|
It's so hard to argue after a while, isn't it? The nonsense reasoning is impossible to follow.
He thinks people should not depend on their government? Well, does that mean that we pay taxes without being represented, if the American people WANT, strongly WANT to take care of our people? To say, if I, or YOU, want our government to use our resources to ensure no one starves, freezes, drowns or suffers in natural disasters, he believes this ideal is unwarranted, unreasonable, too costly...and we shouldn't want it in the first place?
But...what matters more?? What matters more than thousands of people being so badly damaged?? I can't think of anything worse.
It's not just the victims that want it. It's US that want it, and it's not a friggin hand out, we WANT those people to be okay and we think they DESERVE to be okay. Not just them. All of us.
Or does he not believe in nursing homes? The elderly that live in them?? Further, the folks that couldn't get out, it was worth a death penalty for being poor? Not having a car?
THEY shouldn't depend on the government to help them?? Well what about ME, what about us, what about what WE want??? What about what I want, and you want? WE are the people and WE make the government, and WE WANT to help them...so can we the American people not depend on our government in ANY way either??
Not to help us. Not to represent our wishes. Not to use our resources wisely. Not to provide to the people what WE believe should be provided?? Even when they're DYING???!!!!!!!!!!
Have to ask him which government is his. MY government should do what I want it to do. Does his operate under the same constraints, or is that "of the people, by the people, for the people" a problem now?
Funny; he believes people should not depend on their government, which as a libertarian I can understand, but not as he applies it. We believe people can do better for themselves than a government will typically "provide" for them, and so, never ever want to see people held down to lower levels by that system. A system of stabilty...a system where everyone "stays in their place" is what we fear, what we hate. But damn, in a disaster, a community pulls together, and our government absolutely MUST be a proactive part of that. Anything else does not serve us.
Funny too, because if the people should not depend on the government, then it should follow that the government better get used to not "depending" on the people, if it sees little worth in caring for them. Disenfranchise enough of them, and there won't BE a tax base to depend ON, won't be any funds if the people can't work or even live. You can't HAVE your nice vacation in wild NO if you don't even recognize the poor folks that work to provide that "fun".
Yeah, we like the fun times in NO, we LOVE New Orleans, vacationers depended on the poor and those dirt cheap lifestyle of the people there, but we don't care about the people when they're dying? Insane and selfish. Cannibalistic.
Depend on the government? Hardly; the government failed to meet it's most basic contractual obligations to our people, and we damn sure should have been able to depend on that.
If, for some crazy reason, he wants to believe that our federal government had no responsibility in this disaster to save our people, then I submit they should have never TAKEN the taxes and resources and should have never committed the FRAUD in saying they WOULD take care of the people.
Perhaps had the people realized how little effort and money would be expended on their behalf, they would never have depended on it in the first place. For those who, as he implies, had any kind of a CHOICE in the matter.
Perhaps if our government hadn't lied, people wouldn't have died, and that's just all there is to it. At the very least, they would have been more aware of the dangers they faced. They thought all they had to do was make it thought the hurricane, and I, for one, thought that too.
Turns out the hurricane was the least of their worries, but I fail to see how they could have anticipated that, if the WH itself sees fit to say they "didn't see it coming?" That's what I want to scream at people sometimes; they survived the hurricane damnit! We all thought that was enough, to get through that hurricane. No one thought they'd leave people in flood, if the levees broke. NO ONE thought that would happen. How could we have? In our nation, transport was unavaliable? Hardly. They were left, and not a one of us thought that would happen.
If they'd been the least bit honest about what the survivors could expect, maybe they could have faced the disaster better, more prepared. At the least, at the VERY least, if they'd been honest, those poor people would not have been left hopeless as well as helpless. Demoralized in a rich nation that let them die, needlessly. At least they'd have know that true danger they faced, which was that they were on their own. They had no idea, and I can hardly see how THEY can be blamed for it. How could they have known?? No one knew how little they would be helped by this farce of a government. We were all shocked, and still are.
Hope any of that helped at all.
|