Ted Cruz Opposing Disaster Relief; Fellow Republicans Angry

Page 1 of 1 [ 7 posts ] 

AnonymousAnonymous
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 76,428
Location: Portland, Oregon

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

30 Aug 2017, 4:00 pm

If anybody votes against aid for Harvey, I would think they were crazy---and shouldn't be in office.

Ted Cruz was crazy for voting against relief for victims of Hurricane Sandy in 2012-2013.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

30 Aug 2017, 4:22 pm

So now we can all say "well, at least he is a morally consistant heartless bastard".

Maybe not though. Houston leans blue. He probably only represents "red" Texas.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

30 Aug 2017, 4:35 pm

I just had a similar thought: Massachusetts is lucky Harvey didn't hit them.

Also, Ted Cruz is an a**hole. People seem surprised.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

30 Aug 2017, 4:40 pm

The question should be: At what point do the federal, state and local governments say to those who intentionally build communities in riskier areas (because of earthquakes, floods, tornadoes and hurricanes), we are sorry, but you chose to live in a high-risk zone, and we have bailed out your communities for many, many years?


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

30 Aug 2017, 4:43 pm

AspieUtah wrote:
The question should be: At what point do the federal, state and local governments say to those who intentionally build communities in riskier areas (because of earthquakes, floods, tornadoes and hurricanes), we are sorry, but you chose to live in a high-risk zone, and we have bailed out your communities for many, many years?

It would sound ironic coming from a climate change denier and supporter of the fossil fuel industry?


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

30 Aug 2017, 4:54 pm

AspieUtah wrote:
The question should be: At what point do the federal, state and local governments say to those who intentionally build communities in riskier areas (because of earthquakes, floods, tornadoes and hurricanes), we are sorry, but you chose to live in a high-risk zone, and we have bailed out your communities for many, many years?

I agree there are some places where humans build and there's absolutely no benefit to building there aside from the scenery, and those places should be put on notice. That said, Houston isn't that place, Houston is a vitally important port city, as is New Orleans, and we'd be much weaker as a nation without the economy they provide-- they are in effect a necessity, danger zone or not.