If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Kos)   Why hasn't Romney talked about his record managing emergencies? Because as Governor, he vetoed a flood prevention project for a town that later flooded, then ignored requests for help from a second flooded town   (dailykos.com) divider line 272
    More: Fail, Mitt Romney, floods, Greenfield, Ryan Grim, Health Care, International, emergency, town, governors  
•       •       •

3496 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Oct 2012 at 6:48 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



272 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-30 07:31:16 PM
So what is the excuse for the last 10 years since Romney was governor?
 
2012-10-30 07:35:04 PM

jso2897: Noam Chimpsky: Should you be able to build a house or a town anywhere and the governor should be obligated to protect it from flooding? Massachusetts has lots of areas that aren't wise places to put a town or a house. Same can be said for every state.

Should you be allowed to accumulate property you lack the means to protect, and then expect the state to arrest and jail anyone who takes it from you at MY expense? Take care of your own property, you socialist leech. You should have planned better.


Then your answer to my question is "yes"?
 
2012-10-30 07:35:23 PM

coeyagi:
Hey Chimp...

National Education Rankings for 2008-

Blue States Average: 20.5
Red States Average: 32.4

who's_the_retard_now.jpg


Those polls must be skewed.
 
2012-10-30 07:37:46 PM

Weaver95: Noam Chimpsky: Should you be able to build a house or a town anywhere and the governor should be obligated to protect it from flooding? Massachusetts has lots of areas that aren't wise places to put a town or a house. Same can be said for every state.

so blame the victim? that's your solution?


Yeah, that's pretty much just the tip of the iceberg of stupid you're replying to, there...

When you think Massachusetts, you certainly don't think of towns older than the actual United States that have survived far worst natural disasters than some flooding... Hell, new towns are popping up all the time here. It like a game of Rise of Nations here in the Commonwealth. If those folks aren't going to be careful where the build their town, it's their own fault is something happens to 'em. Just last year, a whole town was destroyed by a band of Mongols. Why should my tax dollars go to helping them rebuild so close to the Mongol Empire?!?
 
2012-10-30 07:38:45 PM
Republicans really have no sense of history that they didn't invent out of whole cloth. The reason these megalithic federal agencies exist is because we already tried the other options, and they didn't help. Before FEMA existed, there were hundreds of federal agencies doing disaster relief with no central organization or interconnectedness. Hell, it was Herbert "Hooverville" Hoover who started up the first centralized agency for helping rebuild communities after disaster. And it was a mess of squabbling and piecemeal legislation for decades until the seventies rolled all of these agencies into FEMA so that they could move quicker, cheaper, and do more than they would as a hundred infighting agencies.

Conservatives should crack open a book that isn't from the Texas school board once in a while. Why do we need all these regulations that are strangling our job creators? Well, job creators liked to lock the doors to their garment factories and hundreds of women were burned alive. They also liked that children had small hands and could more easily polish the inside of a mortar round. Why does the FDA get to tell me what to put in my body? Well because people liked to dissolve their snake oil in methanol and sell uranium-laced blankets to people with arthritis.

Anything conservatives vehemently want to dismantle only exists today because we already have seen the consequences of haphazard and local regulation. These programs didn't just appear overnight. They were the result of seeing thousands or hundreds of thousands of deaths, disfigurements, and hardship, and the programs grew organically in order to prevent them from happening again. These agencies exist for a reason.
 
2012-10-30 07:38:49 PM

Weaver95: Noam Chimpsky: ck819: Honest, non trolling question. I'm not on here a lot so I really don't know...

Why are most farkers liberals?

Because most conservatives can't tolerate so much stupidity. I've donated my time to help out the retarded and other special needs types in the past so I've developed a strong tolerance and sort of an amusement to the liberal psychopathy. This is true, not being sarcastic. I can understand most conservatives' repulsion to it, though. You will lose a few IQ points debating these folks, but I had plenty to spare.

case in point - if you aren't with him, you're against him. no grey areas, no compromise - completely black and white thinking.


It saves on cognitive resources. You can be surprised how resource-intensive bluster and delusions can be.
 
2012-10-30 07:39:31 PM

coeyagi: Noam Chimpsky: Should you be able to build a house or a town anywhere and the governor should be obligated to protect it from flooding? Massachusetts has lots of areas that aren't wise places to put a town or a house. Same can be said for every state.

I am sure all the GOP voters affected by the flooding and benefitted from government assistance agree with you.

//sadly, they really do.
///tards



cache.gawker.com
"It's not welfare when we use it!
 
2012-10-30 07:40:49 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Republicans really have no sense of history that they didn't invent out of whole cloth. The reason these megalithic federal agencies exist is because we already tried the other options, and they didn't help. Before FEMA existed, there were hundreds of federal agencies doing disaster relief with no central organization or interconnectedness. Hell, it was Herbert "Hooverville" Hoover who started up the first centralized agency for helping rebuild communities after disaster. And it was a mess of squabbling and piecemeal legislation for decades until the seventies rolled all of these agencies into FEMA so that they could move quicker, cheaper, and do more than they would as a hundred infighting agencies.

Conservatives should crack open a book that isn't from the Texas school board once in a while. Why do we need all these regulations that are strangling our job creators? Well, job creators liked to lock the doors to their garment factories and hundreds of women were burned alive. They also liked that children had small hands and could more easily polish the inside of a mortar round. Why does the FDA get to tell me what to put in my body? Well because people liked to dissolve their snake oil in methanol and sell uranium-laced blankets to people with arthritis.

Anything conservatives vehemently want to dismantle only exists today because we already have seen the consequences of haphazard and local regulation. These programs didn't just appear overnight. They were the result of seeing thousands or hundreds of thousands of deaths, disfigurements, and hardship, and the programs grew organically in order to prevent them from happening again. These agencies exist for a reason.


THIS. Thank you.
 
2012-10-30 07:41:18 PM

Noam Chimpsky: jso2897: Noam Chimpsky: Should you be able to build a house or a town anywhere and the governor should be obligated to protect it from flooding? Massachusetts has lots of areas that aren't wise places to put a town or a house. Same can be said for every state.

Should you be allowed to accumulate property you lack the means to protect, and then expect the state to arrest and jail anyone who takes it from you at MY expense? Take care of your own property, you socialist leech. You should have planned better.

Then your answer to my question is "yes"?



I suppose your motivation for asking the question is to somehow show that the government should not help out those who have made bad decisions. Of course it does. In fact, it should also make the best effort to educate you so that you don't make bad decisions.

The government does have an obligation to protect your life. It even has an obligation to protect your property as best it can, though it does NOT have an obligation to issue you a new building permit if your place is totalled.

The rich, complain as they might about taxes, benefit disproportionally from them. Their taxes go to the dept of commerce, which goes to bat for the on the world stage. It gets them yummy government contracts.
And yes, it protects them with far more fervor than it protects those born on the wrong side of the tracks.
 
2012-10-30 07:41:47 PM
Now we can't say "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job" without being called a racist. :(
 
2012-10-30 07:43:12 PM

mrshowrules: Weaver95: Elzar: More liberal deflection away from the failed policies of B. Hussein - what about Guantanimo? Did Obama close it? Nope - in fact they probably didn't even prepare for Sandy.

Proof of Obama's failure on emergency management was seen in his administration's handling of all the OWS events which occurred in life-threatening winter conditions - and yet his thugs in blue could be seen beating down innocent Americans who have been steam-rolled by the liberal agenda. Not even a single warm blanket, cup of soup or tent offered by FEMA during the trying times of OWS.

Obama also failed spectacularly to pass armed psycho reform legislation which would have prevented the multiple mass shootings we have seen in the last four years.

He also failed to pass legislation preventing the Waconda oil spill - now there is an emergency failure of epic proportion. But no, instead lets talk about a little 3-day Nor'easter and how the Katrina response was one of Obama's signature accomplishments.

/ No think like liberal groupthink

I honestly can't tell if this is serious or not....

Not sure either but "B. Hussein" part would push me into the troll direction.


Nah.... The armed psycho and katrina part point to satire.
 
2012-10-30 07:46:08 PM

GoldSpider: Now we can't say "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job" without being called a racist. :(


www.butterflies.org

This image is practically the KKK. =O
 
2012-10-30 07:46:25 PM
 
2012-10-30 07:46:59 PM
Romney is a whole lot of fail. On top of being sociopathic liar, he's conniving, looting, amoral, two-faced, and just a plain ol' dickhead.
 
2012-10-30 07:48:15 PM

mrshowrules: Nadie_AZ: This warmed the cockles of the talkers' hearts at Fox News, of course, where no one doubted that Romney was not, repeat NOT campaigning. He was just helping box up some canned goods to help in the relief effort, and, heavens, if some photographers or some voters happened to be nearby, that was swell too.

Doesn't sound beyond the scope of logic. BUT

But had anyone at the Romney campaign bothered to ask the Red Cross, they would have been informed that collecting canned is exactly what they don't need.

From their site:

The American Red Cross does not accept or solicit small quantities of individual donations of items for emergency relief purposes. Items such as collections of food, used clothing, and shoes often must be cleaned, sorted, and repackaged which impedes the valuable resources of money, time, and personnel that are needed for other aspects of our relief operation.

Link

There are dipshiats where I work which are collecting grocery store bags which they weave into this shiatty mats which they apparently are donating to Haiti because there is apparently a shortage of shiatty mats there and they lack the labour force to weave plastic bags into mats.

I'm not joking. They have collection bins on every floor and several employees are doing the weaving and I assume someone is paying the post to get them to Haiti. Well paid employees also.

I shake my head. If employees instead donated their time spent doing this in salary dollars they could probably pay to build a decent sized health clinic or school house in Haiti. What do we give them instead, shiatty plastic mats.

From their perspective it is like a billionaire knitting you a sweater. Nice sweater and the thought was nice but if you could instead had given us a fraction of the money you made in the time it took you to make that sweater we could could reduced infant mortality by 10% or have functional water treatment plan


Wha...... What ..... How are mats helping them???

Please ask one of the weavers.
 
2012-10-30 07:48:51 PM
Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"
 
2012-10-30 07:49:18 PM
U mad bro? Get used to Romerica. Only a few more days!!!
 
2012-10-30 07:53:19 PM

cameroncrazy1984: And of course Romney was asked 14 times about FEMA and refused to answer any of them.


Is he trying to break Obama's record on Libya?
 
2012-10-30 07:53:26 PM

ck819: Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"


I would say most Farkers are intelligent people and basically decent people, both of which preclude supporting Romney or any Republican, whether you're pro-Obama or not.
 
2012-10-30 07:54:32 PM

ItchyMcDoogle: Hunter_Worthington: DERP!

Nice try at a dodge though


ha-ha, you got me, I merely pointed out that Obama once opposed policies that he later advocated, or legislation that he needed, and implied that's some how the same as Romney doing the exact same thing under similar circumstances. You're totally right to denounce that as "derp". You should take your sharp political wit to the network television instead of wasting it here on Fark. Go, now, for the good of the body politic!
 
2012-10-30 07:54:52 PM

MyRandomName: cameroncrazy1984: And of course Romney was asked 14 times about FEMA and refused to answer any of them.

Is he trying to break Obama's record on Libya?


What, you mean the embassy security that the GOP voted to defund? Is that what you are talking about? And when did Obama not answer a direct question about it?
 
2012-10-30 07:56:09 PM

ck819: Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"


Why shouldn't more people in general be more pro-rational, pro-smart, pro-decency?

Because that just happens to be what Obama is. It's not partisan, at some point, you have to pick the side that does things the way they should be done.
 
2012-10-30 07:57:59 PM

ck819: Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"


Or you could try "why do most farkers accept evolution?" Or "why do most farkers have compassion for rape victims?"
 
2012-10-30 07:59:24 PM

ck819: Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"


Have you seen / heard the alternative?
 
2012-10-30 08:00:28 PM

Hunter_Worthington: ItchyMcDoogle: Hunter_Worthington: DERP!

Nice try at a dodge though

ha-ha, you got me, I merely pointed out that Obama once opposed policies that he later advocated, or legislation that he needed, and implied that's some how the same as Romney doing the exact same thing under similar circumstances. You're totally right to denounce that as "derp". You should take your sharp political wit to the network television instead of wasting it here on Fark. Go, now, for the good of the body politic!



Yes, but there is one fine difference. Romney won't talk about it, and Obama said flat out that he had made a mistake and it was wrong to vote against the increasing it. He said that a while back. Can you find any other things that he's changed position on?

Romney has a huge history of advocating both sides of an issue. That doesn't count as changing position if you won't talk about it :

* abortion
* gay rights
* FEMA
* health care
* use of emergency rooms
* governments ability to create jobs.

Those are just off the top of my head. A little research is going to uncover more of those Romnesia episodes.
 
2012-10-30 08:02:02 PM

ck819: Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"


Probably because most Farkers are not religious, have enough education to be somewhat tech-savvy, and are relatively young.

You're not going to find a lot of 65 year-old fundamentalist baptists on this board.
 
2012-10-30 08:04:13 PM

ck819: Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"


Personally (while still registered R out of lethargy): After I was laid off in '09 due to the economy, the flipping house goes tea party and starts playing politics with unemployment benefits. Coupled with their Christian Fundie pet projects (also now an atheist thanks to fark), blatant obstructionism to make Obama a one termer economy be damned, and now with the quantum candidate and his almost pathologic penchant for lies... the pacific ocean will have to freeze over before I vote for any R for any post other than county clerk or sheriff.
 
2012-10-30 08:06:12 PM

Weaver95: Noam Chimpsky: Should you be able to build a house or a town anywhere and the governor should be obligated to protect it from flooding? Massachusetts has lots of areas that aren't wise places to put a town or a house. Same can be said for every state.

so blame the victim? that's your solution?


That seems to be the GOP solution for everything: rape, illness, natural disasters, etc.
 
2012-10-30 08:06:45 PM

dartben: You're not going to find a lot of 65 year-old fundamentalist baptists on this board.


This site isn't High-res enough for them to read easily.
 
2012-10-30 08:07:09 PM
jso2897:I'm not going to fire my mechanic for working too slow and then hand the keys to the guys who wrecked the car in the first place.

31 flavors of awesome.
 
2012-10-30 08:08:37 PM

Lando Lincoln: Yeah, but those Salt Lake City Olympics...he did a good job, there.


He only askef for $1,300,000,000.00 from the federal government to hold the olympics, too.

(That's three times more than we spend on PBS and NPR combined. Apparently, borrowing money from China is OK when Mitt does it.)
 
2012-10-30 08:08:40 PM

Elzar: derp....derp... spectacularly.....hurrr....durrr....


i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-30 08:12:25 PM

ck819: Why are most farkers liberals?


I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm a liberal because I'm not a farktard.
 
2012-10-30 08:13:45 PM
(This comment has been removed)
 
2012-10-30 08:16:15 PM

ivan: Yeah, so why are most Farkers liberals?


Farkers are pretty evenly spread across the political spectrum. Since the Democratic party covers most of said political spectrum, most of us will be in favor of something that falls somewhere in the blue region most of the time.

We're only all "liberals" if you're using that as shorthand for "anything other than straight-ticket GOP", which is both not what the word actually means and an exceptionally stupid way to use it.

For example, I'm a policy conservative, i.e. I generally do not advocate changing any policy unless there is a bloody _mountain_ of evidence that the new version is not only better, but better enough to make up for the costs associated with changing policy. I tend to resist social policy changes at the national level until they've been tested at the state level, and I resist changes at the state level until they've been tried at the local level, and react to any politician pushing a dramatic social agenda as if it were urgent with extreme suspicion. I care a lot about the cost of things, and where politics is concerned saying that something, even something obviously vital, is "worth any price" is probably the fastest way to lose me.

Ten years ago, this would have (and did) probably make me a GOP voter for the most part. Nowadays, it makes me a straight-ticket Democrat almost. Literally every actual conservative candidate in US politics has a (D) by their name now. The GOP consists entirely of radical religious reactionaries, which isn't even within artillery distance of conservatism.
 
2012-10-30 08:20:00 PM
Why would he do this don't states have unlimited funds just like the feds?
 
2012-10-30 08:21:22 PM

Elzar: More liberal deflection away from the failed policies of B. Hussein - what about Guantanimo? Did Obama close it? Nope - in fact they probably didn't even prepare for Sandy.

Proof of Obama's failure on emergency management was seen in his administration's handling of all the OWS events which occurred in life-threatening winter conditions - and yet his thugs in blue could be seen beating down innocent Americans who have been steam-rolled by the liberal agenda. Not even a single warm blanket, cup of soup or tent offered by FEMA during the trying times of OWS.

Obama also failed spectacularly to pass armed psycho reform legislation which would have prevented the multiple mass shootings we have seen in the last four years.

He also failed to pass legislation preventing the Waconda oil spill - now there is an emergency failure of epic proportion. But no, instead lets talk about a little 3-day Nor'easter and how the Katrina response was one of Obama's signature accomplishments.

/ No think like liberal groupthink


WTF is " armed psycho reform legislation"? I have never heard of such a thing. Google reveals nothing.
 
2012-10-30 08:23:36 PM

ck819: Honest, non trolling question. I'm not on here a lot so I really don't know...

Why are most farkers liberals?


So being a rational, common sense thinking person is a liberal? So call me liberal.
 
2012-10-30 08:30:26 PM

Hobodeluxe: Noam Chimpsky: Should you be able to build a house or a town anywhere and the governor should be obligated to protect it from flooding? Massachusetts has lots of areas that aren't wise places to put a town or a house. Same can be said for every state.

should the taxpayer pay for Christie's cardiologist?


Yes. A civilized country provides healthcare for all.
 
2012-10-30 08:30:56 PM

Ilmarinen: ck819: Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"

Or you could try "why do most farkers accept evolution?" Or "why do most farkers have compassion for rape victims?"


She was totally asking for it and it wasn't legitimate rape as she was an easy rape. I just hope she got God's little gift of a rape baby. :)
 
2012-10-30 08:31:50 PM
Interesting ad : pagead2.googlesyndication.com
Look at the buttons.
 
2012-10-30 08:32:16 PM
s3.amazonaws.com

Just lookit those crowds! 

MITTMENTUMMENTAL!!!
 
2012-10-30 08:32:58 PM

coyo: Interesting ad : [pagead2.googlesyndication.com image 300x250]
Look at the buttons.


Let's hope a lot of people are red-green colorblind.
 
2012-10-30 08:33:59 PM
This is a lame, one-sided attempt by Obamafanatics to exploit a natural disaster.

If we continue as we have been, we wont have to worry about Federal disaster relief because there wont be any federal money for it.
 
2012-10-30 08:34:09 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: ck819: Thanks for the responses.

I just noticed most of the political headlines were anti Romney, pro Obama and most of the posts the same. No bias. Maybe my question should have been "why are most farkers pro Obama?"

I would say most Farkers are intelligent people and basically decent people, both of which preclude supporting Romney or any Republican, whether you're pro-Obama or not.


I would say, in a flip of how a lot of people outside Fark vote, many Farkers are less pro-Obama than they are anti-Republican--which, by definition in this election makes them anti-Romney. A lot of our more erudite and intelligent conservative Farkers only recently became (very reluctantly) what one might call "liberal" or at least they renounced the Republican party in its current incarnation; they have no choice but to support Obama because they refuse to support the gang of brain-dead ogres and Inquistional thugs calling themselves the GOP nowadays.

Many others are supporting Obama now because they were RON PAUL supporters in early 2012, but that's off the table now and they've seen enough of Romney to know he's only like Paul every third or fourth day; so, again, it's Obama or nothing. Of course, some of us with a better understanding of how politics work think Obama has done an okay job as President given what he was up against in Congress and we're 110% Obama in this election. But you can't take being "against Romney" as being "for Obama" all the time anymore, not the way the GOP has been behaving of late.
 
2012-10-30 08:36:11 PM

Animatronik: This is a lame, one-sided attempt by Obamafanatics to exploit a natural disaster.

If we continue as we have been, we wont have to worry about Federal disaster relief because there wont be any federal money for it.


What you meant to say but your shill-vision blinded you in doing so: "Romney wants to do away with FEMA and give it over to states and how dare someone take a critical look at what he did as governor of MA."
 
2012-10-30 08:37:46 PM

Animatronik: This is a lame, one-sided attempt by Obamafanatics to exploit a natural disaster.

If we continue as we have been, we wont have to worry about Federal disaster relief because there wont be any federal money for it.


cdn2-b.examiner.com
 
2012-10-30 08:38:21 PM

TV's Vinnie: Just lookit those crowds!


It isn't like Romney is very popular here in Michigan... I'm sure tens of people couldn't wait to have Mitt lie to them personally.
 
2012-10-30 08:38:37 PM
Jesus you people actually farking think he is posting in earnest? Maybe he is right, you ARE retarded
 
2012-10-30 08:39:23 PM
Maybe, JUST MAYBE, the people who submitted it did NOT give the proper info... they may have ommitted key details that they did not know they needed to include. FTFA it says he vetoed it due to not enough details. Maybe the plan was not properly submitted. No one is discussing that; as usual everyone is running with is "ooh he vetoed a flood prevention plan...blah blah... he is so despicable.. blah blah... typical conservative...". Oh and then the town flooded. TWICE. Well, how long would it have taken to enact the flood prevention plan? Would it have been completed in time to prevent said flooding? And if the submitters of the plan really DID fail to give the required details then how the hell is that Romney's fault. Not saying it isn't or is but come on people, look at BOTH sides of it instead of jumping on the bashing bandwagon.
 
Displayed 50 of 272 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report