $250K per year allows you to send your kids to private school, join a country club, take nice vacations, and live in a large/nice home. That's rich in my book.


You can do all of that assuming you make $250k every year. Anyone in a highly cyclical business is going to take it in the shorts once every 5 or 10 years when they get the big sales bonus, win a big case or their particular widget is in high demand. Every other year, they will be struggling to pay the mortgage.

Even worse is the poor schlub who sells his small business after years of scraping by trying to build it into something he and the missus can retire on, only to find out that he is now 'rich' because the sale put him over $250k.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 03:20 PM
Shouldn't you be out there helping dig someone out from underneath the rubble instead of turning potential donors away with your off-putting expressions of entitlement on the internet?

How fucking dare you? Where do think I've ben for the majority of the past few days. I've located bodies, instead of sitting on my fucking ass talking politics behind a cozy desk. I tell you what you stupid heartless mother fucker, you've got no idea what it's like to walk down among thousands of people who have lost everything and see that look in their eyes.

patteeu
05-26-2011, 03:33 PM
The sheer size of the social safety net and military spending make everything else "small". But you can break each of them into "small" chunks too. So at some level everything is too small to care about when considered in the overall scope.

It's a bullshit argument. Something that is measured in billions is worthy of being cut. There isn't a single government program that would be devastated by a 10% cut tomorrow. They'd just have to order fewer new computers and take fewer junkets.

All very interesting, but none of that justifies an apparently conscious attempt to blur distinctions. It serves no useful purpose to perpetuate the myth that we can find meaningful savings* in the foreign aid budget.

I'm not opposed to cuts in small programs as a part of a larger effort to get our finances under control, but the focus needs to be on the real financial problem, entitlement spending. Giving equal stature to foreign aid spending and entitlement spending invites people to focus on the wrong parts of the budget and hold out hope that the real problem programs can be dealt with lightly if only we take an ax to these scapegoat programs.

---------------------------
* in relation to the size of the deficit

patteeu
05-26-2011, 03:39 PM
How ****ing dare you? Where do think I've ben for the majority of the past few days. I've located bodies, instead of sitting on my ****ing ass talking politics behind a cozy desk. I tell you what you stupid heartless mother ****er, you've got no idea what it's like to walk down among thousands of people who have lost everything and see that look in their eyes.

Thankfully you've taken time out from your heroic efforts to make sure the Internet isn't getting out of hand. Have you been able to work any porn into your break?

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 03:50 PM
...but the focus needs to be on the real financial problem, entitlement spending.

Add in military spending and we're speaking pretty much the same language.

patteeu
05-26-2011, 03:56 PM
Add in military spending and we're speaking pretty much the same language.

Yeah, we aren't going to agree there. Military spending is "huge", but it's not the source of the spending problem we have. It should be constantly reviewed because there are plenty of inefficiencies to discover and correct as well as an ever evolving threat to design against, but I'm opposed to using it as a piggy bank to fund less important domestic spending.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 03:59 PM
Yeah, we aren't going to agree there.

So everything is on the table except your pet?

This is why it may require simply cutting an equal percentage from every single government program. In the aftermath we can all decide to completely defund some crap in favor of things that we really need.

BucEyedPea
05-26-2011, 04:01 PM
Add in military spending and we're speaking pretty much the same language.

War is just another govt program. For NeoCons it's their sacred entitlement so they can "makeover" the world by exaggerating threats.

BucEyedPea
05-26-2011, 04:03 PM
You are compared to me~

It's not rich, it's well off. It would vary by regions due to cost of living.

RedNeckRaider
05-26-2011, 04:05 PM
It's not rich, it's well off. It would vary by regions due to cost of living.

It was tic...although that is much more than I make~

BucEyedPea
05-26-2011, 04:08 PM
It was tic...
Ah!

...although that is much more than I make~

I'm makin' nuthin' right now so everyone's richer than me. Still waitin' to hear on mama's oil well though. ;)

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 04:08 PM
Thankfully you've taken time out from your heroic efforts to make sure the Internet isn't getting out of hand. Have you been able to work any porn into your break?
Never ever claimed to do anything heroic. Only internet or any other communication is on my phone I've had my cell with me. I certainly didn't sit in the comfort of my own home being self righteous.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 04:12 PM
Never ever claimed to do anything heroic. Only internet or any other communication is on my phone I've had my cell with me. I certainly didn't sit in the comfort of my own home being self righteous.

I'm assuming you can see for miles way up there on that horse.

BucEyedPea
05-26-2011, 04:14 PM
I invite you to come to my town, and tell them that they couldn't get any assistance because they couldn't agree what program should be cut.

Doesn't MO set aside any funds for such disasters?

Now, is it true homes in MO are not built with basements? If it is, I think they ought to pass some new code on building them. I never understood that...except for here due to the water table.

Simplex3
05-26-2011, 04:19 PM
There are some slab homes in the Midwest but those are generally built that way just to reduce expense. A large percentage of them have basements. If you have a slab house, though, you should probably dig a storm shelter. They aren't that expensive.

patteeu
05-26-2011, 04:39 PM
So everything is on the table except your pet?

This is why it may require simply cutting an equal percentage from every single government program. In the aftermath we can all decide to completely defund some crap in favor of things that we really need.

Everything is on the table, but everything doesn't contribute equally to the problem. The contribution of each program to the problem isn't even proportional to the amount budgeted for that program.

gblowfish
05-26-2011, 05:08 PM
In a story today about the planned re-building efforts, Republicans from Alabama (Tuscaloosa tornado) and Missouri are helping Joplin. The douche from Virginia is going to be over-ruled by his own party.

Full story is here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110526/ap_on_re_us/us_joplin_tornado_rebuilding

Except from the story:

Rep. Robert Aderholt, an Alabama Republican, said the move would ensure there's enough money for victims of the Joplin tornado, as well as those suffering from flooding along the Mississippi River and last month's twisters that swept across Alabama.

A day after Joplin was crippled, Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor told reporters any federal aid to disaster areas may need to be offset by spending cuts. But Sen. Roy Blunt, a Missouri Republican, vowed to make sure Joplin gets all it needs.

Funding questions aside, former Joplin Mayor Ron Richard, now a state senator, was a bit more cautious than Rohr in his vision for the immediate future.

"I wouldn't consider this an economic-development opportunity. This is just survival," Richard said. "We're just going to have to get back to where we were — as close as we can would be the goal. I'm not sure how much time it's going to take."

vailpass
05-26-2011, 05:23 PM
In a story today about the planned re-building efforts, Republicans from Alabama (Tuscaloosa tornado) and Missouri are helping Joplin. The douche from Virginia is going to be over-ruled by his own party.

Full story is here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110526/ap_on_re_us/us_joplin_tornado_rebuilding

Except from the story:

Rep. Robert Aderholt, an Alabama Republican, said the move would ensure there's enough money for victims of the Joplin tornado, as well as those suffering from flooding along the Mississippi River and last month's twisters that swept across Alabama.

A day after Joplin was crippled, Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor told reporters any federal aid to disaster areas may need to be offset by spending cuts. But Sen. Roy Blunt, a Missouri Republican, vowed to make sure Joplin gets all it needs.

Funding questions aside, former Joplin Mayor Ron Richard, now a state senator, was a bit more cautious than Rohr in his vision for the immediate future.

"I wouldn't consider this an economic-development opportunity. This is just survival," Richard said. "We're just going to have to get back to where we were — as close as we can would be the goal. I'm not sure how much time it's going to take."

Senators from two affected states are stumping for federal relief $ for their voters? No way.

Reaper16
05-26-2011, 06:24 PM
Shouldn't you be out there helping dig someone out from underneath the rubble instead of turning potential donors away with your off-putting expressions of entitlement on the internet?
Fuck you.

alnorth
05-26-2011, 06:37 PM
In a story today about the planned re-building efforts, Republicans from Alabama (Tuscaloosa tornado) and Missouri are helping Joplin. The douche from Virginia is going to be over-ruled by his own party.

Full story is here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110526/ap_on_re_us/us_joplin_tornado_rebuilding

Except from the story:

Rep. Robert Aderholt, an Alabama Republican, said the move would ensure there's enough money for victims of the Joplin tornado, as well as those suffering from flooding along the Mississippi River and last month's twisters that swept across Alabama.

A day after Joplin was crippled, Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor told reporters any federal aid to disaster areas may need to be offset by spending cuts. But Sen. Roy Blunt, a Missouri Republican, vowed to make sure Joplin gets all it needs.

Funding questions aside, former Joplin Mayor Ron Richard, now a state senator, was a bit more cautious than Rohr in his vision for the immediate future.

"I wouldn't consider this an economic-development opportunity. This is just survival," Richard said. "We're just going to have to get back to where we were — as close as we can would be the goal. I'm not sure how much time it's going to take."

I fail to see a controversy or conflict here.

For some reason you seem to be fixated on Cantor's unwillingness to print money out of thin air by insisting that we fund the aid. Fine, I agree with Cantor, and I'd argue that Blunt probably does too. What is left unspoken in Blunt's quote is something like "... and we'll find something to cut because this is obviously a top priority".

Seriously, this thread title and your outrage are both really dumb.

patteeu
05-26-2011, 07:47 PM
I fail to see a controversy or conflict here.

For some reason you seem to be fixated on Cantor's unwillingness to print money out of thin air by insisting that we fund the aid. Fine, I agree with Cantor, and I'd argue that Blunt probably does too. What is left unspoken in Blunt's quote is something like "... and we'll find something to cut because this is obviously a top priority".

Seriously, this thread title and your outrage are both really dumb.

Good point.

Earthling
05-26-2011, 08:01 PM
Everyone giving Motherlover a hard time just lost a lot of respect in my book. Not that it will make any difference but WTF ?? Sounds like he is going thru hell right now and it could have been any of us.

patteeu
05-26-2011, 08:09 PM
Everyone giving Motherlover a hard time just lost a lot of respect in my book. Not that it will make any difference but WTF ?? Sounds like he is going thru hell right now and it could have been any of us.

I'd like to think that most of us wouldn't have come in here and gone off on Garcia Bronco for no reason like Motherlover did. And if we did, I'd like to think that we would have explained our tough situation as a part of a mea culpa rather than for the purpose of justifying and seeking support for our belligerent behavior.

ClevelandBronco
05-26-2011, 08:34 PM
Everyone giving Motherlover a hard time just lost a lot of respect in my book. Not that it will make any difference but WTF ?? Sounds like he is going thru hell right now and it could have been any of us.

Irreverence and disrespect is an art form around here.

I'm assuming you can see for miles way up there on that horse.

Fortunately there are no inconvenient obstructions, such as trees, houses...

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 09:11 PM
I'd like to think that most of us wouldn't have come in here and gone off on Garcia Bronco for no reason like Motherlover did. And if we did, I'd like to think that we would have explained our tough situation as a part of a mea culpa rather than for the purpose of justifying and seeking support for our belligerent behavior.

Lol,i don't really care about your opinion or otherwise. Theres nothing you can say that can hurt me worse than what I seen the past couple days. Furthermore, for some one to tell me what I'm entitled to or speak on my situation I feel is classless. The only regret I have is not doing enough. You can have your opinion,i just hope you never have to endure what alot of good people endured to change it.

Garcia Bronco
05-26-2011, 09:16 PM
My bad bros, I didn't mean to start any shit. I was just making the point that we should be thankful for the help we get because we aren't entitled to it. We should also try to pay it forward and many of us do.

J Diddy
05-26-2011, 09:30 PM
My bad bros, I didn't mean to start any shit. I was just making the point that we should be thankful for the help we get because we aren't entitled to it. We should also try to pay it forward and many of us do.

You didn't. It was an excuse. I get your point, but with thousands of people with nothing I don't feel sitting around drawing a political line in the sand with no compromise is the way about it. You have your opinion and I gave mine. I appreciate your contribution,i do. I know I came off strong, but obviously this is a very emotional issue for me.

HonestChieffan
05-26-2011, 09:44 PM
The money is there. Cantor voted for it, It came from an energy appropriation doing as cantor suggested, get it from already appropriated funds.

Much ado about nothing. Joplin needs all our support and prayers. The hurt will go on a long time after CNN moves on to the next story.


House Panel Approves Disaster Funds for FEMA

By COREY BOLES

WASHINGTON—A key House committee on Tuesday approved $1 billion in funding that the Federal Emergency Management Agency could use to deal with the aftermath of record-setting tornadoes and flooding in the Midwest and South.

The emergency funds were attached to a bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security in fiscal 2012, which begins on Oct. 1, although the funds would go to FEMA as soon as the bill is signed into law.

FEMA currently has about $2.4 billion remaining in its disaster-relief account, but an official at the agency said it was too early to gauge the final costs stemming from historic flooding in the Mississippi basin and tornadoes.

An April storm system in the South was one of the worst since U.S. recordkeeping began, killing hundreds and destroying thousands of homes in Alabama, Mississippi and Tennessee.

On Sunday, the deadliest U.S. tornado in six decades hit Joplin, Mo., killing at least 118. Millions of acres of Midwest farmland has been flooded along the Mississippi river—either as a result of historic amounts of rain, or deliberately by officials trying to lessen more severe flooding further down the river.

"If you look at the number of storms we've had just in the last month, they could quite honestly run out of money before the end of the year," said Rep. Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.), referring to FEMA's ability to continue to provide emergency aid.

The additional funding was approved unanimously by lawmakers on the House Appropriations Committee, which sets the budgets for the various departments and agencies that comprise the federal government.

Mr. Aderholt represents the Alabama congressional district that sits just north of Birmingham and was among the hardest-hit areas by the tornado that touched down last month. That twister was the third deadliest in U.S. history.

The emergency money was diverted from unused Energy Department funding for a program that provides loans to developers of alternative-energy vehicles. Mr. Aderholt said that program had a balance of $4.2 billion and that all loan applications that had been approved by officials were fully funded.

A House Republican leadership aide said the Homeland Security funding bill could come to the House floor as soon as next week. It would still have to pass the Senate or be matched up with a version of the legislation from that chamber, and then be signed into law by President Barack Obama.

Two Senate Democratic leaders said they believed some emergency assistance would have to be passed by Congress in response to the storms. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said disaster spending should be excluded from the current debate raging over reining in federal spending.

"Anytime we have a natural disaster, we take care of it here," he said.

The Obama administration has yet to formally request additional emergency funds for FEMA. A spokeswoman for the White House Budget Office said, "we are monitoring the situation closely and will consider a supplemental request if the need arises."

Write to Corey Boles at corey.boles@dowjones.com

johnny961
05-26-2011, 09:45 PM
You guys are high. The people making this political are the one refusing to let THEIR program take the cuts to pay for Joplin.

We've been kicking the debt down the road for decades. It has to stop. There will always be an excuse why we can't stop today, and tomorrow never comes.

:facepalm: If you would read ALL of my posts, I never once stated that the funding to assist with this mess shouldn't be taken from somewhere else. I merely stated that the funds should be made available asap. Then wrangle over the logistics later. Besides that, looking at the big picture, how much revenue are federal, state, and local governments losing right now in tax revenues due to the disfunctional state of Joplin right now? How much is it going to cost the government in unemployment benefits due to the loss of jobs in that area? Not to mention the cost of government aid being doled out that displaced families are now being forced to rely on. Its in everyone's best interests to get this city back in a functional, somewhat self sustaining state just as quickly as possible. And that can't be done while a bunch of politicians sit around pissing and moaning over where to get the funds while they do nothing.

dirk digler
05-26-2011, 09:49 PM
Cantor didn't seem to have a problem voting for over $1 trillion dollars in emergency funds to pay for Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Do as I say not as I do

ClevelandBronco
05-26-2011, 09:54 PM
Cantor didn't seem to have a problem voting for over $1 trillion dollars in emergency funds to pay for Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Do as I say not as I do

Yeah, but those funds were redirected from my unborn grandchildren, so it's all good.

As long as it's coming from somewhere and we can give it a name.

dirk digler
05-26-2011, 09:54 PM
Yeah, but those funds were redirected from my unborn grandchildren, so it's all good.

LMAO

johnny961
05-26-2011, 09:59 PM
Shouldn't you be out there helping dig someone out from underneath the rubble instead of turning potential donors away with your off-putting expressions of entitlement on the internet?

Come on man. Show a little compassion. These people are going through hell right now. And internet boards like this may be one of these peoples few means to connect with friends right now. Visiting places like this also may also be one of the few things these people can do just to get away from the harsh reality of their situation for awhile. These people need support right now, not criticism, considering all that they just went through.

listopencil
05-26-2011, 10:00 PM
Well, those people caught in the 250-500K bubble now need it. Especially in some states like California.


Bullshit.

Okie_Apparition
05-26-2011, 10:46 PM
Some times you can see where people like Fred Phelps get their ideas. Poke a wounded bear to get attention. This case isn't to that extreme of course

SNR
05-26-2011, 10:53 PM
Bullshit.That's upper middle class. That's not a family that owns a mansion or sportscars. It's a comfortable living, but that doesn't mean they're rich.

If you want to raise taxes on the rich, I'd first start by making new laws to prevent tax loopholes. It's millionaires that have found ways to not pay their fair share, not a doctor's family who still lives in a neighborhood and needs to cut corners if they want to put a few kids through college.

listopencil
05-26-2011, 11:51 PM
That's upper middle class. That's not a family that owns a mansion or sportscars. It's a comfortable living, but that doesn't mean they're rich.

If you want to raise taxes on the rich, I'd first start by making new laws to prevent tax loopholes. It's millionaires that have found ways to not pay their fair share, not a doctor's family who still lives in a neighborhood and needs to cut corners if they want to put a few kids through college.

No, I'd call 250-500k a year rich. But yes I do see your point.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 04:04 AM
Come on man. Show a little compassion. These people are going through hell right now. And internet boards like this may be one of these peoples few means to connect with friends right now. Visiting places like this also may also be one of the few things these people can do just to get away from the harsh reality of their situation for awhile. These people need support right now, not criticism, considering all that they just went through.

You don't come to CP Washington DC with a belligerent political take to connect with friends and seek support (at least not without expecting to get an equal amount of blowback). Motherlover has been here long enough to know that. If he's in the mood to dish it out, he'd better be in the mood to take it. If he wants peace, love and understanding, he can start a prayer thread or post something in the Lounge's Joplin thread. He could have even generated universal sympathy here if he'd managed to post something non-offensive.

J Diddy
05-27-2011, 07:27 AM
You don't come to CP Washington DC with a belligerent political take to connect with friends and seek support (at least not without expecting to get an equal amount of blowback). Motherlover has been here long enough to know that. If he's in the mood to dish it out, he'd better be in the mood to take it. If he wants peace, love and understanding, he can start a prayer thread or post something in the Lounge's Joplin thread. He could have even generated universal sympathy here if he'd managed to post something non-offensive.

Im incredibly grateful to you, patty, you've shown me that the rules of cp transcend decency, at least in your eyes.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 09:25 AM
Im incredibly grateful to you, patty, you've shown me that the rules of cp transcend decency, at least in your eyes.

Decency in your eyes:

You know nothing of mine or my families situation. The only thing you know is from news reports. I urge you to shut the **** up and thank you for helping out.

johnny961
05-27-2011, 09:46 AM
You don't come to CP Washington DC with a belligerent political take to connect with friends and seek support (at least not without expecting to get an equal amount of blowback). Motherlover has been here long enough to know that. If he's in the mood to dish it out, he'd better be in the mood to take it. If he wants peace, love and understanding, he can start a prayer thread or post something in the Lounge's Joplin thread. He could have even generated universal sympathy here if he'd managed to post something non-offensive.

Yeah, even though I'm a relative n00b around here I know how this place works. Lots of very strong opinions. You and I Pat have even had several spirited disagreements on different issues at times. Which is fine. That being said, reading the OP I knew that this would be a potential hot button to anyone who has been directly affected by these storms, and understandably so. I would expect someone who just had their life upended by a disaster of this magnitude to be offended by a politician, or anyone else for that matter, who basically told them to f*** off regarding their situation. Again, I understand how this place works. And I'm generally fine with some of the spirited disagreements. That being said, I personally would be a bit more diplomatic in my responses towards someone who I knew had been directly affected by something like this.

Simplex3
05-27-2011, 10:08 AM
Remember, the politician didn't say that, the person who started the thread said that.

vailpass
05-27-2011, 10:17 AM
Lol,i don't really care about your opinion or otherwise. Theres nothing you can say that can hurt me worse than what I seen the past couple days. Furthermore, for some one to tell me what I'm entitled to or speak on my situation I feel is classless. The only regret I have is not doing enough. You can have your opinion,i just hope you never have to endure what alot of good people endured to change it.

:rolleyes: You live in Rwanda?

J Diddy
05-27-2011, 10:18 AM
Decency in your eyes:

And I stand by that. Nobody needs to tell me what me and my family are entitled to. Especially when they have no clue as to what they've endured. The only regret here is I used the word fucking. Of course you'd have just piped off about something else.

johnny961
05-27-2011, 10:20 AM
Remember, the politician didn't say that, the person who started the thread said that.

True. The title of this thread was how the thread starter interpreted the statement, which was not the way I took it either.

Jaric
05-27-2011, 10:27 AM
:facepalm:

This is not nearly as complicated as it's being made out to be.

-The poor people of Joplin have a legitimate need for disaster relief (I've talked to some of my coworkers handling claims on people cars in that area and I assure you that Joplin is in no uncertain terms, fucked.)

-That money has to come from somewhere.

-We will have to cut funding from a less important need to pay for this.

Why is that so hard?

mlyonsd
05-27-2011, 10:35 AM
:facepalm:



Because the thread starter politicized it and then tempers flared because some took it as gospel and the rest of us saw an elected official doing his job seriously and responsibly.

Pretty normal for aroung here.

HonestChieffan
05-27-2011, 10:38 AM
:facepalm:

This is not nearly as complicated as it's being made out to be.

-The poor people of Joplin have a legitimate need for disaster relief (I've talked to some of my coworkers handling claims on people cars in that area and I assure you that Joplin is in no uncertain terms, ****ed.)

-That money has to come from somewhere.

-We will have to cut funding from a less important need to pay for this.

Why is that so hard?

And it was passed day before yesterday.....

Taco John
05-27-2011, 10:50 AM
:facepalm:

This is not nearly as complicated as it's being made out to be.

-The poor people of Joplin have a legitimate need for disaster relief (I've talked to some of my coworkers handling claims on people cars in that area and I assure you that Joplin is in no uncertain terms, ****ed.)

-That money has to come from somewhere.

-We will have to cut funding from a less important need to pay for this.

Why is that so hard?

I don't understand it either. I guess some people haven't gotten the message about the financial crunch that the nation is in, and still believe we can/should operate in such a way that we ingore costs and debts, and simply pay now and pass the buck for later.

I prefer to see us do exactly as was suggested. Help the people in Joplin after finding a way to fund it in real time. Let's stop kidding ourselves and passing our debt forward. Let's start paying for things as we go.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 11:04 AM
And I stand by that. Nobody needs to tell me what me and my family are entitled to. Especially when they have no clue as to what they've endured. The only regret here is I used the word ****ing. Of course you'd have just piped off about something else.

What a dumb thing to say. The more you talk, the less sympathetic I am to your plight. I'm sure there are a lot of people in Joplin who are grateful for the generosity of those who come to their aid though so I won't let one bad apple spoil my view of your fellow Joplin citizens.

gblowfish
05-27-2011, 11:16 AM
Pitch Blog:
http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2011/05/eric_cantor_joplin_tornado.php

"The death toll of the Joplin tornado has risen to 122. It was the deadliest tornado that the country has endured in 60 years, and thousands of people are homeless. It's a complete mess, and it will no doubt cost tens of millions of dollars to get the town of 50,000 back to normal.

President Obama, who was out of the country at the time of the disaster, told victims, "The American people are by your side." And, "We're going to stay there until every home is repaired, until every neighborhood is rebuilt, until every business is back on its feet." But House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says it's time for penny-pinching!

Before Uncle Sam starts handing out recovery cash, Cantor (R-VA) wants everybody to know that the emergency money will have to be offset by other federal spending. Wait, are we really concerned about saving a little money as crews are searching rubble for survivors and bodies?

Politico reports Cantor said, "If there is support for a supplemental, it would be accompanied by support for having pay-fors to that supplemental." Apparently going into debt to save a city isn't worth it.

U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt, who represented Joplin during his time in the U.S. House, had a pretty simple message for Cantor Tuesday afternoon. Politico writes that he released a statement saying, "We need to prioritize spending, and this needs to be a priority." Well, duh!

U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill was less reserved in her statement on Cantor's plan. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports she said,"With all due respect to Congressman Cantor, I have a hard time believing that if this were in his congressional district, he would be talking about how additional disaster relief would not be available unless we found some other programs to take it from. It must be available. This must not be a political football. We must provide the assistance. That's what federal tax dollars are for, is to provide assistance when there is no assistance available to communities and states because of the wrath of Mother Nature."

Again, duh! "

blaise
05-27-2011, 11:21 AM
Yeah, you've lost this thread gblowfish.

gblowfish
05-27-2011, 11:23 AM
Just pointing out that I'm not the only one that thinks this guy from Virginia is a douche.
Even Roy Blunt disagrees with him. And Blunt is as hard core right wing repub as they come.

JOPLIN Winning!

Cave Johnson
05-27-2011, 11:24 AM
:facepalm:

This is not nearly as complicated as it's being made out to be.

-The poor people of Joplin have a legitimate need for disaster relief (I've talked to some of my coworkers handling claims on people cars in that area and I assure you that Joplin is in no uncertain terms, ****ed.)

-That money has to come from somewhere.

-We will have to cut funding from a less important need to pay for this.

Why is that so hard?

Not a ton of insurance coverage, I take it?

patteeu
05-27-2011, 11:24 AM
Fake compassion and demagoguery from democrats. Big surprise.

dirk digler
05-27-2011, 11:25 AM
:rolleyes: You live in Rwanda?

Cmon vail that was a really dumb thing to say. Diddy almost lost his daughter, granddaughter, and grandma. Show some compassion

Huffmeister
05-27-2011, 11:26 AM
Just pointing out that I'm not the only one that thinks this guy from Virginia is a douche.
Even Roy Blunt disagrees with him. And Blunt is as hard core right wing repub as they come.

JOPLIN Winning!

You're right, there are plenty of other people responding emotionally about a non-issue. I still don't see where Cantor ever said that Joplin should not receive relief funds.

You're thread title = fail.

VAChief
05-27-2011, 11:30 AM
You're right, there are plenty of other people responding emotionally about a non-issue. I still don't see where Cantor ever said that Joplin should not receive relief funds.

You're thread title = fail.

My problem isn't that we don't have to make choices with our fiscal abilities (we obviously do), but right after an emergency isn't the time to bring this up. This is done by both sides and they are equally wrong to do so.

Jaric
05-27-2011, 11:31 AM
Not a ton of insurance coverage, I take it?

No, their cars are covered as long as they carry comprehensive coverage. When I said things were fucked, I meant in terms of the city just being destroyed, not that they didn't have coverage or anything. Now, I don't handle property so I don't know if their houses are covered (I suspect they are but don't know for sure.)

It's just that most of the time people don't exactly know where their cars are, or if they do, the car might be underneath a pile of rubble. Or the car might be in a place that is off limits as it's not safe to be there yet. Which is making things a right mess because before we can settle a claim with someone we usually have to inspect their vehicle. I don't handle claims from the Joplin area (we're regionalized) so I don't know what they're doing to work around that.

I do know Joplin is a hot mess right now and my thoughts go out to those poor people.

I'm fortunate enough to work for a pretty ethical company so if there is anyway we can cover something we will. But nothing an insurance company can do can fix some of the problems people are dealing with. Same thing with govt aid. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be giving it to them.

But still, money doesn't grow on trees. Since the countries broke the money for Joplin will have to come from somewhere. I don't see the issue with saying we'll have to cut it from some other less important program.

J Diddy
05-27-2011, 11:31 AM
What a dumb thing to say. The more you talk, the less sympathetic I am to your plight. I'm sure there are a lot of people in Joplin who are grateful for the generosity of those who come to their aid though so I won't let one bad apple spoil my view of your fellow Joplin citizens.
Like I said previously,i could care less of your opinion and or otherwise,nor has anyone asked for your sympathy. Let me ask you: if your family and friends had just lost everything how receptive would you be to someone telling you what aid they need, and trying to use your plight as a political bargaining chip. Especially, if they were not here. Just as I don't have the right to speak to your situation you have no right to speak to mine. You may think your being some sort of hero here but your really coming off as a douche. One thing has been bothering me here, is patteu french for useless prick, because you are going above and beyond to make your name synonomous with that phrase.

VAChief
05-27-2011, 11:33 AM
Just pointing out that I'm not the only one that thinks this guy from Virginia is a douche.
Even Roy Blunt disagrees with him. And Blunt is as hard core right wing repub as they come.

JOPLIN Winning!

He is a politician first, the douche sticks to him easier. Many in Virginia would agree.

J Diddy
05-27-2011, 11:34 AM
You know the one thing thats ironic, the one comment patteu took issue with. Well it isn't even talking to him.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 11:40 AM
My problem isn't that we don't have to make choices with our fiscal abilities (we obviously do), but right after an emergency isn't the time to bring this up. This is done by both sides and they are equally wrong to do so.

There's nothing wrong with bringing it up immediately. If you write a check to donate to the red cross, do you not give any consideration to whether you're going to be able to cover your bills and other financial obligations with what's left in your account? Of course you do. All this could have been avoided if someone had had the foresight to budget for a reasonable level of disaster relief ahead of time.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 11:42 AM
You know the one thing thats ironic, the one comment patteu took issue with. Well it isn't even talking to him.

The one thing I find ironic is that you're spending so much time focusing on me when you could be using that time to focus on the daughter, granddaughter, and grandma that dirk says you almost lost.

I assume you noticed the people like reaper, johnny and earthling who took issue with my comment even though it wasn't directed at them. That's how this place works.

dirk digler
05-27-2011, 11:42 AM
You know the one thing thats ironic, the one comment patteu took issue with. Well it isn't even talking to him.

Ignore him I don't know why he is acting like a douchebag today.

ClevelandBronco
05-27-2011, 11:44 AM
Like I said previously,i could care less of your opinion and or otherwise,nor has anyone asked for your sympathy.

Apparently you could care much less, because in the very next statement you ask for the guy's opinion.

Let me ask you: if your family and friends had just lost everything how receptive would you be to someone telling you what aid they need, and trying to use your plight as a political bargaining chip. Especially, if they were not here...

Jaric
05-27-2011, 11:46 AM
There's nothing wrong with bringing it up immediately. If you write a check to donate to the red cross, do you not give any consideration to whether you're going to be able to cover your bills and other financial obligations with what's left in your account? Of course you do. All this could have been avoided if someone had had the foresight to budget for a reasonable level of disaster relief ahead of time.

I agree with you here. But I also understand how the people of Joplin could hear about this and get pissed off about it. I'm pretty sure if I just lost everything I own (and maybe some friends or family members) my tolerance for political wheelings and dealings might be pretty low even if it's a reasonable thing to say or do.

As with most things of a sensative nature, alot of how it's recieved depends on the delivery.

Huffmeister
05-27-2011, 11:51 AM
Like I said previously,i could care less of your opinion and or otherwise,nor has anyone asked for your sympathy. Let me ask you: if your family and friends had just lost everything how receptive would you be to someone telling you what aid they need, and trying to use your plight as a political bargaining chip. Especially, if they were not here. Just as I don't have the right to speak to your situation you have no right to speak to mine. You may think your being some sort of hero here but your really coming off as a douche. One thing has been bothering me here, is patteu french for useless prick, because you are going above and beyond to make your name synonomous with that phrase.

So are you outraged at gblowfish for using this tragedy to generate anti-Republican sentiment?

Cave Johnson
05-27-2011, 11:51 AM
But still, money doesn't grow on trees. Since the countries broke the money for Joplin will have to come from somewhere. I don't see the issue with saying we'll have to cut it from some other less important program.

I don't either, for the record. But it smacks of political grandstanding at a time of immense suffering, which is unseemly (regardless of which party is doing the grandstanding).

FishingRod
05-27-2011, 11:52 AM
Pitch Blog:
http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2011/05/eric_cantor_joplin_tornado.php

"The death toll of the Joplin tornado has risen to 122. It was the deadliest tornado that the country has endured in 60 years, and thousands of people are homeless. It's a complete mess, and it will no doubt cost tens of millions of dollars to get the town of 50,000 back to normal.

President Obama, who was out of the country at the time of the disaster, told victims, "The American people are by your side." And, "We're going to stay there until every home is repaired, until every neighborhood is rebuilt, until every business is back on its feet." But House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says it's time for penny-pinching!

Before Uncle Sam starts handing out recovery cash, Cantor (R-VA) wants everybody to know that the emergency money will have to be offset by other federal spending. Wait, are we really concerned about saving a little money as crews are searching rubble for survivors and bodies?

Politico reports Cantor said, "If there is support for a supplemental, it would be accompanied by support for having pay-fors to that supplemental." Apparently going into debt to save a city isn't worth it.

U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt, who represented Joplin during his time in the U.S. House, had a pretty simple message for Cantor Tuesday afternoon. Politico writes that he released a statement saying, "We need to prioritize spending, and this needs to be a priority." Well, duh!

U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill was less reserved in her statement on Cantor's plan. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports she said,"With all due respect to Congressman Cantor, I have a hard time believing that if this were in his congressional district, he would be talking about how additional disaster relief would not be available unless we found some other programs to take it from. It must be available. This must not be a political football. We must provide the assistance. That's what federal tax dollars are for, is to provide assistance when there is no assistance available to communities and states because of the wrath of Mother Nature."

Again, duh! "


So I haven’t heard you apologize for saying all the death and destruction was cool and amazing.

Jaric
05-27-2011, 11:52 AM
I don't either, for the record. But it smacks of political grandstanding at a time of immense suffering, which is unseemly (regardless of which party is doing the grandstanding).

I can get on board with this. Like I said in my post to Pat, with sensitive subjects, it's all about the delivery.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 11:59 AM
I agree with you here. But I also understand how the people of Joplin could hear about this and get pissed off about it. I'm pretty sure if I just lost everything I own (and maybe some friends or family members) my tolerance for political wheelings and dealings might be pretty low even if it's a reasonable thing to say or do.

As with most things of a sensative nature, alot of how it's recieved depends on the delivery.

I agree, but I think this has more to do with the delivery of opportunist demagogues trying to rile the momentarily sensitive by casting Cantor's statement in a negative light than it has to do with Cantor's delivery though.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 12:00 PM
Ignore him I don't know why he is acting like a douchebag today.

You'd think he'd have more important things on his mind than to argue with me, wouldn't you?

J Diddy
05-27-2011, 12:12 PM
Apparently you could care much less, because in the very next statement you ask for the guy's opinion.

It was rhetorical.

dirk digler
05-27-2011, 12:22 PM
You'd think he'd have more important things on his mind than to argue with me, wouldn't you?

It is a 2-way street so why are you arguing with him? Why not just cut him some slack and back off?

ClevelandBronco
05-27-2011, 12:28 PM
It was rhetorical.

It was comical.

SNR
05-27-2011, 12:29 PM
Just pointing out that I'm not the only one that thinks this guy from Virginia is a douche.
Even Roy Blunt disagrees with him. And Blunt is as hard core right wing repub as they come.

JOPLIN Winning!If Cantor instead said something like, "I feel for the people of Joplin yadda yadda yadda the first priority of this Congress will be to adjust our fiscal budget so the good people of that destroyed city can get some aid," would he still be saying "Screw Joplin!" in your eyes?

To me what I just posted and what he actually said mean pretty much the same thing.

BucEyedPea
05-27-2011, 12:30 PM
I don't either, for the record. But it smacks of political grandstanding at a time of immense suffering, which is unseemly (regardless of which party is doing the grandstanding).

Sounds like the grandstanding is occuring on both sides and more so by yours on this. JMO

Reaper16
05-27-2011, 12:38 PM
I'd like to think that most of us wouldn't have come in here and gone off on Garcia Bronco for no reason like Motherlover did. And if we did, I'd like to think that we would have explained our tough situation as a part of a mea culpa rather than for the purpose of justifying and seeking support for our belligerent behavior.
Wait, so saying "shut the fuck up" on this message board is an example of "going off" on someone? That's something he should apologize for on account of his belligerence? Your post #76 is infinitely more reprehensible than MotherLover simply saying STFU.

gblowfish
05-27-2011, 12:54 PM
I think this article sums it up nicely.

And this is not about political brownie points. It's about doing what is right for Americans in dire need. Even Roy Blunt, who's as Conservative Republican as the day is long, disagrees with this asshat Cantor from Virginia. You can bet your bottom dollar next time Virginia has a flood, or tornado, or forest fire, or whatever, Cantor will be the first guy with his hand out.

I believe that the Tea Party Style Conservative Republicans have comparitively less compassion for those less fortunate than other folks. Actions speak louder than words. Their actions and words this week run contrary to the interests of rebuilding Joplin, doing whatever it takes.

When Harry Truman ran for re-election in 1948, on his whistle stop tour, people said "Give em Hell, Harry." Harry said "I just tell the truth, and Republicans THINK it's Hell."

That's all I have to say about that.

Story:

Republican “You’re On Your Own” Policies Catching Up With Them
By: David Dayen Tuesday May 24, 2011 12:29 pm

http://tinyurl.com/3er7jrl

Eric Cantor is trending on Twitter right now, and it’s for a comment he made about the tornado that killed at least 116 people in Joplin, Missouri. Cantor, merely following established conservative ideology, made the statement that no emergency relief for Joplin would pass the House without corresponding cuts elsewhere.

As the Washington Times reports, Cantor said any aid would need to be offset by other spending cuts, “If there is support for a supplemental, it would be accompanied by support for having pay-fors to that supplemental.” The term “pay-fors” means either spending cuts or tax increases, and the Republicans have firmly stated that they would not pass any tax increases this year. The Washington Times also points out that six years then-House Majority Leader Tom Delay approved Hurricane Katrina aid without offsetting spending cuts. At the time Delay said it was acceptable to just add the Katrina aid on to the deficit.

Needless to say, many on Twitter reacted with horror. But I’m not sure why. This is the true heart of the Republican Party. The idea of the “compassionate conservative” went long ago, and the idea that we’re all in it together never arrived. On the same day that Cantor made this statement, the House Appropriations Committee revealed their plan to cut nutrition and food safety programs by 10-15%, including $832 million in cuts to the Women, Infants and Children food assistance program and $285 million to the FDA. They’re not really interested in helping people and they never were. Presumably the folks in Joplin should just pick themselves up by their bootstraps and rebuild their homes themselves.

This is just the conservative ethos: You’re on your own. It’s perhaps best expressed by this exchange with Rep. Rob Woodall, who asked a constituent “When do I decide I’m going to take care of me?” It’s just what they believe. Of course they wouldn’t want to spend a dime on relief efforts in Joplin. The people of Joplin should have expected that.

HonestChieffan
05-27-2011, 01:03 PM
They passed the bill two days ago...good lord.

gblowfish
05-27-2011, 01:05 PM
They passed the bill two days ago...good lord. Once they were shamed into doing the right thing, you're right, they did.

vailpass
05-27-2011, 01:07 PM
Cmon vail that was a really dumb thing to say. Diddy almost lost his daughter, granddaughter, and grandma. Show some compassion

He doesn't need anyone to feel sorry for him, he's doing a fine job of that on his own.

For some perspective he can look at the people in Rwanda. Joplin is a sunny day in the park compared to that.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 01:07 PM
Wait, so saying "shut the **** up" on this message board is an example of "going off" on someone? That's something he should apologize for on account of his belligerence? Your post #76 is infinitely more reprehensible than MotherLover simply saying STFU.

Yes. In the context it was used, it struck me as unnecessarily belligerent. It's not the kind of thing he should be banned for and it's not even the kind of thing that deserves a warning, but it is the kind of statement with which he sacrificed some of the sympathetic high ground he may have previously enjoyed. He doesn't owe anyone an apology. But a retraction or an apology of some kind would have indicated to me that his outburst was an emotional response instead of a lack of gratitude and it would have given him a better chance of regaining that high ground.

I see nothing wrong with post #76 as a response to his statement. You're welcome to disagree, but you won't convince me otherwise.

SNR
05-27-2011, 01:10 PM
Once they were shamed into doing the right thing, you're right, they did.Oh for fuck's sake. You're being a drama queen.

"We're going to have to clear out some room in the budget for this relief money" isn't the same thing as saying, "I don't know if Joplin deserves to get relief money. I don't think they do. We'll see"

blaise
05-27-2011, 01:14 PM
"Hey man, I haven't eaten for two days, can you get me some money for food?"

"Um, let me see. Yes, I can, I just won't have money for Starbucks."

gblowfish- That's evil!

Reaper16
05-27-2011, 01:35 PM
Yes. In the context it was used, it struck me as unnecessarily belligerent. It's not the kind of thing he should be banned for and it's not even the kind of thing that deserves a warning, but it is the kind of statement with which he sacrificed some of the sympathetic high ground he may have previously enjoyed. He doesn't owe anyone an apology. But a retraction or an apology of some kind would have indicated to me that his outburst was an emotional response instead of a lack of gratitude and it would have given him a better chance of regaining that high ground.

I see nothing wrong with post #76 as a response to his statement. You're welcome to disagree, but you won't convince me otherwise.
This is your darkest hour.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 01:39 PM
This is your darkest hour.

OK, thanks for the input.

ROYC75
05-27-2011, 01:52 PM
Personally with all of the destruction, grief,etc. emotions are worn thin on peoples lives and minds right now. In reality, the BIG PICTURE, the federal deficit, I can understand Cantors opinion. He never once said, look guys and gals, let's let the people of that area handle our own, we have problems here. But instead he is looking the government being fiscally accountable with the deficit.

With emotions riding on the peoples tender feelings, I do believe that too much is being added to his comment.

Now with all of this said, I do care for the people in that area as well as Al, Ms,Ga,and many other states affected by storms that will need the governments assistance in rebuilding.

dirk digler
05-27-2011, 02:07 PM
Yes. In the context it was used, it struck me as unnecessarily belligerent. It's not the kind of thing he should be banned for and it's not even the kind of thing that deserves a warning, but it is the kind of statement with which he sacrificed some of the sympathetic high ground he may have previously enjoyed. He doesn't owe anyone an apology. But a retraction or an apology of some kind would have indicated to me that his outburst was an emotional response instead of a lack of gratitude and it would have given him a better chance of regaining that high ground.

I see nothing wrong with post #76 as a response to his statement. You're welcome to disagree, but you won't convince me otherwise.

He did apologize to Garcia at #128 yet you are still whining.

So shut the fuck up :)

patteeu
05-27-2011, 02:12 PM
He did apologize to Garcia at #128 yet you are still whining.

So shut the **** up :)

He had already compounded his error by then and it wasn't much of one anyway. I think it's too late for Motherlover and me so your matchmaking efforts are probably better used elsewhere.

vailpass
05-27-2011, 03:22 PM
This is your darkest hour.

LMAO

VAChief
05-27-2011, 06:29 PM
There's nothing wrong with bringing it up immediately. If you write a check to donate to the red cross, do you not give any consideration to whether you're going to be able to cover your bills and other financial obligations with what's left in your account? Of course you do. All this could have been avoided if someone had had the foresight to budget for a reasonable level of disaster relief ahead of time.

I would liken it more to a loved one needs life saving surgery and can't pay for the operation. I'm not going to haggle over where the money is going to come from I'm going to take care of business and find the money from somewhere else later. I'm certainly not going to lay a guilt trip on the loved one or make them think in anyway that they are a burden.

Simplex3
05-27-2011, 07:43 PM
I would liken it more to a loved one needs life saving surgery and can't pay for the operation. I'm not going to haggle over where the money is going to come from I'm going to take care of business and find the money from somewhere else later. I'm certainly not going to lay a guilt trip on the loved one or make them think in anyway that they are a burden.

Even if that loved one had been too cheap and lazy to buy their own insurance?

VAChief
05-27-2011, 08:09 PM
Even if that loved one had been too cheap and lazy to buy their own insurance?

My father worked as a manager for a regional trucking company in Springfield back in the early 90's. The company "provided" health coverage or so all the employees thought. Trouble was when he went in for heart surgery he found out the company hadn't paid their premiums and the coverage was lapsed. A week later the owner filed for bankruptcy and everyone who had bills that thought they were covered got screwed. My dad was far from cheap or lazy, he carried Blue Cross and Blue Shield for years when his employer didn't have coverage. We did for him what any loving family would do without thinking about what we would have to sacrifice later.

NewChief
05-27-2011, 08:37 PM
ROFL ROFL ROFL

So Shitsprayer's white knight is in here castigating people for being belligerent? Oh the fucking irony.

Simplex3
05-27-2011, 08:46 PM
My father worked as a manager for a regional trucking company in Springfield back in the early 90's. The company "provided" health coverage or so all the employees thought. Trouble was when he went in for heart surgery he found out the company hadn't paid their premiums and the coverage was lapsed. A week later the owner filed for bankruptcy and everyone who had bills that thought they were covered got screwed. My dad was far from cheap or lazy, he carried Blue Cross and Blue Shield for years when his employer didn't have coverage. We did for him what any loving family would do without thinking about what we would have to sacrifice later.

I don't think anyone in Joplin has been having problems with their insurance.

patteeu
05-27-2011, 08:47 PM
I would liken it more to a loved one needs life saving surgery and can't pay for the operation. I'm not going to haggle over where the money is going to come from I'm going to take care of business and find the money from somewhere else later. I'm certainly not going to lay a guilt trip on the loved one or make them think in anyway that they are a burden.

Cantor wasn't talking to the people of Joplin.

VAChief
05-27-2011, 08:53 PM
Cantor wasn't talking to the people of Joplin.

In my opinion his message of conditional support in a time of tragedy and crisis for fellow Americans speaks to everyone.

VAChief
05-27-2011, 08:53 PM
I don't think anyone in Joplin has been having problems with their insurance.

Certainly not the lazy and cheap ones right?

patteeu
05-27-2011, 08:55 PM
ROFL ROFL ROFL

So Shitsprayer's white knight is in here castigating people for being belligerent? Oh the ****ing irony.

It's not really as ironic as you seem to think since J Diddy was a prime player on the wrong side of the big SHTSPRAYER brouhaha too. It's another case of a guy trying to impose his sense of political correctness on another board member (by inviting Garcia Bronco to shut the **** up) versus the guy who wants to strip away the emotional reaction and point out that Garcia said nothing objectionable and therefore that criticism was misplaced. :shrug:

patteeu
05-27-2011, 09:07 PM
In my opinion his message of conditional support in a time of tragedy and crisis for fellow Americans speaks to everyone.

OK, we'll have to agree to disagree because I think your entire analysis of this is wrong.

NewChief
05-27-2011, 09:07 PM
It's not really as ironic as you seem to think since J Diddy was a prime player on the wrong side of the big SHTSPRAYER brouhaha too. It's another case of a guy trying to impose his sense of political correctness on another board member (by inviting Garcia Bronco to shut the **** up) versus the guy who wants to strip away the emotional reaction and point out that Garcia said nothing objectionable and therefore that criticism was misplaced. :shrug:

I know your MO far too well to expect you to ever back down or drop a bone once you've picked it up. Let's just say the situation is pretty ****ing hilarious, though. It's alright... you've admitted that you're selective in your causes in the past. We all need our crosses to bear, and you'll take Shitty to your grave. I know that you can equivocate your ass off (all that legal training), but I certainly never saw you urging any kind of restraint or civility when Shitsprayer was telling people to fuck off and to suck Obama's wang or jump off a cliff and die or whatever other vile shit he spewed.

J Diddy
05-27-2011, 09:16 PM
It's not really as ironic as you seem to think since J Diddy was a prime player on the wrong side of the big SHTSPRAYER brouhaha too. It's another case of a guy trying to impose his sense of political correctness on another board member (by inviting Garcia Bronco to shut the **** up) versus the guy who wants to strip away the emotional reaction and point out that Garcia said nothing objectionable and therefore that criticism was misplaced. :shrug:

Wow. You're still going?

mikey23545
05-27-2011, 09:24 PM
I have never seen so much vagina wringing in my life as I have on this thread.

You liberals must be ashamed of yourselves for trying to blow such a simple statement up into a supposed example of the old "conservatives are evil, cold-hearted monsters!" boogeyman...

This whole thread should be tented and sprayed for retardation.

stevieray
05-27-2011, 09:42 PM
I know your MO far too well to expect you to ever back down or drop a bone once you've picked it up. Let's just say the situation is pretty ****ing hilarious, though. It's alright... you've admitted that you're selective in your causes in the past. We all need our crosses to bear, and you'll take Shitty to your grave. I know that you can equivocate your ass off (all that legal training), but I certainly never saw you urging any kind of restraint or civility when Shitsprayer was telling people to **** off and to suck Obama's wang or jump off a cliff and die or whatever other vile shit he spewed.

let's not pretend gulit by association isn't employed everyday in this forum.

NewChief
05-27-2011, 09:43 PM
let's not pretend gulit by association isn't employed everyday in this forum.

As usual, you're the master of non-sequitur, and I have no clue what you're even talking about.

mlyonsd
05-27-2011, 10:15 PM
Once again liberals in this forum look like stupid morons. Congrats.

HolyHandgernade
05-27-2011, 10:23 PM
I have never seen so much vagina wringing in my life as I have on this thread.

You liberals must be ashamed of yourselves for trying to blow such a simple statement up into a supposed example of the old "conservatives are evil, cold-hearted monsters!" boogeyman...

This whole thread should be tented and sprayed for retardation.

OH! I"M SOOOOO ASHAMED! Oh, please, don't derogatorily call me a woman no more! I promise not to laugh too loudly when you get conservative asses handed to you again in the next Presidential election. Fair enough? Just PLEEEAAASE don't liken me to a vagina again you cruel, cruel macho conservative men. You're cold-heartedness obviously conveys your over abundance of hardened masculinity good enough for the Black Castle at the Wall north of Winterfell. My weak womanly nature cowers at your virile cyber presence on this thread. YOU are sooooo awesome! :drool:

dirk digler
05-27-2011, 10:26 PM
Once again liberals in this forum look like stupid morons. Congrats.

Just curious how so?

dirk digler
05-27-2011, 10:44 PM
And I know this will go ignored but conservatives in Joplin are none to happy about Cantor's statements and their pussy Republican Representative not standing up to the POS.

I hate to repeat myself but Cantor didn't seem to have a problem voting for over $1 trillion dollars in emergency funds to pay for Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Do as I say not as I do


From a conservative Joplin blogger

http://bungalowbillscw.blogspot.com/

Congressman Billy Long is in a pickle. Running on the theme he is "fed up" with big government, Congressman Long has avoided any confrontation with House leader Eric Cantor who made aid to Joplin a budget issue earlier in the week. Cantor stated there will be no federal aid for Joplin, and Long remained quiet afterwards never condemning Cantor for making this an issue.

Throughout Missouri and in much of the nation people are seeing Billy Long as a man without a backbone, not willing to even issue a statement against Cantor's coldness. A writer at Forbes believes Long's lack of support for his constituents (http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/05/27/deadly-tornados-reveal-the-failure-of-todays-gop-ideology/) exemplified by the very fact Long won't stand up against Cantor and for the people of Joplin will lead to a short political career for Congressman Billy Long.

Earlier this week when Duane Graham, a Joplin resident who lives two blocks from the major damage, asked Long to address Cantor's statement (http://duanegraham.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/billy-long-refuses-to-answer-question-about-eric-cantors-warnings-about-federal-help-for-joplin/). Long walked away from the Joplin resident.

J Diddy
05-27-2011, 10:53 PM
I'm assuming you can see for miles way up there on that horse.

I fail to see how I'm sitting on a high horse by this, but ok. I mean really. If you cannot see how I could be emotional about this then, well, I just don't know. I stated a few facts.

SNR
05-27-2011, 11:28 PM
And I know this will go ignored but conservatives in Joplin are none to happy about Cantor's statements and their pussy Republican Representative not standing up to the POS.

I hate to repeat myself but Cantor didn't seem to have a problem voting for over $1 trillion dollars in emergency funds to pay for Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Do as I say not as I do


From a conservative Joplin bloggerYour article stated:

Cantor stated there will be no federal aid for Joplin

When the hell did he say that?

dirk digler
05-27-2011, 11:42 PM
Your article stated:



When the hell did he say that?

He is a conservative blogger you can't expect him to be completely truthful :p

My main point is that conservatives and liberals in Joplin and around this state felt the same way about what Cantor said. This isn't some liberal made up bs

go bowe
05-27-2011, 11:44 PM
He is a conservative blogger you can't expect him to be completely truthful :p

My main point is that conservatives and liberals in Joplin and around this state felt the same way about what Cantor said. This isn't some liberal made up bs

pfffft...

no real conservative (read real american) would ever criticize the house majority leader /ss

SNR
05-27-2011, 11:46 PM
pfffft...

no real conservative (read real american) would ever criticize the house majority leader /ssWhen did Shitsprayer come back? Did he say something like this? I didn't know he had a mancrush on Eric Cantor.

WHAT ELSE HAVEN'T YOU TOLD ME???

go bowe
05-27-2011, 11:50 PM
When did Shitsprayer come back? Did he say something like this? I didn't know he had a mancrush on Eric Cantor.

WHAT ELSE HAVEN'T YOU TOLD ME???

er, not tmc, sportsshrink...

lame joke, but it's late...

ClevelandBronco
05-28-2011, 12:17 AM
...when you get conservative asses handed to you again in the next Presidential election...

I kinda hope you're right. The sooner this motherfucker falls apart, the better.

J Diddy
05-28-2011, 12:38 AM
I kinda hope you're right. The sooner this motherfucker falls apart, the better.
See maybe yhis

mikey23545
05-28-2011, 01:47 AM
OH! I"M SOOOOO ASHAMED! Oh, please, don't derogatorily call me a woman no more! I promise not to laugh too loudly when you get conservative asses handed to you again in the next Presidential election. Fair enough? Just PLEEEAAASE don't liken me to a vagina again you cruel, cruel macho conservative men. You're cold-heartedness obviously conveys your over abundance of hardened masculinity good enough for the Black Castle at the Wall north of Winterfell. My weak womanly nature cowers at your virile cyber presence on this thread. YOU are sooooo awesome! :drool:

Congratulations!

The first step in overcoming your problem is admitting that you have one.

This actually shows you may have the requisite intelligence to become a conservative if you can ever cure your swollen giner.

HolyHandgernade
05-28-2011, 06:52 AM
Congratulations!

The first step in overcoming your problem is admitting that you have one.

This actually shows you may have the requisite intelligence to become a conservative if you can ever cure your swollen giner.

Show me how, mikey! Show me how!

RedNeckRaider
05-28-2011, 07:54 AM
Congratulations!

The first step in overcoming your problem is admitting that you have one.

This actually shows you may have the requisite intelligence to become a conservative if you can ever cure your swollen giner.

Mike your sig would be funnier if you included a picture of the grotesque mask know as Nancy Pelosi's face~

patteeu
05-28-2011, 09:27 AM
I know your MO far too well to expect you to ever back down or drop a bone once you've picked it up. Let's just say the situation is pretty ****ing hilarious, though. It's alright... you've admitted that you're selective in your causes in the past. We all need our crosses to bear, and you'll take Shitty to your grave. I know that you can equivocate your ass off (all that legal training), but I certainly never saw you urging any kind of restraint or civility when Shitsprayer was telling people to **** off and to suck Obama's wang or jump off a cliff and die or whatever other vile shit he spewed.

You're only lookin at half the picture here. In the SHTSPRAYER vs Frazod/P Diddy episode I was urging restraint on the part of the people who were mischaracterizing SHTSPRAYER's posts as racist and calling for a ban. I wasn't suggesting that they should sit back and meekly accept his posts without responding at all. Here, I'm not saying that J Diddy should have to restrain himself. I'm saying that when he doesn't, he shouldn't be surprised when someone responds like I did.

I find it kind of funny that you think because I defended SHTSPRAYER from harsh abuse that it's somehow ironic that I defended Garcia Bronco's much less offensive post (in fact, not offensive at all) from the same guy's over-reaction.

patteeu
05-28-2011, 09:33 AM
And I know this will go ignored but conservatives in Joplin are none to happy about Cantor's statements and their pussy Republican Representative not standing up to the POS.

I hate to repeat myself but Cantor didn't seem to have a problem voting for over $1 trillion dollars in emergency funds to pay for Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Do as I say not as I do


From a conservative Joplin blogger

It's pretty clear that your "conservative blogger" is responding to the spin he's hearing second-hand rather than what Cantor actually said. Congratulations for fooling at least one sucker.

NewChief
05-28-2011, 09:37 AM
You're only lookin at half the picture here. In the SHTSPRAYER vs Frazod/P Diddy episode I was urging restraint on the part of the people who were mischaracterizing SHTSPRAYER's posts as racist and calling for a ban. I wasn't suggesting that they should sit back and meekly accept his posts without responding at all. Here, I'm not saying that J Diddy should have to restrain himself. I'm saying that when he doesn't, he shouldn't be surprised when someone responds like I did.

I find it kind of funny that you think because I defended SHTSPRAYER from harsh abuse that it's somehow ironic that I defended Garcia Bronco's much less offensive post from the same guy's over-reaction.

Let me parse it down to what I see: you chide J-diddy/Motherlover (I didn't realize they were the same person until just now) for the tone of his posts. You never did that with Shitsprayer, instead choosing to defend his right to use that tone. I understand you're trying to show J-diddy to be a hypocrite. That's fine, but let's not try to make it some kind of great ethical stand you're taking here. You're just attempting to score points in the "game" of DC.

patteeu
05-28-2011, 09:47 AM
Let me parse it down to what I see: you chide J-diddy/Motherlover (I didn't realize they were the same person until just now) for the tone of his posts. You never did that with Shitsprayer, instead choosing to defend his right to use that tone. I understand you're trying to show J-diddy to be a hypocrite. That's fine, but let's not try to make it some kind of great ethical stand you're taking here. You're just attempting to score points in the "game" of DC.

I never claimed it was some kind of great ethical stand. I've criticized conservatives here in the past, but I won't shy away from the fact that I'm much more likely to be moved to post when a liberal says something dumb than when a conservative does. In addition to that, my responses are more polite when I'm talking to people who are being polite. I don't think I'm unique in this approach to this forum.

Rausch
05-28-2011, 09:51 AM
........and Hurricane season starts next week.

God has not cut the US a break in a long time.

Seems like one flood, one tornado, one huge fire, one hurricane, one disaster after another for about the last ten years.

patteeu
05-28-2011, 09:58 AM
... you've admitted that you're selective in your causes in the past.

I forgot to mention this part. I'm not sure what significance there is in this observation. Isn't everyone selective in their causes?

J Diddy
05-28-2011, 10:01 AM
You're only lookin at half the picture here. In the SHTSPRAYER vs Frazod/P Diddy episode I was urging restraint on the part of the people who were mischaracterizing SHTSPRAYER's posts as racist and calling for a ban. I wasn't suggesting that they should sit back and meekly accept his posts without responding at all. Here, I'm not saying that J Diddy should have to restrain himself. I'm saying that when he doesn't, he shouldn't be surprised when someone responds like I did.

I find it kind of funny that you think because I defended SHTSPRAYER from harsh abuse that it's somehow ironic that I defended Garcia Bronco's much less offensive post (in fact, not offensive at all) from the same guy's over-reaction.


I read this and I thought thank God. Without you there would be no heroes in DC.


Suddenly I have an image of you wearing a green cape and cereal box sun glasses. Leaping and hopping singing, "I can be your hero baby, I can take away the pain."

patteeu
05-28-2011, 10:05 AM
I read this and I thought thank God. Without you there would be no heroes in DC.


Suddenly I have an image of you wearing a green cape and cereal box sun glasses. Leaping and hopping singing, "I can be your hero baby, I can take away the pain."

That's kind of a cheap ripoff of my cardboard badge take. I'm appropriately flattered by the imitation.

J Diddy
05-28-2011, 10:07 AM
That's kind of a cheap ripoff of my cardboard badge take. I'm appropriately flattered by the imitation.

I figured the best way to honor you is to keep cheap and imitation right on the front burner.

patteeu
05-28-2011, 10:11 AM
I figured the best way to honor you is to keep cheap and imitation right on the front burner.

OK

mikey23545
05-28-2011, 06:07 PM
Mike your sig would be funnier if you included a picture of the grotesque mask know as Nancy Pelosi's face~

I think then I would be delving into the genre known as "dark humor".

banyon
05-29-2011, 03:03 PM
And you believed them?

It might also behoove us to look back at all the recent disasters and see how well they delivered.

While you're at it, you may want to review the record of the private insurance companies during those disasters, particularly State Farm and the Mississippi coast during Katrina.


Feb. 15, 2007

State Farm, Mississippi's largest home insurer, says that starting Friday it won't write new policies in the state, in part because of increased litigation after the damage caused to Mississippi homes by Hurricane Katrina.

Some are calling the move heartless, while others are calling it just plain greedy.

Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood says that State Farm's tactics have hurt thousands in his state.

"What they have done is they have [dragged] this out for 15 months," Hood said on "Good Morning America."

Those thousands include people like Phil and Toni Shafer.

Last year, the Shafers showed ABC News where their newly renovated home used to be before Hurricane Katrina.

On Wednesday, after a year and a half, they finally got a check from State Farm.

"They're basically saying. … 'You guys eat this loss,'" Phil Shafer said.

The couple had to sue, move out of the state, and start over before getting their money.


A year and a half after Hurricane Katrina, 35,000 Mississippi households remain at odds with State Farm, and now the company says it won't issue any new homeowner policies in Mississippi.

Bob Hunter of the Consumer Federation of America said he believed State Farm's action was a warning to other Gulf Coast states.

"I would say it's a warning shot," Hunter said. "The insurance company here, State Farm, is basically saying, 'If you make us pay what we owe, we're gonna … take it out on your citizens.'"

State Farm thought it had a comprehensive deal to settle outstanding Katrina claims centered on the company's refusal to cover water damage.

A judge put that on hold, and the company also lost a million-dollar lawsuit.

"The real challenge in Mississippi is the uncertainty being created by all the judicial matters," Mike Fernandez, a State Farm vice president, said last week.

But Hood disagrees with that assessment.

"They [State Farm] created the problem," he said. "If they would have paid what they owed in the first place, there never would have been a lawsuit filed."

He believes the real problem is not the worst hurricane season ever, he says it's State Farm's greed.

State Farm says that less than 2 percent of all its Katrina-related claims remain unsettled.

But Hood has vowed to put pressure on the company until it pays the claims he believes it owes.

He says that most of the water damage came from the wind-driven storm surge, and that the company did not specifically exclude "storm surge" storm in its policies.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2877436&page=1

They are always looking for a way to make you eat the costs. More $ for them.

State Farm Settles Katrina Claims in Mississippi



By JOSEPH B. TREASTER
Published: January 23, 2007

State Farm, the nation’s largest home insurer, reached an agreement today with Mississippi officials to pay hundreds of millions dollars to thousands of homeowners in the state who have been unable to rebuild in the nearly 17 months since Hurricane Katrina swept across the Gulf Coast.


Lawyers for the insurance company and Jim Hood, the Mississippi attorney general, completed the last details of the settlement in a meeting in Jackson, the state capital, this afternoon.

Then lawyers for State Farm and Richard F. Scruggs, who represents hundreds of storm victims and played a key role in drafting the settlement, flew to the coastal city of Gulfport to seek endorsement of the plan by a federal district judge, L.T. Senter, Jr.

Judge Senter has suggested that he would like to see a global settlement, and some participants in the talks say the first money could begin to flow to storm victims as early as next week.

A settlement could help jump-start a recovery along a 70-mile stretch of waterfront that was mauled by high winds and surging floodwaters.

Among the homeowners who will benefit from the settlement are Senator Trent Lott and Representative Gene Taylor, both of whom lost their homes in the storm and were denied payment by State Farm.

Under the agreement, State Farm would pay an initial $130 million and perhaps several hundred million more by the end of the year, depending upon how many policyholders request that their claims be reopened. About 35, 000 homeowners along the Mississippi coast are eligible.

Today’s agreement does not apply to Louisiana, where the destruction was even greater, and where lawyers and insurers say no settlement talks have taken place.

Insurance executives expect other carriers to follow the lead of State Farm in settling lawsuits in Mississippi and permitting policyholders to reopen damage claims. Those settlements could add several hundred million dollars for rebuilding.. Since Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005, companies have paid $5.3 billion for damage to more than 330,000 homes in Mississippi and $10.3 billion for nearly a million homes in Louisiana. But State Farm and other companies balked at paying for the concentration of losses along Mississippi’s Gulf Coast and in New Orleans, contending that their policies did not cover damage from flooding. In many cases, the insurers also argued that their standard coverage against wind damage was nullified for homes that were battered both by surging flood waters and the high winds of the hurricane. Thousands of residents in coastal Mississippi and in New Orleans sued their insurance companies.

Lawyers for the storm victims had worried that the insurance companies would fight every case through the courts and that it would take years to resolve the coverage disputes. But the insurers became tired of being called insensitive and uncaring about the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

In the first jury trial on the hurricane damage a little more than a week ago, Judge Senter said State Farm failed to prove its case and the jury ordered the company to pay $2.5 million in punitive damage to a couple in Biloxi. The judge also awarded the couple the full value of their insurance policy, $223,000. State Farm had maintained it owed them nothing.

“Every insurance company wants to settle these cases as fast as possible,” said the general counsel of another big insurance company shortly before the jury’s decision. “No one in our business likes to hear, over and over, how the big insurance companies are mistreating the poor homeowners.”

Randy J. Maniloff, a lawyer at White & Williams in Philadelphia who represents insurance companies, said bad publicity had been a big factor in State Farm’s decision to settle. “They spent 80 years building up a brand,” he said, “and the adverse publicity from these lawsuits has been clearly doing damage to the brand. It just flies in the face of their portrayal of themselves as good neighbors.”

Indeed, according to people close to the talks, it was State Farm that first suggested settlement talks in a telephone call early last fall to Richard F. Scruggs, who was representing hundreds of storm victims .


Mr. Scruggs, who came to prominence by filing lawsuits against the tobacco industry, worked out the main points of the settlement with State farm lawyers and two weeks ago, he and the company reached an agreement in principle. But the attorney general of Mississippi and George Dale, the Mississippi insurance commissioner, expressed reservations. Both officials, who are up for reelection in the fall, said they wanted to make sure that homeowners got the best possible deal. Mr. Dale said it was also important that any agreement not be overly burdensome for insurance companies. The sticking point in the agreement had been over the framing of a few sentences that would end a criminal investigation by Mr. Hood into State Farm’s handling of the claims after the hurricane. Mr. Hood had convened a grand jury last week that began hearing evidence against State Farm.
Hurricane Katrina


State Farm had insisted that Mr. Hood drop the criminal case, which it contended was unjustified. State Farm also demanded that Mr. Hood abandon a civil lawsuit against it and other insurers.

In the agreement, State Farm said it would pay $80 million to settle 640 lawsuits filed by homeowners after Hurricane Katrina and reopen, on the request of homeowners, up to 35,000 other damage claims. The insurance company agreed to pay at least $50 million more on the previously closed claims.

Participants in the talks estimated that, in addition to the $150 million, State Farm could pay another $250 million to $600 million under the terms of the settlement. The participants said State Farm insured about half of the estimated 70,000 homes along the coast whose owners filed claims for damage.

In the settlement of the 640 lawsuits, State Farm agreed to pay the full insured value for 300 homes that were swept away with nothing left behind but concrete slab foundations and tangles of debris. Those homes were insured for $69,700 to $2.34 million. The owners of the other 340 homes, with varying degrees of damage, are to receive an average of $124,400.

In the review of closed claims, homeowners may accept a new offer from State Farm or insist on binding arbitration in hopes of receiving more money. Storm victims are also free to ignore the settlement and file separate lawsuits against State Farm. But few are expected to do so.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/23/business/23cnd-insure.html?pagewanted=2

Those insurance companies aren't there to mercifully help out their customers. They're there to collect evidence and see how many plausible denials there are.

vailpass
05-29-2011, 05:06 PM
A business acting like a business? Shocking.
Next thing you'll be telling me is that fiscal conservation is the reason a business can stay viable for the long term.

banyon
05-29-2011, 05:34 PM
A business acting like a business? Shocking.
Next thing you'll be telling me is that fiscal conservation is the reason a business can stay viable for the long term.

State Farm was just acting like a business?

Most businesses give you a good or service when you pay them and don't wind up with criminal charges and leaving the state with their tail between their legs.

Insurance, particularly medical is not an ordinary business.

mlyonsd
05-29-2011, 06:06 PM
State Farm was just acting like a business?

Most businesses give you a good or service when you pay them and don't wind up with criminal charges and leaving the state with their tail between their legs.

Insurance, particularly medical is not an ordinary business.SF ended up with criminal charges?

Without sitting in as a juror I can understand SF's case. I would consider storm surge to be a flood event.

I think it's the same as living next to a creek and having a 9 inch rain cause the creek to flood. One could argue that is storm surge too. I don't think it is though.

stevieray
05-30-2011, 10:59 AM
.... but let's not try to make it some kind of great ethical stand you're taking here. You're just attempting to score points in the "game" of DC.

....it was only a matter of time before you engaged in what you projected onto patt....

and you claimed you didn't have a clue...LOL

thanks for the elitist dismissal though, it's always good for a chuckle.

BigChiefFan
05-30-2011, 11:35 AM
Insurance companies don't mind taking your money every month for providing zilch, but when it comes time for them to pay up, they cry wolf. These criminal thugs need to be sued until they are out of business.

vailpass
05-30-2011, 01:33 PM
God has not cut the US a break in a long time.

Seems like one flood, one tornado, one huge fire, one hurricane, one disaster after another for about the last ten years.

We'd love to feel sory for you but we're too busy dying.

Best,
Africa

vailpass
05-30-2011, 01:39 PM
State Farm was just acting like a business?

Most businesses give you a good or service when you pay them and don't wind up with criminal charges and leaving the state with their tail between their legs.

Insurance, particularly medical is not an ordinary business.

Do you think that State Farm ended up paying more money than if they had paid out on every single one of the disputed claims?

vailpass
05-30-2011, 01:40 PM
Insurance companies don't mind taking your money every month for providing zilch, but when it comes time for them to pay up, they cry wolf. These criminal thugs need to be sued until they are out of business.

LMAO

HonestChieffan
05-30-2011, 01:58 PM
I have not had many claims in my life but every one I have had has been managed very professionally and I have never had a disputed claim.

My son was rearended in KC by an uninsured driver when he was 17 and Am Family took care of it without a hitch. My Home was hail damaged and they found stuff we hadn't considered and paid in full. I had my Bass Boat cleaned out at a Marina when I was tourny fishing and Am Family replaced every last lure and rod and reel.

So much of the issues people face are brought on by themselves or by having some out of wack expectation. No doubt insurers can be a pain but its a two way street.

Jaric
05-31-2011, 08:31 AM
I have not had many claims in my life but every one I have had has been managed very professionally and I have never had a disputed claim.

My son was rearended in KC by an uninsured driver when he was 17 and Am Family took care of it without a hitch. My Home was hail damaged and they found stuff we hadn't considered and paid in full. I had my Bass Boat cleaned out at a Marina when I was tourny fishing and Am Family replaced every last lure and rod and reel.

So much of the issues people face are brought on by themselves or by having some out of wack expectation. No doubt insurers can be a pain but its a two way street.

This. I'd recommend that every person go home and actually read their insurance policies. If you have questions about if something is covered, please call your agent (or the companies customer service line if you don't have an agent) to find out for sure.

Don't just assume that because "I pay my premiums every month!" that if something happens you're going to get a big fat check and be Oprah rich.

Calcountry
05-31-2011, 05:17 PM
Cut it from the foreign aid we give to shithole places like Pakistan...?here here!