Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Ron Paul: Fox News’ Favorite Anti Hurricane Irene Relief Tool
After days of pushing their anti-federal disaster relief message ahead of and during Hurricane Irene, it is no surprise that Fox News gave nearly 14 minutes of airtime to Ron Paul today.
Here is the video from Fox News:
When asked about abolishing FEMA, the 2012 GOP presidential candidate said,
Have you ever read the reports that came out of New Orleans and all those wonderful things they did? Giving checks to people who didn’t even live there? Sending in hundreds of millions of dollars worth of trailers that they had to junk because they didn’t meet FEMA’s standards? No. It’s a system of bureaucratic central economic planning which is a policy which is deeply flawed. So no, you don’t get rid of something like that in one day. As a matter of fact, I’ve had this position for a long time and people keep reelecting me, and I have a coastal district. But, I’ve also suggested that there are different ways to finance this too, because actually FEMA’s in big trouble financially.
Their flood program is about $20 billion in debt, so it’s deeply flawed, but even back then when I refused to vote for the bailout money, because we didn’t have any money. I mean, this idea that government can just bail out everybody and vote for money — but I propose that we save a billion dollars from the overseas war-mongering, bring half that home and put it against the deficit, and yes, tide people over until we come to our senses and realize that FEMA’s been around since 1978. It has one of the worst reputations for a bureaucracy ever.
I win elections because I fight for the constituents to overcome the bureaucracy You can’t imagine how many calls we get because FEMA’s getting in the way and they can’t get their checks, they can’t get their bailouts. Then these checks go to you know contractors, and the people don’t end up with the money, the contractors end up with the money, sometimes in no bid contracts. Anybody who wants to defend this department and this agency, they have a tough argument to argue for.
As Rep. Paul said, he has held these positions for years. There is no surprise in the news that Ron Paul thinks disaster relief is a bailout, and wants to get rid of FEMA. The question is, why would Fox News, a network that seems to spend most of their time trying to figure out new ways to marginalize and ignore Ron Paul decide that today is the perfect day to give him a segment on Fox News Sunday?
The answer can found in FNC’s recent pushing of the idea that Hurricane Irene aid is equivalent to an economic stimulus. Fox News has been defending Eric Cantor’s plan to hold hurricane relief hostage in exchange for spending cuts:
Of course, Fox News isn’t the only one. On Friday, former Fox employee Glenn Beck blew a gasket over the idea that the federal government is going to provide assistance to the victims of Hurricane Irene. It is interesting that the example of FEMA failure that critics like Paul always refer to was the Bush era FEMA.
George W. Bush’s philosophy on disaster relief was one that Ron Paul agrees with. Bush took FEMA’s cabinet status away, and turned them into a sub agency in the Department of Homeland Security. After 9/11, FEMA role was changed from disaster relief to responding to terrorist attacks. From the time they took office, the Bushies set out to deconstruct FEMA. They did exactly what Ron Paul is currently advocating.
The Bush administration took the federal government out of the disaster relief business, and placed state and local officials in the lead. Bush dismantled the “FEMA bureaucracy” that Ron Paul was talking about on Fox News. No longer was their close disaster response coordination between the federal, state, and local governments, and when Katrina struck the consequences of this ideological decision proved fatal.
It was hypocritical for Ron Paul to call FEMA a failure based on Katrina, when the agency had been gutted by the same ideology that he is now advocating. FEMA was widely praised for their responses to disasters under George HW Bush and Bill Clinton, but that praise morphed into criticism when George W. Bush took the federal government out of disaster relief. Obama has restored FEMA’s disaster relief mission, and praise for the agency has returned.
Fox News had no time for Ron Paul until they needed a far right messenger to champion the wildly unpopular idea that the federal government has no role in disaster relief. What Fox did today was use Ron Paul to lay the groundwork for their opposition to aid for the victims of Irene unless it is accompanied by spending cuts.
Fox News got exactly what they wanted out of Ron Paul this morning. Now they can go back to ignoring him, and his candidacy.
Related Posts :
The disappointment that Hurricane Irene wasn’t disaster of Katrinaesque proportions which they can blame ...
On his radio show today, Glenn Beck expressed outrage at the idea that the government helps any disaster ...
Glenn Beck has been popping up on FNC outside of his own program, including last night’s O’Reilly Factor to ...
Glenn Beck has been popping up on FNC outside of his own program, including last night’s O’Reilly Factor to ...
As the East Coast braces for a massive storm, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are trying to cover up the fact ...
12 Responses to Ron Paul: Fox News’ Favorite Anti Hurricane Irene Relief Tool
Public Service Advertisements
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Aug. 28th, 2011 at 5:31 pm
Yeah, he’ll overcome bureaucracy at the expense of everyone but himself. This is what libertarianism does for America.
Anne
Aug. 28th, 2011 at 6:25 pm
He is no better than the other GOP candidates. Even though he gets a couple of things right once in a while, like being against the endless wars that drain the national treasury, he is still another nut job, and his anti-FEMA stance only confirms it.
Shiva (Moderator)
Aug. 28th, 2011 at 6:44 pm
He has a candidacy?
You are right of course, Fox will use him and then dump him like the girlfriend that wont wear short dresses.
At least he will not be a representative after 2012
Spudnuts
Aug. 28th, 2011 at 7:16 pm
Say it ain’t so..
As a libertarian, Paul says he opposes federal disaster relief, but one of Paul’s staffers told me that his office has shepherded hundreds of FEMA claims, ensured the reconstruction of the county’s seawall, and won federal funding for an extensive beach nourishment project. Indeed, between 1999 and 2009 (the most recent year available), federal spending in Galveston County quadrupled to more than $4 billion. In 2009, the county received $14,707 per resident, topping average per capita federal spending in 46 of the 50 states. Paul earmarked some $60 million for projects in and around the city that year.
motherjones.com/politics/...
Larke98
Aug. 29th, 2011 at 12:09 am
I’d love to know who pissed in hs Cheerios when he was a child and soured him for life, turned him into the self-serving, hypocritical little twit he is today.
Jeff
Aug. 29th, 2011 at 3:21 am
All the people who prop up organizations like FEMA and other social welfare programs are the same folks who wouldn’t lift a finger to help the unfortunate with their own time and money.
As I Ron Paul supporter I am well aware of the social contract and the inevitability of taxes to fund security and infrastructure. My problem with it is all our tax dollars get funneled into the irresponsible hands of trust fund babies at our federal level of government.
Critics of Ron Paul consistently fail to acknowledge that he is a champion of the Constitution and the 10th Amendment. There is nothing that the federal government can do that cannot be done by the states. There is nothing that the federal government can legally do other than raise and fund an Army/Navy. State and local legislators have more invested in the regions they represent, and thus are more apt to make responsible decisions that are in line with their constituents. If the DMV can be run at the state level, if cities can manage parks and transportation systems then why cant they handle the rest? Social welfare and relief programs would be much more effective if they were overseen by local and state governments; and the money wouldn’t have so many hands skimming off the top as the money made its way back to the individual who earned it.
I’m not a big fan of social welfare programs I would prefer to lend my assistance and donate money as I please, the private sector has always been more effective in battling poverty and substance abuse, and providing immediate aid to disaster victims. I know we can never totally get rid of these programs, but people should have the right to opt out of paying into them and forfeit the benefit of drawing from them. It’s that conscious decision to take responsibility for ones life and expect nothing from anyone else which is at the heart of the libertarian ideology. I have a strong family so maybe I have idealistic views of a private safety net, but they they are my views.
Ron Paul isn’t perfect, shoot I’ve thought about drawing unemployment just so I can recoup what was stolen from me even though supporting that system compromises my values. News flash, its tough being a human, and its tough making the right decisions all the time, but the message is perfect. It’s the same thing that attracts people to Jesus. Christianity has compromised itself throughout its history yet the underlying message (do unto others…) is something all rational people can agree on. Ron Paul is the only candidate who is willing to be unapologetic in his telling the truth. IF Ron Paul earmarked FEMA funding for his constituency, well, I can live with that. I’m a soldier who wants the wars to end, but as it is I have a job to do, I made a conscious decision to sign that contract, and I have to live up to it.
One last note, you wont find many libertarians who hurl viscous insults at people they disagree with. Something to think about…
Jeff
Shiva (Moderator)
Aug. 29th, 2011 at 7:46 am
there is one thing that the states are supremely better at than the federal government, and that is being corrupted. Wisconsin comes to mind. There are many things that the federal government does that I would never want to see at the hands of states simply because the state can be purchased. As far as the private sector being more effective in battling poverty and substance abuse I think you been smoking something. If you depend on volunteerism for donations for people who are unemployed and giving aid to disaster victims you’re not going to get much aid for anyone. There is nothing more hilarious than people saying they would give assistance and donate money. If that was the case we wouldn’t have to have disaster relief and poverty programs right now.
DewyB
Aug. 29th, 2011 at 11:14 am
Jeff, Libertarians were the original Tea Partiers… yes they use harsh language, are self centered more than self reliant… but have some good points in theory.
It would be a wonderful life if we could count on corps and governments to do the “right thing” and then we could live the Libertarian Dream together. But that’s all it is, a dream, a smokey illusion of what “should be”.
The Constitution was a fine document covering the world as our Founding Fathers knew it. This is a very different time with many more possibilities for the Federal Gov to work in benefit for its constituents in ways that were not possible during T. Jefferson’s time, and also for the powers of “Greed and God” to do more harm. So the Federal Government is well within its legal power to govern interstate commerce and provide for the common welfare of its Citizens, even necessary to prevent powerful special interests from doing damage they could benefit from.
Ron Paul has some fine ideas, that in a perfect world would be an easy choice. In the current world dissolving the Federal Reserve would create a world wide economic catastrophe, dissolving the EPA would unleash the Corporate Hounds of Hell on the populace, and dissolving FEMA would not serve the tax payers or state and local governments.
Yet he feels perfectly comfortable suggesting those things to garner support from the less informed to gain more power. I have voted for him in the past… voted for Perot too… and he would have made a much better President than Rep. Paul.
Anne
Aug. 29th, 2011 at 6:00 am
@Jeff:
Saying that people like Ron Paul, Rick Perry, and Michelle Bachmann expose their hypocrisy by denigrating government while they benefit from its largess is not insulting them. It’s a correct assessment of their characters and a reminder of why they don’t need to be part of the very government they claim to despise. I love the way that “libertarians” like to call for small government, but appeal to it when faced with major catastrophes. The fact is that there are problems and issues that states are simply not equipped to deal with, and that’s where federal government comes in. Everyday, something occurs that disproves the validity of the libertarian argument. FEMA did poorly back in 2005 when dealing with Katrina because Brown was ill-equipped to run it. He seems like a decent guy who just got in over his head, and he was hung out to dry by the administration he served. Paul and others deserve the scorn that’s being heaped on them, because they are dangerously ignorant along with being certain they are right. He makes sense once in a while, but the fact remains that he is just as much of an ideologue as the other GOP nominees.
Mary Workman
Aug. 30th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
@Anne I love the way busch said good job brownie. Busch is a dumb ass & always will be. The only reason he got elected was because he was a B movie actor & people were stupid for voting for him not once but twice!!!!!!!!!!!! He left our country in a mess we may never get out of & it saddens me something terrible. Now we have another bunch of dumb asses of repugs running & that scares me to death. I pray every night that the President gets back in & not one of them.
Jeff
Aug. 29th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
I just don’t see how its the feds responsibility to answer to nature. State Governments suck at handling things nowadays because they have become too dependent on federal funding, if they money that the government dishes out went to the states in the first place we wouldn’t see these problems. State governments are a joke because they have been stripped of their powers. Whats the point in a state organizing its own efforts when the feds have the money they need to do it? Maybe we should put a Federal Reserve printing press in every state capitol so they can print the money they need.
Go out on the street and ask the average American who their state Governor is. Better yet! ask them who their state LEGISLATORS are! Shoot, I don’t even know that one ,presently. States are not incapable because of some inherent fallacy, it is by precedent and the status quo that we look to the feds for their almighty hand in aid.
I have worked for my home County’s Search and Rescue team and I currently work in the U.S. Army. Believe it or not the former was the more professional, effective and highly trained of the two.
Jeff
Experience dictates outlook
DewyB
Aug. 29th, 2011 at 5:17 pm
Wow, your small county Search and Rescue team was more efficient and effective than the U.S. Military? Can we hire them to Defend the nation? No… do they have to account for and feed 1,430,000 people EVERY DAY? Well, go figure that there is more waste in a “department” with Millions of people in it as opposed to the what, 20 man team you had?
So you’re are comparing apples to large buildings.