1
   

Sen Santorum Wants to Penalize Hurricane Victims

 
 
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 08:53 pm

Sen Santorum Wants to Penalize Hurricane Victims


Quote:
From Action 4 News At 11 PM
WTAE-TV CH 4 (ABC) Pittsburgh

[CC] 00:05:40 Senator Rick Santorum is criticizing the government's emergency response to hurricane Katrina victims. But he's also criticizing the ones who chose to ride out the storm. "I mean, you have people who don't heed those warnings and then put people at risk as a result of not heeding those warnings. There may be a need to look at tougher penalties on those who decide to ride it out and understand that there are consequences to not leaving."


Do you believe the hubris of these so-called Christians?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,756 • Replies: 33
No top replies

 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 08:58 pm
At first blush, I *almost* agree with him, but then you look at it more closely.

First, how do you decide who's who? Everything I've seen (and I welcome facts/ sources on this) indicates that for a whole lot of the people who remained behind, they had no way to get out. Not that they refused to evacuate, but that they wanted to get out and simply didn't have the resources.

So you have people who were desperate to get out, couldn't, and then are penalized on top of that? <shaking head>
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 09:00 pm
Those who stayed, by choice or otherwise, have paid enough. So did those who left.
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 09:11 pm
sozobe wrote:
At first blush, I *almost* agree with him, but then you look at it more closely.

First, how do you decide who's who? Everything I've seen (and I welcome facts/ sources on this) indicates that for a whole lot of the people who remained behind, they had no way to get out. Not that they refused to evacuate, but that they wanted to get out and simply didn't have the resources.

So you have people who were desperate to get out, couldn't, and then are penalized on top of that? <shaking head>


Of course, tens of thousands couldn't get out, the storm hit at the end of the month, where money dries up in the inner city, even among the working, the dollars are gone by the month's end. So even the poor with a car, had no money for gas. Then there is food and lodging.

Many elderly are stubborn and think they have survived this long and they could survive this. Some people have evacuated many times before needlessly. Even Joe Scarborough admits he put himself in jeopardy by not evacuating.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 11:42 pm
There is a fact that needs to be addressed relative to future catastrophes: Some portion of the population will not heed mandatory evacuation orders.

Some portion of the 100,000 or so remaining in New Orleans through Katrina wanted to leave but could not. One has to ask why over 500 public buses in New Orleans could not be made available for these people.
The City failed these people and this is a lesson to be learned.

But what about the people who, for whatever reason, refuse to leave?

There are only two rational choices:

1) The State, literally, forces them to evacuate
2) The State allows them to remain, and leaves them to their own devices.

There can be no middle ground.

Somewhere along the line we need to come to terms with the notion of personal accountability.

If, for whatever reason, society believes these people are incapable of making a rational decision relative to remaining or evacuation, then it is society's obligation to force them to leave. We don't allow childrens to decide their immediate fates.

If, on the other hand, we accept that these people can make judgments for themselves, they need to be left to their judgments.

We can decide as a society that we will take care of those who stupidly put themselves in peril, but it is foolish to, at the the same time, try and assign blame to anyone for the consequences that rational people have chosen.

If someone wants to defy a mandatory evacuation order and remain in peril we have three choices:

1) Force them to leave
2) Allow them to stay and bear the consequence of their decisions
3) Allow them to stay and then eventually either force or coerce them to leave at a later date, and if they cannot be made to leave, compensate them for their losses.

I'm OK with #1 or #2.

Current reality is #3
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 11:57 pm
roger wrote:
Those who stayed, by choice or otherwise, have paid enough. So did those who left.



I agree!
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 06:17 am
The local govt in N.O. did NOT care enough about the low income areas, PERIOD. Explain how a parking lot full of school buses was never used? Did they care more about the buses?

Santorum is just another empty suit in Washington looking at the blame game.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 06:38 am
I thought about the buses, too, especially after seeing the flooded lots. That's a lot of money sitting on asphalt.

Here in our part of NC I can tell you who drives those buses. Poor, mostly black, mostly women, a lot of them with children.

I can only guess that the same would be true (truer) in New Orleans. I'm also guessing they couldn't be forced to stay and drive those buses to rescue people and risk their own lives, or their childrens.

Were there enough other city employees that could have been organized to drive the buses around to rescue people and still get out before the place was flooded? I don't know.
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 06:45 am
woiyo wrote:
The local govt in N.O. did NOT care enough about the low income areas, PERIOD. Explain how a parking lot full of school buses was never used? Did they care more about the buses?




That's what I have been trying to get across repeatedly. Why just focus on the Feds when local officials did not even do their part?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 06:49 am
Quote:
There may be a need to look at tougher penalties on those who decide to ride it out and understand that there are consequences to not leaving."


These people are well aware of the consequences of not leaving. They lived them. Mr. Santorum should crawl back under the rock from whence he crawled. Since he does not have enough sense to understand this is not the appropriate time for such statements.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 06:52 am
squinney wrote:
I thought about the buses, too, especially after seeing the flooded lots. That's a lot of money sitting on asphalt.

Here in our part of NC I can tell you who drives those buses. Poor, mostly black, mostly women, a lot of them with children.

I can only guess that the same would be true (truer) in New Orleans. I'm also guessing they couldn't be forced to stay and drive those buses to rescue people and risk their own lives, or their childrens.

Were there enough other city employees that could have been organized to drive the buses around to rescue people and still get out before the place was flooded? I don't know.


On SATURDAY, GW declares a federal disaster. That would give local authorities PLENTY OF TIME to get people to drive those buses somewhere and return to help their families.

What you suggest, while it may be true, is that NOBODY WANTED TO HELP ANYBODY??
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 07:00 am
woiyo wrote:

On SATURDAY, GW declares a federal disaster. That would give local authorities PLENTY OF TIME to get people to drive those buses somewhere and return to help their families.

What you suggest, while it may be true, is that NOBODY WANTED TO HELP ANYBODY??

So where were the FEDERAL drivers on Saturday and Sunday?
Where were they on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday?
0 Replies
 
Noddy24
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 07:42 am
Santorum has been flirting with the notion of making a bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2006.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 07:46 am
I don't know of any FEDERAL school bus drivers. Can't they do anything down there?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 07:46 am
I find myself in complete agreement with Finn. Somebody get me my smelling salts.

I've seen mandatory evacuations put in place in Florida. All resources are mobilized to get people out or to a shelter and the cops go door to door to tell you to get your ass out or nobody's coming to help you when you call 911. Anybody know if the NO and Missip evacuations were mandatory?
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 07:55 am
woiyo wrote:
The local govt in N.O. did NOT care enough about the low income areas, PERIOD. Explain how a parking lot full of school buses was never used? Did they care more about the buses?

Santorum is just another empty suit in Washington looking at the blame game.


The buses o not drive themselves. Perhaps, there should have been a plan to have drivers available with CDL Class B licenses. There should have been a better evacuation plan. There is a lot of woulda, could, shoulda, like why was the funding slashed by Bush to fortify the levee.

The White House went into action late last week, not to provide relief but to set the Rovian spin machine in motion. One of the tactics is to obfuscate and try to place blame on others. Well, of course, it speaks to the fact that we have the worst President in our history still in office that a lot of people are foooled by these tactics.

Heck, if the Bush admin was as good at coordinating rescue efforts as it is at lying, perhaps "only" hundreds, not thousands, would have been lost.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 07:58 am
Chrissee wrote:
woiyo wrote:
The local govt in N.O. did NOT care enough about the low income areas, PERIOD. Explain how a parking lot full of school buses was never used? Did they care more about the buses?

Santorum is just another empty suit in Washington looking at the blame game.


The buses o not drive themselves. Perhaps, there should have been a plan to have drivers available with CDL Class B licenses. There should have been a better evacuation plan. There is a lot of woulda, could, shoulda, like why was the funding slashed by Bush to fortify the levee.

The White House went into action late last week, not to provide relief but to set the Rovian spin machine in motion. One of the tactics is to obfuscate and try to place blame on others. Well, of course, it speaks to the fact that we have the worst President in our history still in office that a lot of people are foooled by these tactics.

Heck, if the Bush admin was as good at coordinating rescue efforts as it is at lying, perhaps "only" hundreds, not thousands, would have been lost.


Explain WHY is it the Federal Govts responsibility to tell the State Govt how to evacuate their cities and State? Do you really expect the Federal Govt to tell all 50 States how to protect it's citizens? Do you really expect the Federal Govt to do the States work??
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 08:02 am
FreeDuck wrote:
I find myself in complete agreement with Finn. Somebody get me my smelling salts.

I've seen mandatory evacuations put in place in Florida. All resources are mobilized to get people out or to a shelter and the cops go door to door to tell you to get your ass out or nobody's coming to help you when you call 911. Anybody know if the NO and Missip evacuations were mandatory?


Sunday AM, Nagin issued a mandatory evacuation. A day late IMO. People were told get out or prepare to die.

Of course, the good people of Louisiana will determine if local politicians' heads should roll. For most of us, it is the role of the Federal Government that needs to be examined. The Rovian tactic of trying to villify Blanco and Nagin is unconsionable.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 08:12 am
Well, as far as the evacuation goes, I think there is a lot of local responsibility. They should have issued the order sooner. They should have had the buses running. They should have had cops going around getting people out. If they needed more resources than they had to get it done, then they should have called in the guard and the feds.

But after the fact, I think the state and federal govts have the most culpability. The local areas were decimated so what could they have done? FEMA and any state aid agencies should have been ready to go right in. We should be a well-oiled machine by now, we've had plenty of practice. Somebody, more than one somebody, screwed up royal. And the typical ultra-conservative tactic of blaming the victim is just so tiresome. Now you all know why we in PA are trying to bounce Santorum out on his ass. I'm surprised he didn't say "those victims should just pull themselves out of the flood waters by their bootstraps."
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 08:38 am
If it were up to me, I would arrange it so on judgement day, when Santorum stands before God the Father with Christ at His right to be judged like all the rest of us, why I'd have God have a few of the people who remained behind in New Orleans right there so Santorum could talk to them about his statements face to face.

I'd give a nickel to see that.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Sen Santorum Wants to Penalize Hurricane Victims
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 01/08/2025 at 07:17:10