So, Mr. Norquist: Who would YOU have respond to the tornados in Alabama?

[Bake]

Since you would shrink the government until you could drown it in the bathtub, just exactly WHO THE HELL is supposed to dig out the residents of Alabama who were devastated by the tornados?

Who, Mr. Norquist? Private industry? Who's gonna pay for that, Mr. Norquist? Certainly not YOU, you worthless piece of sub-human filth! We're waiting for your answer.

Bake

[RandomThoughts]

1. I would chip in once my beer and travel money arrives.

And think taxes are a good idea for social projects that help the entire community.

And could even start to pay taxes again after said issue of justice and compassion is corrected, and I return to some form of work.

[monmouth]

2. I read that FEMA is either there or on their way. God help these people..n/t

[rurallib]

3. you get my rec for calling Norquist "worthless piece of sub-human filth!"

[Bake]

4. It was the most polite thing I could come up with.

I'm trying to clean up my act ... :rofl:

Thanks for rec'ing!

Bake

[Bake]

5. Reagan said government IS the problem.

I guess they didn't think about tragedies like TORNADOS. Or HURRICANES. Or EARTHQUAKES.

The difference between us and them? Well, one of the differences, anyway, is that Democrats BELIEVE IN GOOD GOVERNMENT. To Pukes, there is no good in government.

Bake

[Permanut]

6. This is one of the cornerstone questions of a society

You've said it perfectly. I have an idea; maybe Norquist, and all the teabaggers and anybody who wants to shut off government funds, should put some code, maybe on the roof of the house, car, or whatever, then FEMA could just skip them when helping with a disaster effort. I don't mean they should be forced to do this, they should do it voluntarily on principle.

[Jackpine Radical]

7. What's the problem here?

There are 2 kinds of people in the world. Those who can afford to pay for being dug out from the aftermath of a tornado and those who cannot. Those who can, will. (Or their agents will oversee their being dug out if they're incommunicado themselves.) Those who cannot will be left in place until someone wants the property they are posthumously occupying, at which time they will be pushed into a mass demolition pit and grave with a bulldozer.

[alsame]

8. I'm sure he and his ilk would want all FEMA responsibilities to

be privatized so that some corporation could make a lot of money from all natural disasters and human suffering.

[cyberpj]

11. Why not? They did it with Blackwater and the business of war, then parlayed THAT into a massive

Security training and operations company as well.

Oops. I mean XE (or whatever the F it is now).

[malaise]

9. Obama will be there tomorrow

Fuck Grover

[cyberpj]

10. State governments. They want all the power to go to state govs then individual states can raise

taxes to pay for their own problems and individual states politician's can get even richer by taking bribes from local contractor's with no review or regulation. Then smarmy rich people can create numerous contract companies with which to make money from all the state's people (taxpayers) by privatizing all state 'jobs'. Just my first thought....

[WhiteTara]

12. Let them pull themselves out with their own

bootstraps! Lost those boots? Out of luck then, pardner! :sarcasm:

BTW Did God destroy Alabama because he hates stupid, racist, red necks ?

[KittyWampus]

13. The answer is- charitable organizations

[Bake]

14. Charity is great. I'm sure there will be many many charitable orgs responding.

But they can't do it alone. The devastation is overwhelming. This one requires a BIG player to step up to the plate.

Bake

[KittyWampus]

16. I agree. But the mindset of our modern day Hoovers is let charity take care of the masses

[matt819]

15. You should read the comments to the article in the NYT

I skimmed through them - even commented, though my remarks were moderated away. The comments on the global climate change issue are kind of pointless. Shit happens, of course, and my guess is that none of the posters were scientists, so I pretty much dismissed these posts.

What I found particularly rich, though, were the comments critical of liberals saying, basically, you reap what you sow - you want small government, fine, dig yourself out of this mess. Okay, the loss is terrible. There's no denying that. And it is a shame that tornadoes and most other natural disasters affect those who are least able to bear the brunt. But - and I know this is heartless - this happened in the "heartland" of conservative, small government is great, hands off my Medicare America. Now will you pay attention? Now will you raise taxes? Now will you fund those "liberal" agencies like FEMA and the National Weather Service, etc., etc.

This is what government is for - to be there when its people need it most. (Kind of like airplane pilots. You don't give them all that much thought on any given day, but when you lose power and have to glide into the Hudson River, you really want a pilot who cares about his job and is paid well to do it.) Government is not there to be run like a business, with the eye completely on the bottom line. Government is what makes us a civil society, and squeezing it dry, as "these people" would like to do (or as they have been lead to believe they want by the corporate puppet masters) is what makes the government unable to respond to these sorts of tragedies, whether they happen in the north or south, winter or summer.

[salin]

17. Would want govt to have NO plan or services, but be willing in such an emergency to HIRE

private firms (at far much higher cost that having service in tact all the time) so that all of the money from govt goes into the hands of those (think Haliburton like companies) who gouge the govt and provide some kind of services (with no accountability for the quality or cost of those services.)

[JoeyT]

18. Underfunded volunteer emergency services.

Same as were dealing with it today in many places.

Only he'd like them all volunteer and even more underfunded.

Edited to add: Sometimes the safety net should be keeping you from losing your house or starving when you can't work. Sometimes the safety net should be digging you out of your house or chainsawing trees out of your road so the ambulance can get to you to treat you. It's all the same principle, as far as I'm concerned.

[Chris_Texas]

19. Well said!!! Course I am SURE that piece of crap Limbaugh is winging his way there as we speak

Shovel in hand.

[Bake]

20. Either that, or to the Dominican Republic ...

... with his dick in his hand!

Bake