goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: Bookcat on August 30, 2011, 01:46:44 PM
-
a federal government program is out of cash..but Obama is to blame.....Anyone see the irony?
Several House Republicans issued a statement Saturday in advance of the storm criticizing the Democratic-controlled Senate and the Obama administration for their failure to act on the additional cash for FEMA, saying they had left the agency "running on fumes." "Even though the President himself said that 'We are going to do everything we can to help these communities rebuild,' the rhetoric has not matched reality and the Disaster Relief Fund is running out of money," said Robert Aderholt, chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.
It's only an entitlement when SOMEONE ELSE needs it...right small-government conservatives?
-
Meh, I wouldnt mind if they just got rid of the whole program all together or at least scaled it way down.
-
It's only an entitlement when SOMEONE ELSE needs it...right small-government conservatives?
No. eff Fema. They're insolvent and a huge threat to civil liberties.
Just another inefficient big government program
-
It's only an entitlement when SOMEONE ELSE needs it...right small-government conservatives?
No. eff Fema. They're insolvent and a huge threat to civil liberties.
Just another inefficient big government program
How is an emergency management program a threat to civil liberties?
-
It's only an entitlement when SOMEONE ELSE needs it...right small-government conservatives?
No. eff Fema. They're insolvent and a huge threat to civil liberties.
Just another inefficient big government program
How is an emergency management program a threat to civil liberties?
In the hands of a few bureaucrats, FEMA can force relocation of entire populations, seize control of all transportation, food and natural resources, among other things.
Has bad news written all over it.
-
It's only an entitlement when SOMEONE ELSE needs it...right small-government conservatives?
No. eff Fema. They're insolvent and a huge threat to civil liberties.
Just another inefficient big government program
How is an emergency management program a threat to civil liberties?
In the hands of a few bureaucrats, FEMA can force relocation of entire populations, seize control of all transportation, food and natural resources, among other things.
Has bad news written all over it.
You would prefer no emergency evacuations?
-
It's only an entitlement when SOMEONE ELSE needs it...right small-government conservatives?
No. eff Fema. They're insolvent and a huge threat to civil liberties.
Just another inefficient big government program
How is an emergency management program a threat to civil liberties?
In the hands of a few bureaucrats, FEMA can force relocation of entire populations, seize control of all transportation, food and natural resources, among other things.
Has bad news written all over it.
You would prefer no emergency evacuations?
If that's what you want to call a government takeover of everything, then no.
-
I've worked on some projects with FEMA. They really aren't that bad to work with. Conspiracy theories aside, FEMA funds projects that save lives.
-
I've worked on some projects with FEMA. They really aren't that bad to work with. Conspiracy theories aside, FEMA funds projects that save lives.
I'd rather be dead than have my soul owned by a socialist bureaucracy like FEMA, which actually requires you to sign over your soul before receiving help. Total fact, read it on Pike's blog.
-
Well there's no doubting they do some good, but why can't we just have the Red Cross? And I'm not even saying there are FEMA death camps or anything. But if you guys are for inefficient big government programs that don't work, then I guess there is no arguing it.
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
-
Well there's no doubting they do some good, but why can't we just have the Red Cross? And I'm not even saying there are FEMA death camps or anything. But if you guys are for inefficient big government programs that don't work, then I guess there is no arguing it.
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
Heard a radio deal on red cross(and similar org's) donations during tragedies. They said that somewhere around 10% of what is usually announced as what has been raised ever actually gets delivered from donor to said org.
Said that large corps as well as foreign govts are the worst and that they almost always reneg on their pledges.
-
Well there's no doubting they do some good, but why can't we just have the Red Cross? And I'm not even saying there are FEMA death camps or anything. But if you guys are for inefficient big government programs that don't work, then I guess there is no arguing it.
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
I don't think anybody believes the country (other than people who drown from floods/hurricanes/forest fires) will suffer. I just think that maybe we should look into cutting programs that provide no benefit to the public health and safety before we put the bulls-eye on FEMA and the EPA.
-
You guys should read the book Zeitoun. :thumbs:
-
You guys should read the book Zeitoun. :thumbs:
Required freshman reading this year as K-State.
-
You guys should read the book Zeitoun. :thumbs:
Required freshman reading this year as K-State.
:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:
-
You guys should read the book Zeitoun. :thumbs:
You should really read the book called Goodnight Moon
-
:confused:
-
SkinnyBenny getting pwn3d in this thread
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Ok, dumb eff, but you're missing the point. Everything the government touches they eff up, but you probably can't understand that since you're ok with and think it's necessary for them to be involved in every aspect of our lives. When in reality, the bureaucracy they have created around all aspects of society have just become money pits of ineptitude and inefficiency.
Once again the only hope for saving us, Ron Paul, is correct.
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1907:were-from-the-government-were-here-to-help&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69
-
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you?
My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Ok, dumb eff,
Exchanges like this make up my only interest in the Pit.
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Free advise from SugarDick
Don't use words you don't know how to use when tearing someone down. It makes you look like a foolish.
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Free advise from SugarDick
Don't use words you don't know how to use when tearing someone down. It makes you look like a foolish.
First, don't use advise when you mean advice when tearing someone down. It makes you look like a foolich.
Secondly, myriad actually can be used that way. It's uncommon, yes, but it's syntactically legal. I would advise against using it this way, though, mainly because people who think they know the meaning/implementation of myriad (FakeSugarDick) will usually call you out and be snooty about it, as if anyone's impressed that they know the word myriad. They'll be wrong in calling you out for this, but it's still just best to avoid it altogether. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myriad
Some better advice regarding myriad is this, though: don't use the word at all. What FSD doesn't realize is that, even if someone uses it in the sense he considers correct, that person will still look like a tool. Because only tools use the word myriad. Hint to everyone who uses this: it's not impressing anyone. It's one of those words that you think is big and impressive, but really, everyone knows it.
Just some helpful friendly advice from your pal SB. Play nice, now, gang. :ump:
-
syntactically
:horrorsurprise:
-
Yes? And?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/audio.php?file=syntac03&word=syntactically&text=\-ti-k%28%C9%99-%29l%C4%93\
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Free advise from SugarDick
Don't use words you don't know how to use when tearing someone down. It makes you look like a foolish.
To recap you scolded me for using a word, you clearly don't know the meaning of, in the course of your attempted correction you mistook advice with advise. That's middle school English, sugar dick. My God you're dumb, an embarrassment to all other living beings. You keep looking like a rough ridin' moron, I'll keep hoping that you cease to breathe.
-
So let's get back to how awful FEMA was during Katrina, huh gang? :excited:
Honestly haven't paid much attention to them lately. Odds that they've learned from their mistakes and would do it better next time?
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Ok, dumb eff, but you're missing the point. Everything the government touches they eff up, but you probably can't understand that since you're ok with and think it's necessary for them to be involved in every aspect of our lives. When in reality, the bureaucracy they have created around all aspects of society have just become money pits of ineptitude and inefficiency.
Once again the only hope for saving us, Ron Paul, is correct.
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1907:were-from-the-government-were-here-to-help&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69
I very much understood your point and dissected what you said. Did I change what you typed when I put them in quotes? Let's forget that you proposed handing a government agency to a "not-for-profit" organization who only gave 30% of donated money for 9/11 to the actual victims, and some of the people who got money were multimillionaires. Let's forget that same "not-for-profit" agency had a scandal so bad that it forced the director to resign and since they don't make a profit they only gave her a $1.5 million buyout. I'm willing to forget your dumb ass, misinformed, opinion. I mean it's from you, what else can be expected?
So forgetting all of that, you are of the opinion that emergency management worked so much better before the government got involved with it. I can't and won't forget that you not only didn't take the time to see that the US government has been the only people to handle emergency management, but after I informed you of the fact you still went on your idiotic tangent that the government messed up emergency management. Are you following this? Did your mother drink when she was pregnant with you? I'm going to explain this once more, read slow.
The government didn't eff up emergency management. You have no point of reference as to how it's done other than how they do it. Have they made mistakes, of course. However, you can't say they ruined something that they and they alone have controlled for 200 years. Tell me who did emergency management so well that the government put out of business? Who ran emergency management so well 200 years ago that we're missing out on?
Don't bother with answers, I don't care about what bullshit you are going to spew. Just keep gathering your bullets, water, powdered milk, and MREs for the day the government comes after us. rough ridin' freak.
-
:woot:
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Ok, dumb eff, but you're missing the point. Everything the government touches they eff up, but you probably can't understand that since you're ok with and think it's necessary for them to be involved in every aspect of our lives. When in reality, the bureaucracy they have created around all aspects of society have just become money pits of ineptitude and inefficiency.
Once again the only hope for saving us, Ron Paul, is correct.
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1907:were-from-the-government-were-here-to-help&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69
I very much understood your point and dissected what you said. Did I change what you typed when I put them in quotes? Let's forget that you proposed handing a government agency to a "not-for-profit" organization who only gave 30% of donated money for 9/11 to the actual victims, and some of the people who got money were multimillionaires. Let's forget that same "not-for-profit" agency had a scandal so bad that it forced the director to resign and since they don't make a profit they only gave her a $1.5 million buyout. I'm willing to forget your dumb ass, misinformed, opinion. I mean it's from you, what else can be expected?
So forgetting all of that, you are of the opinion that emergency management worked so much better before the government got involved with it. I can't and won't forget that you not only didn't take the time to see that the US government has been the only people to handle emergency management, but after I informed you of the fact you still went on your idiotic tangent that the government messed up emergency management. Are you following this? Did your mother drink when she was pregnant with you? I'm going to explain this once more, read slow.
The government didn't eff up emergency management. You have no point of reference as to how it's done other than how they do it. Have they made mistakes, of course. However, you can't say they ruined something that they and they alone have controlled for 200 years. Tell me who did emergency management so well that the government put out of business? Who ran emergency management so well 200 years ago that we're missing out on?
Don't bother with answers, I don't care about what bullshit you are going to spew. Just keep gathering your bullets, water, powdered milk, and MREs for the day the government comes after us. rough ridin' freak.
Ok well, Tap out noted.
-
I don't see why people get so upset about this?
FEMA doesn't rough ridin' work. It's that simple. You wouldn't keep dumping money into a pick up truck that flew off a cliff in order to fix it.
Oh wait, yes, you would since libtards like yourself somehow believe that throwing more money at something and trusting the "good will" of the government will somehow make things better.
Only complete idiots think this way, and the writing is on the wall: The Government Fucks up Everything it Touches. Maybe the government did do it better pre-FEMA...but FEMA is still here, and completely sucks ass at what they do. Like the rest of the government.
Just ask:
The war on drugs
The war on poverty
The USPS
TARP
The war on terror
Vietnam
Social security
Prohibition (see war on drugs)
and soon to be: health care
among others
But I guess if we don't mind wasting trillions of trillions of dollars, than none of this matters.
-
I don't see why people get so upset about this?
FEMA doesn't rough ridin' work. It's that simple. You wouldn't keep dumping money into a pick up truck that flew off a cliff in order to fix it.
Oh wait, yes, you would since libtards like yourself somehow believe that throwing more money at something and trusting the "good will" of the government will somehow make things better.
Only complete idiots think this way, and the writing is on the wall: The Government Fucks up Everything it Touches. Maybe the government did do it better pre-FEMA...but FEMA is still here, and completely sucks ass at what they do. Like the rest of the government.
Just ask:
The war on drugs
The war on poverty
The USPS This is actually a very good service. It is much better than Fed Ex, and on par with UPS.
TARP
The war on terror
Vietnam
Social security
Prohibition (see war on drugs)
and soon to be: health care LOL at the notion that our health care system could possibly be "ruined" at this point.
among others
But I guess if we don't mind wasting trillions of trillions of dollars, than none of this matters.
The idea behind FEMA is to mitigate disasters before they happen. FEMA identifies areas that are at high risk for floods and other disasters and publishes that data. This is why you cannot buy land in a flood plain and not pay for flood insurance if you have a mortgage. They also create models for city leaders to develop plans in case of floods, earthquakes, and hurricanes. They subsidize the cost of cities developing emergency plans to minimize casualties and damage. FEMA works very well with cities that work with FEMA. I guess I'm just not sure what you are saying the government did better pre-FEMA.
-
I don't see why people get so upset about this?
FEMA doesn't rough ridin' work. It's that simple. You wouldn't keep dumping money into a pick up truck that flew off a cliff in order to fix it.
Oh wait, yes, you would since libtards like yourself somehow believe that throwing more money at something and trusting the "good will" of the government will somehow make things better.
Only complete idiots think this way, and the writing is on the wall: The Government Fucks up Everything it Touches. Maybe the government did do it better pre-FEMA...but FEMA is still here, and completely sucks ass at what they do. Like the rest of the government.
Just ask:
The war on drugs
The war on poverty
The USPS This is actually a very good service. It is much better than Fed Ex, and on par with UPS.
TARP
The war on terror
Vietnam
Social security
Prohibition (see war on drugs)
and soon to be: health care LOL at the notion that our health care system could possibly be "ruined" at this point.
among others
But I guess if we don't mind wasting trillions of trillions of dollars, than none of this matters.
The idea behind FEMA is to mitigate disasters before they happen. FEMA identifies areas that are at high risk for floods and other disasters and publishes that data. This is why you cannot buy land in a flood plain and not pay for flood insurance if you have a mortgage. They also create models for city leaders to develop plans in case of floods, earthquakes, and hurricanes. They subsidize the cost of cities developing emergency plans to minimize casualties and damage. FEMA works very well with cities that work with FEMA. I guess I'm just not sure what you are saying the government did better pre-FEMA.
IDK. I didn't bring it up. METH head did. But FEMA sucks so hard that there's no way the gov was any worse at it.
-
Good old Pike. He has no idea what FEMA actually does on a day-to-day basis, but he's sure they suck at it because hur derp government.
-
Good old Pike. He has no idea what FEMA actually does on a day-to-day basis, but he's sure they suck at it because hur derp government.
So we should just sustain as many government programs as possible, even though they lose money?
Jesus Christ :facepalm:
-
Good old Pike. He has no idea what FEMA actually does on a day-to-day basis, but he's sure they suck at it because hur derp government.
So we should just sustain as many government programs as possible, even though they lose money?
Jesus Christ :facepalm:
Pike is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Confirmed.
-
Good old Pike. He has no idea what FEMA actually does on a day-to-day basis, but he's sure they suck at it because hur derp government.
So we should just sustain as many government programs as possible, even though they lose money?
Jesus Christ :facepalm:
Pike is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Confirmed.
:flush:
-
Come on Pike, surely you can link to an article that you don't understand and claim it means the exact opposite of what it actually says again. You don't need to tap out like this.
-
Good old Pike. He has no idea what FEMA actually does on a day-to-day basis, but he's sure they suck at it because hur derp government.
So we should just sustain as many government programs as possible, even though they lose money?
Jesus Christ :facepalm:
I guess I'm just not sure why we should care about an emergency management program not making money. How are they supposed to make money, again?
-
Good old Pike. He has no idea what FEMA actually does on a day-to-day basis, but he's sure they suck at it because hur derp government.
So we should just sustain as many government programs as possible, even though they lose money?
Jesus Christ :facepalm:
I guess I'm just not sure why we should care about an emergency management program not making money. How are they supposed to make money, again?
I'd love to see Pike running a business. After the first week the only department left would be sales. "All the other departments weren't making money, they had to go."
-
Good old Pike. He has no idea what FEMA actually does on a day-to-day basis, but he's sure they suck at it because hur derp government.
So we should just sustain as many government programs as possible, even though they lose money?
Jesus Christ :facepalm:
I guess I'm just not sure why we should care about an emergency management program not making money. How are they supposed to make money, again?
I'd love to see Pike running a business. After the first week the only department left would be sales. "All the other departments weren't making money, they had to go."
Well, I wouldn't certainly wouldn't throw billions of dollars at incompetent retards to piss the money away through a ridiculous bureaucracy, especially if I had no money to begin with.
-
So where's FEMA pissing its money away Pike?
-
So where's FEMA pissing its money away Pike?
Here's a good example from 2006.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/06/us/06fraud.html
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5 — The Federal Emergency Management Agency has recouped less than 1 percent of an estimated $1 billion in fraudulent or unjustified payments it distributed after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, a new report by Congressional investigators says.
At the same time, the agency continued to wrongly send out millions of dollars of new aid this year, including $17 million in rental assistance to families living rent-free in FEMA trailers, the Government Accountability Office report says.
The auditors’ findings, set to be released on Wednesday, demonstrate how the agency has remained open to criticism from advocates for evacuees as being too stingy with people who have real needs, and to criticism from auditors as being too willing to give taxpayer dollars to scam artists and cheats.
Just last week, a federal judge ordered the agency to restore housing assistance and pay back rent to thousands of Hurricane Katrina evacuees who had been deemed ineligible for long-term housing aid.
Yet the new report by the Congressional investigators said that, in addition to the rental aid given to more than 8,600 victims living in trailers rent-free, the agency distributed $20 million to people who registered for both hurricanes, meaning they received double payments for rent and other emergency aid.
The investigators also recently determined that the agency gave at least $3 million to more than 500 foreign students or other foreigners in the United States on work visas even though federal law specifically prohibits such aid.
“FEMA has much work to do before we can be confident that it is providing assistance to those who are eligible and who need it, while denying it to those who do not,” said Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut. Mr. Lieberman is the ranking Democrat on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday on Hurricane Katrina-related fraud and abuse.
The agency’s officials on Tuesday said they had not yet seen the new report and would not comment in detail until they had. But they acknowledged the serious flaws in distribution of financial aid after the hurricanes. A copy of the report was given to The New York Times.
“The stringent controls instituted this past year by FEMA will dramatically improve safeguards and help eliminate processing errors and fraudulent abuse,” Pat Philbin, an agency spokesman, said in a written statement.
But the Government Accountability Office report made it clear that the inappropriate payments continued into this year. For example, 10 residents of an apartment complex in Plano, Tex., collected $46,000 in rental assistance from FEMA through June, even though the City of Plano was paying their rent, with money from the federal agency.
FEMA estimates that of the $7 billion in emergency aid given out to individuals and families after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, about $290 million was unjustified. But based on more than a year of spot-checking applications, Congressional auditors said they believed the federal agency was grossly underestimating the figure, and that a more accurate amount would be at least $1 billion.
That would include money that went to thousands of inmates and people who used falsified Social Security numbers or submitted applications for phantom homes, all cases turned up by the investigators.
FEMA has recouped about $7.5 million of these inappropriate payments, an agency official said Tuesday, and he estimated that an additional $8.1 million was on the way.
Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, chairwoman of the Homeland Security Committee, said the small percentage of money recouped showed how important it was for the agency to improve how it screened applications for disaster aid.
“Once the money is out the door, it is very difficult for it to be recovered,” Ms. Collins said.
At the time Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit, the agency had systems in place to prevent fraud, including a computer program that looked for applications with the same Social Security number. But officials said they turned the system off, claiming that they were worried it might prevent legitimate victims from getting help, the report said.
That is why, for example, the 7,600 individuals had been able to collect $20 million in emergency aid for properties supposedly hit by both storms, the report said.
Ms. Collins said she did not accept the assertion that the agency could not figure out how to distribute emergency assistance quickly while preventing widespread waste and fraud.
“It’s a false choice,” she said.
-
And that's from your "Big government" newspaper, too.
-
I have no problem with simply eliminating the ability for FEMA to give money to people who suffer from disasters as relief. The program as a whole serves a greater, much more important mission.
-
So Pike, got anything more recent. You know like since FEMA got a director that had actual emergency management experience.
I mean $1 billion is a lot, but it also came more than 5 years ago and after one of the worst natural disasters to hit the U.S. that displaced people across a wide geographic area. crap is going to happen in instances like that. How much more money should we spend tracking down what amounts to a few pennies?
I can think of one private industry off the top of my head that loses billions in fraud a year and continues to allow it despite the technology being available to stop it. I wonder why it's still going on?
Also, you should be able to find tons of day-to-day abuses of the system since they're just pissing money away. I mean all those grants for fire trucks, ambulances, first responder training etc. The standardizing of radio equipment for first responders and all the other crap FEMA does on a daily basis that you don't know about because you're too rough ridin' lazy to do any actual research before just spouting off "Government Bad".
-
Some communities in Alabama rejected FEMA assistance after the tornado rampage this past spring. They're not too keen on allowing lousy bureaucrats telling them how to live their lives.
And others were denied FEMA aid, even when their homes were ripped off their foundations. I suppose such a thing is expected when the American people are conditioned to have the government come and save them. Thank god for our brave, patriotic, noble leaders looking out for our best interests. Constantly providing new hope and change for the betterment of society.
It's too much of a cluster eff.
EDIT: Why can't we use the national guard for disaster relief? Or instead of immoral wars against people that aren't threats to us, we could use our military industrial complex?
-
Some communities in Alabama rejected FEMA assistance after the tornado rampage this past spring. They're not too keen on allowing lousy bureaucrats telling them how to live their lives.
And others were denied FEMA aid, even when their homes were ripped off their foundations. I suppose such a thing is expected when the American people are conditioned to have the government come and save them. Thank god for our brave, patriotic, noble leaders looking out for our best interests. Constantly providing new hope and change for the betterment of society.
It's too much of a cluster eff.
EDIT: Why can't we use the national guard for disaster relief? Or instead of immoral wars against people that aren't threats to us, we could use our military industrial complex?
I don't think FEMA should be giving aid to anybody. That's not really the point of FEMA.
-
Some communities in Alabama rejected FEMA assistance after the tornado rampage this past spring. They're not too keen on allowing lousy bureaucrats telling them how to live their lives.
And others were denied FEMA aid, even when their homes were ripped off their foundations. I suppose such a thing is expected when the American people are conditioned to have the government come and save them. Thank god for our brave, patriotic, noble leaders looking out for our best interests. Constantly providing new hope and change for the betterment of society.
It's too much of a cluster eff.
Going to need a link on the firs claim, unless you're talking about the dumbass mayor that didn't want FEMA trailers in his beautiful city.
And I realize I'm going to take a lot of time pointing this out and you won't comprehend it, but here goes: FEMA has taken up the practice that several insurance companies use -- deny the initial claim/request. This started as a direct result of the previous article you posted. This was the government's response to people like you bitching about the fraud that occurred during Katrina.
Private companies just assume there's going to be a certain amount of theft/fraud and live with it. The credit card industry has the tools and technology to eliminate 99 percent of credit card fraud, which costs the industry billions each year, yet very little of it has been implemented. Now I wonder why that is? Maybe because they've discovered its more cost efficient to keep their product simple to use and just eat the fraud costs.
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Free advice from SugarDick
Don't use words you don't know how to use when tearing someone down. It makes you look like a foolish.
To recap you scolded me for using a word, you clearly don't know the meaning of, in the course of your attempted correction you mistook advice with advise. That's middle school English, sugar dick. My God you're dumb, an embarrassment to all other living beings. You keep looking like a rough ridin' moron, I'll keep hoping that you cease to breathe.
Take the word "of" out of your pathetic slam and you'd be using the word correctly, dumbass. Your use of "of" in that context is superfluous, idiot. You basically said, " . . . [many/thousands/countless] of rough ridin' stupid posts.", when you meant to say, ". . . [many/thousands/countless] rough ridin' stupid posts." Ergo, you sound like a dipshit. Take my free advice. Google can't save you on this one.
Some more free advice, insults are more effective when set up with factual misgivings of the insultee. Basically, you have message board turrets. :comeatme:
-
Take the word "of" out of your pathetic slam and you'd be using the word correctly, dumbass. Your use of "of" in that context is superfluous, idiot. You basically said, " . . . [many/thousands/countless] of rough ridin' stupid posts.", when you meant to say, ". . . [many/thousands/countless] rough ridin' stupid posts." Ergo, you sound like a dipshit. Take my free advice. Google can't save you on this one.
Some more free advice, insults are more effective when set up with factual misgivings of the insultee. Basically, you have message board turrets. :comeatme:
OMFG. You are unbelievably terrible at this. Congrats on getting advice right this time, though! Glad I could teach you the difference, but you should probably bow out now, considering the whole "fool me twice" thing.
-
Take the word "of" out of your pathetic slam and you'd be using the word correctly, dumbass. Your use of "of" in that context is superfluous, idiot. You basically said, " . . . [many/thousands/countless] of rough ridin' stupid posts.", when you meant to say, ". . . [many/thousands/countless] rough ridin' stupid posts." Ergo, you sound like a dipshit. Take my free advice. Google can't save you on this one.
Some more free advice, insults are more effective when set up with factual misgivings of the insultee. Basically, you have message board turrets. :comeatme:
OMFG. You are unbelievably terrible at this. Congrats on getting advice right this time, though! Glad I could teach you the difference, but you should probably bow out now, considering the whole "fool me twice" thing.
shut up douche.
spell checking posts is the ultimate last grasp at "getting someone" and you're not even a party here. backoff, twit
-
So I'll just take that as an admission that you realize how you got completely schooled...twice. :emawkid:
-
So I'll just take that as an admission that you realize how you got completely schooled...twice. :emawkid:
Take it as you will.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoWblwKdeHg
-
If you can't see the self-defeating irony of attacking someone's use of the language while simultaneously misusing it yourself twice (three times, actually), and then telling me not to do the exact same thing to you because it's "the ultimate last grasp," then I'm not sure we can do much to help you.
But I have a feeling you do see the irony, you're just desperate to have a little more poop to fling back, so that's what you went with. I'm going to throw you a bone real quick, but only because you're a K-State fan, and I prefer that K-State fans don't represent us like retards. Here you go:
Turret:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbrowningmgs.com%2FAirGunnery%2FTurrets%2FBall%2FSperryBallTurret.jpg&hash=9ba858cd9f45a492dbcc5614425fddd93255de5c)
Tourette's:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia1.break.com%2Fdnet%2Fmedia%2F2007%2F8%2F23aug22-i-dont-have-tourettes.jpg&hash=d34532fb50cd1d4ed176573dbdb61a47733680ab)
-
SkinnyBenny,
Are you trying to "own" Sugar Dick?
TIA,
Sugar Dick
-
Not just trying, bro. :cool:
-
Not just trying, bro. :cool:
Well then, you should probably learn more about the word irony. Unless of course, your definition is derived from Alanis Morissette "language".
pwn3d
-
Dying to hear you explain to me how what you did somehow doesn't qualify as irony.
:bwpopcorn:
Pointer, in case you were thinking of heading down this road: irony and hypocrisy are not mutually exclusive.
-
but why can't we just have the Red Cross
I try to bite my tongue when I read your myriad of rough ridin' stupid posts, but this is just too much. You can't be this rough ridin' stupid can you? The Red Cross, in all of its bureaucratic glory, doesn't even serve the same purpose as FEMA. This is like suggesting Planned Parenthood take over the CDC. Hey while we're at it Doctors without Borders can take over for the FDA. Great idea Pike!
You know there was a time when we didn't have FEMA and we were just fine?
The federal government has been involved with emergency management since 1803. My god this was one of your worst posts ever and that says A LOT.
Free advice from SugarDick
Don't use words you don't know how to use when tearing someone down. It makes you look like a foolish.
To recap you scolded me for using a word, you clearly don't know the meaning of, in the course of your attempted correction you mistook advice with advise. That's middle school English, sugar dick. My God you're dumb, an embarrassment to all other living beings. You keep looking like a rough ridin' moron, I'll keep hoping that you cease to breathe.
Take the word "of" out of your pathetic slam and you'd be using the word correctly, dumbass. Your use of "of" in that context is superfluous, idiot. You basically said, " . . . [many/thousands/countless] of rough ridin' stupid posts.", when you meant to say, ". . . [many/thousands/countless] rough ridin' stupid posts." Ergo, you sound like a dipshit. Take my free advice. Google can't save you on this one.
Some more free advice, insults are more effective when set up with factual misgivings of the insultee. Basically, you have message board turrets. :comeatme:
Link? I have the Merriam-Webster on my side, who you got?
The noun myriad has appeared in the works of such writers as Milton (plural myriads) and Thoreau (a myriad of), and it continues to occur frequently in reputable English. There is no reason to avoid it.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myriad (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myriad)
Tough break on the second really obvious spelling error when trying to correct someone else. Happy you got advice right the second time though, props. Since you are incapable of letting things go when you're painfully wrong, I look forward to your reply. It is entertaining to see you constantly clownsuit yourself.
-
MIR
google: "noun" then google: "adjective"
rough ridin' half-wit
-
MIR
google: "noun" then google: "adjective"
rough ridin' half-wit
You can't be rough ridin' serious? I used it as a noun. Since you refuse to click the link that two different posters have linked for you, I'll save you the trouble.
1 myr·i·ad noun \?mir-?-?d\
Definition of MYRIAD
: ten thousand
: a great number <a myriad of ideas>
See myriad defined for English-language learners » See myriad defined for kids »
Usage Discussion of MYRIAD
Recent criticism of the use of myriad as a noun, both in the plural form myriadsand in the phrase a myriad of, seems to reflect a mistaken belief thattheword wasoriginally and isstillproperly only an adjective.As the entries here show, however, the noun is in fact the older form, dating to the 16th century. The noun myriad has appeared in the works of such writers as Milton (plural myriads) and Thoreau (a myriad of), and it continues to occur frequently in reputable English. There is no reason to avoid it.
Examples of MYRIAD
There are a myriad of possibilities.
<the car can be outfitted with a myriad of options>
Mr. McCullough hails Adams for being uncannily prescient … foreseeing a myriad of developments, from the difficultyof defeating theBritish… to thedivisive consequences of slavery.
Your move
-
MIR
If you want to pretend you used Myriad as a noun, that's fine. However, I have a hard time believing you sat next to Pike and watched him post in a "rough ridin' stupid" manner.
your pal,
Sugar Dick
edited for SB
-
MIR
If you want to pretend you used Myriad as a noun, that's fine. However, I have a heard believing you sat next to Pike and watched him post in a "rough ridin' stupid" manner.
your pal,
Sugar Dick
:confused:
-
still don't proof read or spell check posts SB
-
still don't proof read or spell check posts SB
Yeah, it's tough to take 5 seconds when the drivethru is full.