Tea Party supporting radio host backs "burn, baby burn" re: Tn house

[JohnnyLib2]

Nope, no hyperbole in the thread title. The host is Mandy McConnell on WHAS 840 in Louisville. Here is her blog; she's holding to that position this morning and saying it is a metaphor for "Obama Care."

http://www.whas.com/pages/MandyConnell.html

(scan down to her Wednesday list of topics)

Food for thought.....

[Orrex]

1. Well, in fairness to McConnell, I've seen the same sentiment here @ DU many times over.

So...

[ananda]

2. There is such a sickness in this country.

We are truly fucked.

[TexasObserver]

3. It's a sentiment posted hundreds of times here so far.

Not very many posters involved in it, but hundreds of posts.

[JohnnyLib2]

4. Hmmm, it sure is building the listener participation this morning.

Same here, maybe?

[TexasObserver]

6. It's the typical wedge issue used by the right.

While the right likes to accuse us of "class warfare," that's their tactic. They love to pit haves against have nots.

They're Calvinists. God loves you, and he wants you to burn in hell.

[gulliver]

5. It is a metaphor for "Obamacare." It supports Obamacare.

The county did not have universal fire protection. The guy who didn't buy the "insurance" paid the price. But if it worked like Obamacare, the FD would have responded. There would have been a penalty for not buying the insurance, but it would have been far less than the total loss of his home.

[itsrobert]

8. Correct

Thanks for reasoned analysis. Seems like some are only seeing what they want to see.

The man disregarded the $75 fee. Voted for members on the County board who voted 19-1 not to provide a fire department for the county. Had a son with a fire 3 years earlier where he did not pay the $75. His son promise to pay the $75, but didn't. The city sent noitices and the fire chief called the home a few times informing the owner that he will not get service if he didn't pay the $75. The man is not poor and could easily afford $75.

The fire started because the owner wanted to save the dumping fee, so he decided to burn his trash nearby the home. He wasn't concerned about his dogs and cat, because he had ample time to get them out himself, but failed.

BLAME: THE OWNER.

[gmoney]

7. Yeah, so was Boortz, in so many words.

The old "he knew the risks, he failed to pay, he suffered the consequences" argument. Predictable Libertarian position.

The whole "no pay, no spray" situation is entirely predictable, too, and therefore just should have been avoided by assessing $75 in property taxes for each building/property, so that everyone within the area was covered. However, I'd guess some genius politician promised people he'd cut taxes in order to get elected, and instead enacted this scheme.

[JohnnyLib2]

9. Yup.

And/or others were voted down as "tax and spend 'librals'".

[HelenWheels]

10. Agree with gmoney

Put it on the tax roll. What happens if the firemen stand by while the fire spreads to other areas?