What's new
By:

OKC Tornados

Death toll is now at 51. 20 kids were killed when their school was smashed. Many kids are still unaccounted for so that number will rise... Wow just bad news
 
Tragic stuff - and it's a shame that Oklahoma (presumably) won't be accepting any federal aid being both of the senators from OK voted against the federal relief package for New Jersey due to Hurricane Sandy.

Do you think maybe they'll reconsider?
 
candrew said:
Tragic stuff - and it's a shame that Oklahoma (presumably) won't be accepting any federal aid being both of the senators from OK voted against the federal relief package for New Jersey due to Hurricane Sandy.

Do you think maybe they'll reconsider?
Click to expand...

I'm so sick of this ****. They voted against it, but it's still there. They're still paying for it.

It's like if my wife and I disagree on the budget and I don't think we should spend our money on cable TV and put the money in savings instead. She wins and we get cable TV. Would you find it hypocritical if I watched my own ****ing TV channels I paid for? Would there be a smart *** joke in there for you?
 
Moore had an F-5 tornado in 1999 which followed the exact path as this one. Yikes. Don't live there. You will either die or your house will be destroyed.
 
Gameface said:
I'm so sick of this ****. They voted against it, but it's still there. They're still paying for it.

It's like if my wife and I disagree on the budget and I don't think we should spend our money on cable TV and put the money in savings instead. She wins and we get cable TV. Would you find it hypocritical if I watched my own ****ing TV channels I paid for? Would there be a smart *** joke in there for you?
Click to expand...

LOL - is that an actual analogy or are you just bitching about your wife?

You'll just have to deal with the fact that I take it a little personally when these two idiot senators from Oklahoma decided to play politics while my friends and neighbors were suffering just because Gov. Christie said something not horrible about Obama.

Theoretically speaking, if they are of the opinion that a state is not entitled to federal aid due to a natural disaster then it stands to reason that they would refuse any money offered to their own state for the same reason. In the real world, we all know better and they'll suck in every penny they can; but watching this jackass tap dance on TV in and of itself is worth whatever price the rest of us will have to pay.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKjDjPwufD0
 
candrew said:
LOL - is that an actual analogy or are you just bitching about your wife?
Click to expand...

Both. But in reality I'm the spender.

I don't think there should be unemployment benefits, or social security or FEMA. But you can bet you *** if I qualify for benefits I'm going to use them if I need them. It's not hypocritical. Not even a little bit. How simple minded do you have to be to think it is? How much more simple minded do you have to be to think smart-*** comments like yours are clever? Pretty ****ing simple!
 
Gameface said:
Both. But in reality I'm the spender.

I don't think there should be unemployment benefits, or social security or FEMA. But you can bet you *** if I qualify for benefits I'm going to use them if I need them. It's not hypocritical. Not even a little bit. How simple minded do you have to be to think it is? How much more simple minded do you have to be to think smart-*** comments like yours are clever? Pretty ****ing simple!
Click to expand...

What I find simple minded are your bait and switch false analogies. Have you ever looked at your paycheck? You pay unemployment insurance and SSI out of every paycheck, so it wouldn't be hypocritical for you to turn down a benefit that you already paid for - regardless of your philosophical feelings about them. But that of course has no ****ing relevance in what is happening here.

This is fairly black and white - this is a senator saying this group of people (whom I just so happen to represent) should get federal aid immediately while this other group of people should get NOTHING. If you can't see the hypocrisy in that then you're a moron and I can't help you.
 
candrew said:
What I find simple minded are your bait and switch false analogies. Have you ever looked at your paycheck? You pay unemployment insurance and SSI out of every paycheck, so it wouldn't be hypocritical for you to turn down a benefit that you already paid for - regardless of your philosophical feelings about them. But that of course has no ****ing relevance in what is happening here.

This is fairly black and white - this is a senator saying this group of people (whom I just so happen to represent) should get federal aid immediately while this other group of people should get NOTHING. If you can't see the hypocrisy in that then you're a moron and I can't help you.
Click to expand...

I did not vote for President Obama, and yet he is the President and I will support him as our country's President.

Because I did not vote for him, does that mean I should reject every decision he makes?

Here's how it works, you make your vote, and then you accept whatever the decision is and move on. They voted, it did not go their way, they move on now the way it is. I'm with Gameface on this, it's not hypocritical and it's not that hard to understand unless you are trying to make it difficult or you are digging for ways to rip on somebody.
 
Inhofe thinks the liberals were trying to use the NJ relief bill as a slush fund for unrelated projects.

Inhofe wants to use federal funds to help the victims in his state, rather than to remodel his offices.

Not a hypocrite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top