[Pukin Dog]

Sometimes, I think some of you are just a bunch of dopes.

Do you understand anything at all about economics? ANYTHING?

First, note the key word: HOMEOWNERS.

This is NOT a giveaway program for those poverty-ridden punks you saw looting on TV last year. Those people were NOT home owners.

Providing rebuilding funds for land-owners whose property does not contain a livable home, will be a huge shot in the arm for the local economy, and pay for itself many times over in jobs, capital and investment in the region.

Why not educate yourself JUST A LITTLE before going off on the President in this case, or are your knees just stuck in permanent jerk-mode?

[Little Ray]

Maybe 'cause homeowners (like me) are supposed to take care of things like this with their own insurance and NOT suck it out of the taxpayers?

Where in the Constitution does it say the Federales must help people who build their homes on coastal sites below sea level, rebuild said homes when Mother Nature catches up to 'em?

[babygene]

"Providing rebuilding funds for land-owners whose property does not contain a livable home, will be a huge shot in the arm for the local economy, and pay for itself many times over in jobs, capital and investment in the region."

Why would my tax money pay for this? This is a BAD idea.

[kenth]

What does it matter whether or not the person was a homeowner before or not? It's still a giveaway. You could give away the same amount to a person who wasn't a homeowner and the local economy would still be spurred. I think you're making some assumptions about those against the giveaway. They aren't upset at who would be getting the money, but that anyone is getting the money at all.

[brainstem223]

Spin spin spin...BUT

Its a giveaway program. If anyone with a home gets it trashed by a tornado, (like mine was in 1998), or a fire, landslide or hit by a meteor; and the government steps in and gives money to the owners of the trashed house; its a giveaway program. Worse yet, its the most sleazy kind of politics imaginable. Sets a evil president.
Unless you can find a clause in the Constution that says otherwise.

[Pessimist]

"Providing rebuilding funds for land-owners whose property does not contain a livable home, will be a huge shot in the arm for the local economy, and pay for itself many times over in jobs, capital and investment in the region."

Wow. Sounds like you're all for gvt "investment".

Do you actually call yourself a conservative, or just a republican?

[LibLieSlayer]

PD, some of these posters are the most hateful group of people that I have ever seen. They hate everybody, except themselves!

LLS

[F16Fighter]

"Sometimes, I think some of you are just a bunch of dopes...Do you understand anything at all about economics? ANYTHING?"

Shall we all drop out car, home and health insurance and expect the President to pick up OUR tabs should OUR worst-case disaster scenario occur?

Apparently YOU understand MORE about selective Marxism, and LESS about the concept of home insurance and personal responsibility...

But then I fully expect you to be a nodding marionette -- especially when Dubya Bush plays 'Simon Says.'

[rattrap]

When did the federal government start providing free homeowners insurance? Could you point that out in the Constitution for us?