Posted on 05/21/2013 12:45:54 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Nearly four months ago, Oklahoma Senators Tom Coburn and James Inhofe both voted against H.R.152, the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act that eventually sent $50.5 billion in relief to victims of Hurricane Sandy. And in the flurry of last night's devastation in Moore, Oklahoma. it was impossible not to forget that fact, knowing the federal government would soon rally to the cause.
Part of that reason was because of the social media aspect to the stormlike the Boston Bombings and like Hurricane Sand information on Monday's storm was quickly dispensed through mediums like Twitter and Facebook. But with that came tweets like this, from Current TV's David Shuster (retweeted 118 times):
Praying for OK victims, hoping federal aid/help won't be delayed like #Sandy when 32 Senators, including OK's Coburn + Inhofe, opposed it. David Shuster (@DavidShuster) May 21, 2013
This one was retweeted 252 more times:
That awkward moment when Sen. Inhofe votes against government help for Sandy victims and then Oklahoma gets hit by a tornado. Top Conservative Cat (@TeaPartyCat) May 21, 2013
And a quick search for "Inhofe" on Twitter turns a stream into a river of people talking about Inhofe's Sandy vote:
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
So the libs are saying it’s not about helping hurting people, it’s about helping OUR people. What a bunch of self-centered hypocrites.
If we vote against the benefits of big government, does this mean we don’t have to pay the taxes of big government?
Good reading. This is not something they teach you about Davey Crockett in school.
Anyhow, like I said, the Constitutional basis for such disaster relief is tenuous. I also recognized that popular sentiment is usually approving of it. Some of my family live in New Jersey and they did alright during Sandy, in fact better than most, because they are disciplined, self-reliant people. But, they too resented some of the opposition to the Sandy bill.
Of all the wasteful and unconstitutional spending done by the Federal Government, disaster relief, especially in the immediate aftermath of such events, cause me the least objection. Ideally, local communities should take care of most matters. However, sometimes, the Federal Government is the best source of rescue assets and immediate medical assistance. The spending objections for me usually come later, weeks or months after the initial disaster.
God bless all the people affected by this tornado.
thanks!
If Tornado relief looked like the Sandy relief bill, there’d be 10 billion to help the victims, 10 billion to study climate change and its effects on tornados, 10 billion to the weather service to plan weather intercept stations in space, China, and Mecca, 10 more billion to study the impact on after disaster relief workers of Oklahoma being a concealed carry state, and 20 billion to finance camp outings for all minorities in any state affected by the same weather system that spawned those tornados.
And that’s why the OK senators thought the disaster bill should be opposed.
It spent much more on pet projects than on getting relief quickly into the hands of those experiencing a disaster.
Wow. I am glad you are okay.
Why would he tell viewers he had a jacket? Was he trying to taunt him?
Personally, I think much of these issues could be helped more by private donations from the willing. And more responsibly, too.
“The two OK senators were right to vote against it.”
Yes, as I recall the Sandy Relief was loaded with unrelated pork (in unrelated parts of the country).
thanks!
Personally I did not donate to Sandy relief due to the unions turning away help from the other states. Since the NJ, NY, etc. utility unions didn’t seem to want any else’s help why should I have given it?
Ticked me off that so many went to help and were almost beat up for it. (some were)
************************
Agreed.
Wrote the book on it a dozen years ago.
Oklahoma more self-sufficient than government-dependent northeast. OK has backbone, not wishbone (except OU offense)
Wasn’t the reason that Katrina was such a disaster in New Orleans, because the local government failed to take adequate precautions, because they felt they can rely on the federal government? But the federal government was not in position to make those preventative measures. Doesn’t FEMA actually make the disasters worse?
I'm assuming that's a rhetorical question. :-)
Doesnt FEMA actually make the disasters worse?
Its existence certainly does, but then I've never seen a top-down system work as well as one that has organized from the bottom up. Even armies have found that giving soldiers more discretion on the battlefield works to an advantage as long as they are of similar mind and have the information they need.
They did vote for the bill that funded Sandy to a larger number than the original bill... they just cut out all of the dim party graft... you pos rat bastid dim! Not aimed at you Nick but at the demon that wrote this.
LLS
The goobernator blanco and mary “no balls” landrieu were incompetent at best and nagin and the new orleans administration were all corrupt and unqualified. Heck even NOPD looted. They even violated the Second Amendment. That is why I will never set foot in new orleans again.
LLS
Um, because it was a slush fund?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.