Eric Cantor: no disaster relief for Irene w/o budget cuts

[cubby1223]

I also really don't see the outrage other than "progressives" just found another opportunity to hate for the sake of hating.


Money has to be accounted for. If all the money the government has is allocated elsewhere... and you decide you are going to spend more money on something new... what money are you spending? Where does it come from? Is it being printed? Borrowed? Taxed? Diverted? It has to be one of those things.

And I do believe it is responsible governance to specify where the money is coming from. Irresponsible governance to leave that up to the mystical budget fairies.

 

[her209]

What Eric should have said was its not the federal government's job to provide disaster relief.

/Ron Paul

 

[cubby1223]

PJ, if you are going to quibble over semantics look at the first paragraph you skipped over:

"A spokesperson for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) said that if there is any damage caused by Hurricane Irene requiring federal disaster funding, the money would have to be balanced out by spending cuts elsewhere in government."

"Would have" is mandatory and means shall. Nice spin on claiming the story is bullshit based upon Cantor's backpedaling once he lit off a firestorm of outrage.

Face it, the teabag end of the GOP is set to take the American people hostage once again.

If this post isn't the height of partisan hackary...

The first paragraph you are quoting is the words of Zeke Miller who has absolutely no connection to Eric Cantor.

Is this what this forum is reduced to?

Congratulations, you put forth much effort to achieve no more than what most here do with a quick mumbled half-sentance.

 

[dmcowen674]

Eric Cantor: no disaster relief for Irene w/o budget cuts

Eric Cantor is yet again playing the role of a heartless bean counter. In advance of landfall, he has already vowed to fight any disaster relief arising from Hurricane Irene unless equal spending cuts are made elsewhere.

My commentary: what a f*cking tool. Those who voted for the teaparty must someday realize the damage they are causing to the USA as Cantor strives to roll us back to the days of robber barons, no labor laws and no safety laws or safety net.

Link:

http://www.businessinsider.com/eric...ill-have-to-be-offset-by-spending-cuts-2011-8

Keep voting Republican and you all deserve this

 

[Ausm]

Repubs' new motto- Never, ever, pass up a hostage taking opportunity in pursuit of hard money.

Those Scumbags have no shame...

 

[Ausm]

What Eric should have said was its not the federal government's job to provide disaster relief.

/Ron Paul

WTF is gubermint suppose to do then besides provide employment for corrupt politicians??

 

[jman19]

Ouch, that didn't take long.

 

[jman19]

Eric Cantor doesn't know how to manage situations with federal aid when ti comes to Irene. It seems alot of the middle to upper states will be the hardest hit. It's interesting that New york seems to be the target of the hardest hit. And they just got through legalizing homosexual marriages.

There is a site that deals with some of the potential victims at http://www.hurricaneireneforum.com. Maybe Cantor can take some advice and go with it.

Seriously? You're suggesting NYC is getting hit hard by a hurricane because they recently made gay marriage legal?

 

[Jhhnn]

He didn't suggest anything about how to pay for it, only that if federal money would need to be spent, it would have to be paid for somehow. That seems completely logical to me, it makes perfect sense.

Stop with the dishonesty. His spokesperson said it should be paid for with spending cuts of an unspecified nature. Raising taxes on anybody, particularly the true Bush constituency, is off the table, & we both know it. From the article-

"We aren't going to speculate on damage before it happens, period," his spokesperson Laena Fallon emails. "But, as you know, Eric has consistently said that additional funds for federal disaster relief ought to be offset with spending cuts."

You were saying?

 

[HendrixFan]

He didn't suggest anything about how to pay for it, only that if federal money would need to be spent, it would have to be paid for somehow. That seems completely logical to me, it makes perfect sense.

How does cutting spending elsewhere "pay" for new emergency spending? All that does is double what, if any, deficit spending takes place for the emergency spending. It makes no sense.

 

[BoberFett]

Stop with the dishonesty. His spokesperson said it should be paid for with spending cuts of an unspecified nature. Raising taxes on anybody, particularly the true Bush constituency, is off the table, & we both know it.

I thought you wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy to lower the deficit. Now it's going to cover disaster relief also?

Fools like you are why people say that if you give the US federal government $1, they'll spend $2.

 

[ChunkiMunki]

Cantor has been a deficit hawk for the last .....uh, year and a half. I guess when a republican president is in office deficits don't matter.

 

[bfdd]

if you can't afford relief you can't afford relief. odds are we can't afford it so any damage people are SOL, like they should be. no insurance? your fault you lost your house, srys, the govt and the rest of us aren't obligated to pay for your dumbass. don't live in a shit part of the country.

 

[Ausm]

Cantor has been a deficit hawk for the last .....uh, year and a half. I guess when a republican president is in office deficits don't matter.

My question is where were the Teapublicans when GWB was running up Trillions in deficits?

 

[Engineer]

if you can't afford relief you can't afford relief. odds are we can't afford it so any damage people are SOL, like they should be. no insurance? your fault you lost your house, srys, the govt and the rest of us aren't obligated to pay for your dumbass. don't live in a shit part of the country.

LOL...I think that some of those states being hit (NY, NJ, Connecticut) could have a field day with that statement, especially when they get as low as $0.61 on the dollar on taxes paid vs taxes received. Maybe it should be split back up so that you only get the dollars paid in. The southern states would be royally fucked.

 

[Greenman]

Sounds like Eric Cantor understands what a fifteen trillion dollar debt is.

 

[Jhhnn]

I thought you wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy to lower the deficit. Now it's going to cover disaster relief also?

Fools like you are why people say that if you give the US federal government $1, they'll spend $2.

Nice bit of false attribution, followed by projection & innuendo.

I have many reasons for wanting to raise taxes at the top, & have expressed them many times. I'd refresh your memory if it seemed like a productive endeavor- obviously, that's not the case. You believe what you want to believe based on emotional satisfaction rather than any other sort of principle, substitute gotcha attempts for rational discourse.

Entertaining your line of discussion is like casting pearls before swine & all that.

 

[Jhhnn]

My question is where were the Teapublicans when GWB was running up Trillions in deficits?

There's a rational question. They were on the Trickledown tax cut/ deficits don't matter bandwagon, the Terrarist Threat! bandwagon, the Ebil Saddam! bandwagon, the Ownership Society! bandwagon, and the ever popular God, Guns & Gays bandwagon.

Today, it's the OMFG! deficits bandwagon.

Remarkable that they can jump from one to another quite so adroitly- it's like a wild west show...

 

[xj0hnx]

My question is where were the Teapublicans when GWB was running up Trillions in deficits?

They were right where they are now. The Tea Party was hijacked by neocons, and is now a tool of the Republicans.

 

[Craig234]

Sounds like Eric Cantor understands what a fifteen trillion dollar debt is.

Really?

Then he supports raising revenue from the lopsided rich to help reduce it?

 

[BoberFett]

Nice bit of false attribution, followed by projection & innuendo.

I have many reasons for wanting to raise taxes at the top, & have expressed them many times. I'd refresh your memory if it seemed like a productive endeavor- obviously, that's not the case. You believe what you want to believe based on emotional satisfaction rather than any other sort of principle, substitute gotcha attempts for rational discourse.

Entertaining your line of discussion is like casting pearls before swine & all that.

Blab, blah, blah, typical Jhhhnnhn non-answer. I've said it before, I'll say it again. Go ahead. Raise taxes on the wealthy. As high as you want. 100% if you just want to be spiteful. We'll still be hemorrhaging money.

 

[MovingTarget]

Hopefully this idiot gets voted out the next go-round. Relief for natural disasters isn't something we should even question - it will be provided. Suggesting otherwise is unamerican. To use a natural disaster such as a hurricane as a political tool is morally reprehensible. If you want to argue over how to most effectively deliver aid, that is okay. Address the immediate needs of the people first, then the bean counters once those needs have been met.

 

[MovingTarget]

Seriously? You're suggesting NYC is getting hit hard by a hurricane because they recently made gay marriage legal?

Wow, that really takes the cake. Nobody told me that FL,MS,AL,LA,GA,SC, etc. had legalized gay marriage so many years ago. Thats why we keep getting hit! Who knew?!?

 

[Thump553]

Far as the NY/gay marriage post goes, note that it from a brand new account, one post. Obviously a troll post by someone unwilling to sully their ordinary identity with that bile.

 

[xj0hnx]

Blab, blah, blah, typical Jhhhnnhn non-answer. I've said it before, I'll say it again. Go ahead. Raise taxes on the wealthy. As high as you want. 100% if you just want to be spiteful. We'll still be hemorrhaging money.

But it will makes them feel better. I almost want them to tax the "rich" (250K+ lol rich) at 100%, so that when it fails, and everyone, that doesn't already, realizes that isn't the problem, the progressives will become a sad, fading, soon to be forgotten blip on the radar of history.