.

.

Saturday, December 29, 2012

SO, I GUESS WE’RE NOT BROKE ENOUGH, NOR HAVE WE WASTED QUITE ENOUGH MONEY…



So, the guy that has been described as being our "Lord and Savior," ah, that would be Barack Hussein Obama, is requesting $60.4 Billion in disaster relief for the victims of Hurricane Sandy. OK, we’re broke, but I suppose, these people do need some kind of help. And also, if you’re opposed to disaster relief funding, then that means you’re nothing but a meany-pot who actually wants disaster victims to continue to suffer as much as possible. And also, spend-crazy Democrats thoroughly enjoy taking every opportunity they can to point out that conservative representatives in Congress would only vote against such legislation because they’re cold and heartless individuals. Because this is generally what liberals and big government Republicans think of those who are not in favor of the federal government giving handouts to storm victims.

But look, we know that we’re not cold and heartless. And it’s been shown time and time again that conservatives are actually much more generous with their own money than are tightwad liberals. Liberals prefer spending other people’s money, and as much of it as they can. They do so by having more and more of that ‘other people’s’ money ‘taken’ through higher and higher taxes to fund more and more government programs that succeed in only making people poorer and much more dependent on government. Conservatives give more of the their own money, money that they themselves have worked very hard for, away to charitable organizations that actually do help people in need. Which only goes to prove the fact that the people are much better custodians of ‘their’ money than is the government.

It’s unconstitutional for the government to extract money through taxes and then give that money to other people or businesses no matter how good the government’s intentions are. But as we have continued to be a witness to, when has that little fact ever stopped corrupt politicians from doing just that. And it’s one of the main reasons I absolutely cringe every time I hear some Democrat talking about the need for putting together some form of ‘relief’ package for some group of people somewhere because of some ‘catastrophe’ or another. And it never fails that these "relief" bills always include massive amounts of money that is to be spent on none-relief-related issues because those corrupt politicians use them as excuses to stuff a bunch of money for pork projects that buy off their constituents. The NY Post reported:

"The pork-barrel feast includes more than $8 million to buy cars and equipment for the Homeland Security and Justice departments. It also includes a whopping $150 Million for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to dole out to fisheries in Alaska and $2 Million for the Smithsonian Institution to repair museum roofs in DC. An eye-popping $13 Billion would go to "mitigation" projects to prepare for future storms. Other big-ticket items in the bill include $207 Million for the VA Manhattan Medical Center; $41 Million to fix up eight military bases along the storm’s path, including Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; $4 million for repairs at Kennedy Space Center in Florida; $3.3 Million for the Plum Island Animal Disease Center and $1.1 Million to repair national cemeteries."

Some of these things don’t have anything to do with helping Sandy victims, yet somehow they all managed to be part of a Sandy relief package. I mean, come one, how is giving $150 Million to fisheries in Alaska supposed to help someone in New York who lost his home? Or, how is spending money to fix up ‘Club’ Gitmo going to help a business in New York whose building got destroyed by the hurricane? Or spending millions to help repair damages at the space center in Florida? This is why conservatives are opposed to this kind of legislation. Would it end up helping some people and businesses in New York? Perhaps, but at what expense to the taxpayer? But now, it’s little more than a mini-bailout for politicians’ buddies. And if you’re opposed to it, that means you want children to suffer and to be homeless. You meany-pot you!

No comments:

Post a Comment