*length=4:02

Prick

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 4:02 - length declared by PlayhousePals.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'mitt romney, fema, cut funding' to 'mitt romney, fema, cut funding, Rachel Maddow' - edited by Boise_Lib

As with times immediately after gun massacres "Now is a completely inappropriate time to be asking such questions or raising such issues".

Yah huh. Right.

I don't think he's lying (this time).
He really is this much of a unfeeling, entitled Prick.

We tried a de-centralized gov't. It was called the Articles of Confederation.

..it didn't work. Get over it. If you want an actual union, you need a strong federal government. This lesson was already learned a couple CENTURIES ago.

That said though. If I were in Romney's shoes, trying to press flesh with voters and trying to score photo ops helping out, regardless that you're only doing it to score cheap political points...I probably would ignore reporters as much as I can too.

On one hand, I want him to answer the question, but on the other hand, I'd be thinking about punching the reporters in the throat for nagging him when he's obviously busy doing something else. Plenty of other opportunities to hound the guy. If we actually had a decent press, they'd hold his feet to the fire the next time he gave an interview. And quite honestly, he does seem to be clear on what he would want to do.

but here's the thing, we went through the same shit with Bush. FEMA survived it, they just had a crony put in charge.

We don't need government for emergency relief, because society doesn't need to be forced into taking care and being charitable towards each other.

Those who think otherwise don't understand the nature of charity at all, they act as if only they have the noblest of goals, while doubting anyone else is capable of being charitable out of their own free will and means.

>> ^renatojj:

We don't need government for emergency relief, because society doesn't need to be forced into taking care and being charitable towards each other.
Those who think otherwise don't understand the nature of charity at all, they act as if only they have the noblest of goals, while doubting anyone else is capable of being charitable out of their own free will and means.


i think it is you who do not understand the basic,fundamental role of government in regards to "emergency disaster relief".

>> ^Boise_Lib:

I don't think he's lying (this time).
He really is this much of a unfeeling, entitled Prick.


There's a wonderful aroma of coffee to be enjoyed upon your rise from slumber my friend....You can't BE president in the fantasy world of American government UNLESS you are an unfeeling, entitled Prick!?!

>> ^renatojj:

We don't need government for emergency relief, because society doesn't need to be forced into taking care and being charitable towards each other.
Those who think otherwise don't understand the nature of charity at all, they act as if only they have the noblest of goals, while doubting anyone else is capable of being charitable out of their own free will and means.


I think when my paying taxes goes to helping the old widow down the way get food, or help the kids at their school I feel very good about that. I would agree as would most Americans would to giving more of my money to schools and the poor.

The problem is that you don't know anything.

"Damnit people, I've got hands to shake and boxes to move!"

@enoch why, is society so incapable of voluntary charity that, without government, people would simply have no concern for each other? Stating that it's a basic, fundamental role, doesn't make it so. Maybe you should question that.

@Yogi but you're not exactly giving money to an old widow or helping kids at school, you're just being forced into funding a corporation called "government", trusting that they won't steal that money for bailouts, corruption or sheer incompetence. Not wanting government involved doesn't imply lack of concern for the poor and needy or non-willingness to do charity by other means.

America is one of the most charitable countries in the world, more than $200 billion last year alone, most of the contributions coming from middle class individuals. Why are you so distrustful of the kindness of the human spirit, so sure that if government didn't make people do charity at the point of a gun, people would always let their neighbors starve and die?

@renatojj Because if 200 billion was enough there would be no need to even have this discussion.

@Kofi if 200 billion is not enough, wouldn't that amount increase if government didn't take away so much from it? If people were allowed to keep more of their money, I think they would have more to likely donate to charity.

Also, I'm sure you'll agree that just throwing money at a problem is not a solution, whether it's 200 billion or 2 trillion, the amount isn't everything. Just look at how much more money government takes and how poorly it does its job. Wouldn't charity, without the wasteful middle man of government, improve the situation?

Besides, wasting money is the opposite of charity, because it's money that won't go into productive employment, goods, services, and investments. So society is worse off, and while most of us can still go on with our lives, those who are needy and poor are the most affected by any amount of wasted resources.

@renatojj
what you are alluding to is the basic fundamental argument of politics,or more aptly put:"what IS the role of government".

but to suggest that emergency disaster relief is somehow charity is stretching the logic beyond operating parameters.

now we could argue,
in regards to emergency disaster relief:
1.the size of the department.
2.the yearly funds allocated.
3.responsibilities and duties.
and a myriad of other details,but to suggest that emergency disaster relief is somehow forced charity is just patently false.

because even the most extreme political ideologies recognize that the protection of citizens is paramount and is a "fundamental" role of government.

we are not talking about food stamps or section 8 housing.
we are talking about natural disasters which wipe out whole communities of our fellow citizens,through no fault of their own,who have lost everything and are in desperate need of the very basics of life.

the argument is not the "role" but rather the "degree" of that role.

Why do people all of a sudden think that governments should run like corporations?
Governments are first and foremost services and social contracts.

The irony of an online persona with an avatar that includes Troll Face provoking substantive discussion is making my brain hurt and question reality. Only on the Sift.

>> ^renatojj:

@Kofi if 200 billion is not enough, wouldn't that amount increase if government didn't take away so much from it? If people were allowed to keep more of their money, I think they would have more to likely donate to charity.


Well if you look at "charity" breakdown, it's only about $35B that goes to anything like disaster relief.

So let's use that real number. And then let's pretend that it's not already spent on ongoing everyday problems, and then let's pretend the ~$60B in tax revenue that these "charities" are exempted from costs nothing.

Are you seriously claiming that you could put together a lean-mean non-profit relief org that could manage to be prepared for, and provide aid in any arbitrary situation like hurricane Sandy for $35B a year? What about the next thing? What if you go a Katrina instead?

>> ^renatojj:


Also, I'm sure you'll agree that just throwing money at a problem is not a solution, whether it's 200 billion or 2 trillion, the amount isn't everything. Just look at how much more money government takes and how poorly it does its job. Wouldn't charity, without the wasteful middle man of government, improve the situation?
Besides, wasting money is the opposite of charity, because it's money that won't go into productive employment, goods, services, and investments. So society is worse off, and while most of us can still go on with our lives, those who are needy and poor are the most affected by any amount of wasted resources.


Large Organizations are wasteful, if they are for-profit, charity, or government, having a large enough infrastructure to address large problems is costly, that is not a government problem.

We live in a high infrastructure technological society. We don't form bucket brigades when someone's house catches on fire, we have professionals, with effective equipment, who show up and solve this problem more quickly and efficiently, and at a lower aggregate cost to society.

The same is true of disaster relief, we pay for the maintenance of a professional disaster relief infrastructure, and it's cheaper than either doing it ad-hoc, or not having anything in place at all.

Kindness and charity are good and real human impulses, but they are not preparedness, we have organizations for that, we call them governments.

The question about FEMA is moot.

Little to nothing ever gets cut in these federal bureaucracies, any cuts are more like a single theatrical scratch. It doesn't matter which side is in charge.

The federal mafia grows every goddamned year whether it needs to or not. It's mandated.

We can argue all night about FEMA, which is just the Post Office with a life preserver, Band-Aid and bottle of water, it won't make a whit of difference.

Here's some other ways your tax dollars are being spent:

*$2.6 Million Spent To Train Chinese Prostitutes To Drink Responsibly

*$1,529,220 for an Appalachian Fruit Lab.

*$742,764 for olive fruit fly research. ($211,509 of this amount was to be spent in Paris, France)

*$172,782 for the National Wild Turkey Federation in Edgefield, S.C.

*$1,128,000 for Big Brothers/Big Sisters of Alaska Eagle River for an at-risk youth mentoring program.

*$50,000,000 for REAL ID grants. Got to be sure to track and trace those unruly American citizens!

*$123,050 for a Mother's Day Shrine in Grafton, West Virginia (population 5,489, with a land area of 3.8 square miles)



Revolution is coming, now it's only a question of when...less than 10 years if Romney is elected, less than 4 if the other guy squeaks in.

IF Romney is elected? What happened to ROMNEY LANDSLIDE?

I think you may be a RINO in disguise.>> ^quantumushroom:

The question about FEMA is moot.
Little to nothing ever gets cut in these federal bureaucracies, any cuts are more like a single theatrical scratch. It doesn't matter which side is in charge.
The federal mafia grows every goddamned year whether it needs to or not. It's mandated.
We can argue all night about FEMA, which is just the Post Office with a life preserver, Band-Aid and bottle of water, it won't make a whit of difference.
Here's some other ways your tax dollars are being spent:
$2.6 Million Spent To Train Chinese Prostitutes To Drink Responsibly
$1,529,220 for an Appalachian Fruit Lab.
$742,764 for olive fruit fly research. ($211,509 of this amount was to be spent in Paris, France)
$172,782 for the National Wild Turkey Federation in Edgefield, S.C.
$1,128,000 for Big Brothers/Big Sisters of Alaska Eagle River for an at-risk youth mentoring program.
$50,000,000 for REAL ID grants. Got to be sure to track and trace those unruly American citizens!
$123,050 for a Mother's Day Shrine in Grafton, West Virginia (population 5,489, with a land area of 3.8 square miles)

Revolution is coming, now it's only a question of when...less than 10 years if Romney is elected, less than 4 if the other guy squeaks in.

@enoch let me see, charity = helping people (preferably) in need. Disaster relief = helping people in need (due to some disaster). Help me understand why I can't compare the two.

@dgandhi did FEMA do such an amazing job after Katrina that I don't know about? Because there's a very long article on Wikipedia detailing all the criticisms, somebody should remove it.

Government is not wasteful just for being large, it's wasteful for being a monopoly. It's so easy to conceive of the evils of a single corporation becoming a monopoly, but when it comes to government, the issue strangely never comes up.

I understand that's most likely because we can't avoid government being a monopoly, it's the nature of the beast, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make it smaller.

You bring up good points about division of labor. What about competition, does that matter in modern society or will that also be overlooked?

If we use this $35B figure, which is allegedly what government needs to do disaster relief work poorly, can't we bring it down by subtracting all the money wasted, or will the private corporations have to operate at the same level of exorbitance?

Does it have to be a single gigantic institution, why can't smaller organizations be triggered in unison by a big disaster?

Also, why does it have to be entirely non-profit, what about the insurance business, doesn't it revolve around risk management and dealing with unlikely events like disasters?

Yes, we pay for a disaster relief infrastructure, but we don't have a choice in the matter, and that knowledge is what makes FEMA a disaster. In our moment of most dire need, we can only count on FEMA and nothing else. They abuse their privilege by being wasteful and inefficient.

Governments are not the only organizations capable of preparing and dealing with disasters, and they're very far from being the best at it.

*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by MrFisk.

He has a hearing imparMitt.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by Norsuelefantti.

>> ^Kofi:

As with times immediately after gun massacres "Now is a completely inappropriate time to be asking such questions or raising such issues".
Yah huh. Right.

Romney opened the door. If you're taking cheap shots at FEMA as wasted money when there isn't a disaster, you deserve to have those statements shoved down your throat when its necessity is demonstrated.



>> ^renatojj:
Governments are not the only organizations capable of preparing and dealing with disasters, and they're very far from being the best at it.

Yes, because the Red Cross did such an excellent job with all the donations they received for Haiti and 9/11.

@Zyrxil No, no. You misunderstood. I guess I should have used the sarcasm box. I was alluding to Romney's silence as a tacit message of "now if not the time to address statements that are entirely pertinent simply because they will make me look bad and I will hide behind the emotion of grief for victims as a cover for why I won't talk about it".

After the cinema massacre a few months ago the gun groups spouted that line. There has been nearly 1 shooting spree per week since then. If not being able to debate an issue (or take someone to task over previous statements) based on the sensitivity to victims then such things will never be discussed. Romney needs to either stand behind what he said or retract it and say he was wrong in this case.

Your claims here are vastly skewed. As an example I'll point out that prostitutes do, in fact, view alcoholism awareness public service announcements, but than again, so does everyone else.
Hell, better yet, I'll go ahead and inform you that fruit flies are among the most commonly used model animal in modern science. That funding could literally be going to just about any biology related field of research in existence.

I'm very much willing to read and consider your viewpoints, but please, try and present the whole facts next time.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Here's some other ways your tax dollars are being spent:
$2.6 Million Spent To Train Chinese Prostitutes To Drink Responsibly
$1,529,220 for an Appalachian Fruit Lab.
$742,764 for olive fruit fly research. ($211,509 of this amount was to be spent in Paris, France)
$172,782 for the National Wild Turkey Federation in Edgefield, S.C.
$1,128,000 for Big Brothers/Big Sisters of Alaska Eagle River for an at-risk youth mentoring program.
$50,000,000 for REAL ID grants. Got to be sure to track and trace those unruly American citizens!
$123,050 for a Mother's Day Shrine in Grafton, West Virginia (population 5,489, with a land area of 3.8 square miles)