Not long ago Rafael (AKA Ted) Cruz voted ,not just no, but Hell No on Federal Hurricane relief for the Northeast after it was battered by a hurricane. Now, the Pol ,also known as Ted, is asking for Federal relief for Texans who have been affected by recent weather events.
Just weeks after ordering the Texas national Guard to monitor United States (Federal) troops during a training exercise, apparently to give Texans time to respond in case the Feds were actually planning an "invasion", Texas Governor Greg Abbot now wants the Obama administration to give Texas money to help with flood clean up.
Real Smmmooooth.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Not long ago Rafael (AKA Ted) Cruz voted ,not just no, but Hell No on Federal Hurricane relief for the Northeast after it was battered by a hurricane. Now, the Pol ,also known as Ted, is asking for Federal relief for Texans who have been affected by recent weather events.
Just weeks after ordering the Texas national Guard to monitor United States (Federal) troops during a training exercise, apparently to give Texans time to respond in case the Feds were actually planning an "invasion", Texas Governor Greg Abbot now wants the Obama administration to give Texas money to help with flood clean up.
Just like President Barack H.Obama in 2008 ..he did not mislead voters on marriage for same-sex couples,but his views a few years later had evolved and now he supports same sex marriage,,he was just against it ,,before he was for it .
Same with Ted Cruz..he did not support a federal aid package for Superstorm Sandy three years ago,, but his views have evolved and he now supports federal disaster relief for the widespread flooding in Texas..
...and Gov.Abbott did not have the Texas National Guard monitor Operation Jade Helm..Abbott directed the Texas State Guard---which is funded entirely separatefrom National Guard and Federal government---to monitor the U.S. military training ..So for the Governor of Texas to request Federal funds for flood clean-up ..it is not contradictory..
0
Just like President Barack H.Obama in 2008 ..he did not mislead voters on marriage for same-sex couples,but his views a few years later had evolved and now he supports same sex marriage,,he was just against it ,,before he was for it .
Same with Ted Cruz..he did not support a federal aid package for Superstorm Sandy three years ago,, but his views have evolved and he now supports federal disaster relief for the widespread flooding in Texas..
...and Gov.Abbott did not have the Texas National Guard monitor Operation Jade Helm..Abbott directed the Texas State Guard---which is funded entirely separatefrom National Guard and Federal government---to monitor the U.S. military training ..So for the Governor of Texas to request Federal funds for flood clean-up ..it is not contradictory..
I stand corrected. Abbott had the "state" guard monitor the intentions of the Federal army............. and then asked the Federals for some cash to pay for the flood damage.
0
I stand corrected. Abbott had the "state" guard monitor the intentions of the Federal army............. and then asked the Federals for some cash to pay for the flood damage.
Yeah I wonder if ole Ron Paul is telling the people of Texas to go their local church and non-profit charities in the area for support and to not look to the state and feds for relief now that the need is in HIS neck of the woods.
0
Yeah I wonder if ole Ron Paul is telling the people of Texas to go their local church and non-profit charities in the area for support and to not look to the state and feds for relief now that the need is in HIS neck of the woods.
I don't think many, if any, politician would be against disaster relief. Resistance occurs when politicians tie pork in with the bill that has nothing to do with the intended bill.
0
I don't think many, if any, politician would be against disaster relief. Resistance occurs when politicians tie pork in with the bill that has nothing to do with the intended bill.
I don't think many, if any, politician would be against disaster relief. Resistance occurs when politicians tie pork in with the bill that has nothing to do with the intended bill.
Canovsp, you make an excellent point......... Obama's proposed $60.4 billion federal aid for victims of Hurricane Sandy was loaded with pork..
$150 million is slated to benefit Alaskan fisheries, $8 million to homeland security and the justice departments for new cars, office equipment, furniture and 'mobile X-Ray machines,' and $41 million for eight military bases .
$207 million for the VA Manhattan Medical Center, $3.3 million for the Plum Island Animal Disease Center in New York, and $1.1 million for national cemeteries.
So,, of that 60 billion in the bill ..47.4 billion of aid assigned to go directly to Sandy victims and their rebuilding efforts...the rest was stuffing the pork barrel..
Instead of all the funds going to helping the community and the people the bill was full of lard to replace federal assets or federal items...
0
Quote Originally Posted by canovsp:
I don't think many, if any, politician would be against disaster relief. Resistance occurs when politicians tie pork in with the bill that has nothing to do with the intended bill.
Canovsp, you make an excellent point......... Obama's proposed $60.4 billion federal aid for victims of Hurricane Sandy was loaded with pork..
$150 million is slated to benefit Alaskan fisheries, $8 million to homeland security and the justice departments for new cars, office equipment, furniture and 'mobile X-Ray machines,' and $41 million for eight military bases .
$207 million for the VA Manhattan Medical Center, $3.3 million for the Plum Island Animal Disease Center in New York, and $1.1 million for national cemeteries.
So,, of that 60 billion in the bill ..47.4 billion of aid assigned to go directly to Sandy victims and their rebuilding efforts...the rest was stuffing the pork barrel..
Instead of all the funds going to helping the community and the people the bill was full of lard to replace federal assets or federal items...
I don't think many, if any, politician would be against disaster relief. Resistance occurs when politicians tie pork in with the bill that has nothing to do with the intended bill.
Was going to say the same thing. I am not a fan of Cruz but as I recall there was a lot of crap attached to the Hurricane relief which is why some voted no.
I don't understand why unrelated issues are tied to the actual original content of a bill. I take that back I actually I know why but don't understand why it is acceptable.
0
Quote Originally Posted by canovsp:
I don't think many, if any, politician would be against disaster relief. Resistance occurs when politicians tie pork in with the bill that has nothing to do with the intended bill.
Was going to say the same thing. I am not a fan of Cruz but as I recall there was a lot of crap attached to the Hurricane relief which is why some voted no.
I don't understand why unrelated issues are tied to the actual original content of a bill. I take that back I actually I know why but don't understand why it is acceptable.
Was going to say the same thing. I am not a fan of Cruz but as I recall there was a lot of crap attached to the Hurricane relief which is why some voted no.
I don't understand why unrelated issues are tied to the actual original content of a bill. I take that back I actually I know why but don't understand why it is acceptable.
i don't know for sure, but isn't unrelated garbage always attached to these bills? isn't that how these guys generally do it?
0
Quote Originally Posted by Nut_Flopper:
Was going to say the same thing. I am not a fan of Cruz but as I recall there was a lot of crap attached to the Hurricane relief which is why some voted no.
I don't understand why unrelated issues are tied to the actual original content of a bill. I take that back I actually I know why but don't understand why it is acceptable.
i don't know for sure, but isn't unrelated garbage always attached to these bills? isn't that how these guys generally do it?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
