Just a year ago our community was placed in turmoil after two floods that wrecked our area. Now, tonight we are faced with the same overwhelming odds of rebuilding. As I sit here over looking the city from my DC apartment pondering our goverments past transgressions I ask, "Why do you turn a cold shoulder?" I came to DC to broaden my educational horizon and now I am compelled to perform my civic duty and bring relief to my community. On Wednesday I have a meeting with Senator Mitch McConnell to discuss public policy, what I would like to see is if you would send me e-mails with your stories on the past floods. Once I go into his office I plan to present him with my story and everyone elses if i get enough. It is now time for us to join as a collective unit and be heard. My fellow Pike, Floyd, Perry, Letcher and Martin Countain's lets put pressure on our congressional leaders to assist us in times of crisis, they are forced to listen now with Midterm elections coming in Nov.
Oh and by the way my e-mail is [email=uc.collier@gmail.com]uc.collier@gmail.com[/email]
15thRegionSlamaBamma Wrote:Just a year ago our community was placed in turmoil after two floods that wrecked our area. Now, tonight we are faced with the same overwhelming odds of rebuilding. As I sit here over looking the city from my DC apartment pondering our governments past transgressions I ask, "Why do you turn a cold shoulder?" I came to DC to broaden my educational horizon and now I am compelled to perform my civic duty and bring relief to my community. On Wednesday I have a meeting with Senator Mitch McConnell to discuss public policy, what I would like to see is if you would send me e-mails with your stories on the past floods. Once I go into his office I plan to present him with my story and everyone elses if i get enough. It is now time for us to join as a collective unit and be heard. My fellow Pike, Floyd, Perry, Letcher and Martin Countain's lets put pressure on our congressional leaders to assist us in times of crisis, they are forced to listen now with Midterm elections coming in Nov.
Not to rain (so to speak on you're parade) you do know McConnell isn't up for re-election in November? If you live in an area prone to flooding you should really have flood insurance which is separate from Home owners insuraance. Anyway good luck
Why is flooding a federal problem? This sounds like a liberal Democrat looking for something to divert attention away from the failures of Congress, despite overwhelming Democratic majorities in both both the House and Senate. Pigs lining up at the trough for their fair share of slop.
nky Wrote:Not to rain (so to speak on you're parade) you do know McConnell isn't up for re-election in November? If you live in an area prone to flooding you should really have flood insurance which is separate from Home owners insuraance. Anyway good luck
:Thumbs: IMO, not one cent of tax money should be given to people who live in flood-prone areas. If the federal government insists on providing charity using the money it coerces from taxpayers, then let it pay moving expenses for flood victims (once per the lifetime of the recipient) and then burn the flood damaged houses to the ground. This nation has plenty of land that does not lie in a flood plane and those who move into houses that get flooded have nobody but themselves to blame.
Former Congressman Davey Crockett said it best:
[INDENT]
Quote:I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House; but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every Member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please In charity; but as Members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloqnent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt dne the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death; and I have never beard that the Government was in arrears to him. This Government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it Is a debt, how much is it? Has it been andited, and the amount dne ascertained f If it has, the Treasurer will pay it without legislation. If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it Is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay; for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount. There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; and if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit I should be langhed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but wc never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt. The Government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, hnt I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We can not, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of anthority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I can not vote for this bill. Bnt I will give one week's pay to the object; and if every Member of Congress will do the same it will amount to more than the bill asks. Harpers Magazine, 1867
[/INDENT]
Hoot Gibson Wrote::Thumbs: IMO, not one cent of tax money should be given to people who live in flood-prone areas. If the federal government insists on providing charity using the money it coerces from taxpayers, then let it pay moving expenses for flood victims (once per the lifetime of the recipient) and then burn the flood damaged houses to the ground. This nation has plenty of land that does not lie in a flood plane and those who move into houses that get flooded have nobody but themselves to blame.
Former Congressman Davey Crockett said it best:
[INDENT][/INDENT]
So no tax money should have went to New Orleans to rebuild the city after Hurricane Katrina. When earth quakes hit LA California move the people burn the cities. People that are hit with tornados in tornado alley should not have in government help it's their fault?
Benchwarmer Wrote:So no tax money should have went to New Orleans to rebuild the city after Hurricane Katrina. When earth quakes hit LA California move the people burn the cities. People that are hit with tornados in tornado alley should not have in government help it's their fault?
Only to the extent that flooding was caused by the state and federal government's incompetence. Bad weather and other natural disaster are nobody's fault. However, when a person chooses a location for a home, he or she should know the risks and take appropriate measures to protect themselves and their families. A house can be made virtually earthquake and tornado proof and insurance is available. If an individual cannot afford the risks of home ownership, then he should build elsewhere or rent a home and let somebody else assume that risk.
The only time that government should provide disaster relief is when it is at fault. For example, the 9/11 attacks were the result of the federal government's failure to protect our borders, which is one of their few Constitutional responsibilities. In the case of Katrina, some people were victims of poorly designed levee systems, which allowed Lake Lake Pontchartrain to flood low lying areas of New Orleans - so I believe that those victims had a right to be compensated. In general, however, people who choose to live in areas where hurricanes occur should not be bailed out when the inevitable happens.
In our particular situation we have never been flooded nor have we ever been at risk up untill the last few years. However, the water has never made it close to the house untill last night. Just stop posting on here this thread Hoot, you have no right to bash people who are going through a really rough time right now. Yes, I am taking affence to your comments, I in one night have lost everythign besides what I have here and my granmother had a stroke as well. I end this post now and not say what is truly going through my mind.
15thRegionSlamaBamma Wrote:In our particular situation we have never been flooded nor have we ever been at risk up untill the last few years. However, the water has never made it close to the house untill last night. Just stop posting on here this thread Hoot, you have no right to bash people who are going through a really rough time right now. Yes, I am taking affence to your comments, I in one night have lost everythign besides what I have here and my granmother had a stroke as well. I end this post now and not say what is truly going through my mind.
Take all the affence [sic] that you want to my posts but you may not place threads off limits to those who disagree with you. I am sorry to hear about your grandmother and your situation, but I, as a taxpayer am not responsible for your situation.
Do you not live in the 100-year flood plain - because if you do, then it matters not whether you have ever been flooded before. Either way, you or your family had an obligation to maintain flood insurance to protect yourselves against flooding. The federal government is broke and has been for some time. The time will come soon when it will no longer be able to afford to provide relief from natural disasters, and it would be better to cut back on such expenditures sooner rather than later.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Why is flooding a federal problem? This sounds like a liberal Democrat looking for something to divert attention away from the failures of Congress, despite overwhelming Democratic majorities in both both the House and Senate. Pigs lining up at the trough for their fair share of slop.
You do realize that the city of pikeville was flooded off the face of the planet last night. People losing their lives, homes, everything they owned. How does him wanting to talk to the congressman about keeping his home safe have any ****ing thing to do with A liberal democrat. Pigs lining up? Are you kidding me Hoot? This guy just lost so much and your comparing him to a pig looking for a freebie? You have sunken to a new low.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Only to the extent that flooding was caused by the state and federal government's incompetence. Bad weather and other natural disaster are nobody's fault. However, when a person chooses a location for a home, he or she should know the risks and take appropriate measures to protect themselves and their families. A house can be made virtually earthquake and tornado proof and insurance is available. If an individual cannot afford the risks of home ownership, then he should build elsewhere or rent a home and let somebody else assume that risk.
The only time that government should provide disaster relief is when it is at fault. For example, the 9/11 attacks were the result of the federal government's failure to protect our borders, which is one of their few Constitutional responsibilities. In the case of Katrina, some people were victims of poorly designed levee systems, which allowed Lake Lake Pontchartrain to flood low lying areas of New Orleans - so I believe that those victims had a right to be compensated. In general, however, people who choose to live in areas where hurricanes occur should not be bailed out when the inevitable happens.
So we used tax payers money to build levees so people can live in New Orleans? A earthquake and Tornado proof house?
Wow, I really can't believe some of the things I have read Hoot post in this thread. Unbelievable.
Wildcatk23 Wrote:You do realize that the city of pikeville was flooded off the face of the planet last night. People losing their lives, homes, everything they owned. How does him wanting to talk to the congressman about keeping his home safe have any ****ing thing to do with A liberal democrat. Pigs lining up? Are you kidding me Hoot? This guy just lost so much and your comparing him to a pig looking for a freebie? You have sunken to a new low.
Actually, no I was not aware that of the flooding that took place last night. I no longer live in the area. But that does not change my opinion of the federal government's role in natural disasters one bit.
As for my pigs lining up at the trough, the comment was aimed at nobody in particular but directed generally at liberals, moderates, and even some conservatives who look to the federal government to bail them out of situations that are entirely predictable.
The federal government has no right to borrow money to bail out victims of predictable natural disasters and sticking me, my children, and every other current and future taxpayer with the tab. As I said before, in the not so distant future the federal government will no longer be able to provide this kind of relief, yet people who receivd no benefit will still be paying for peoples' failure to behave responsibly.
Finally, I do not blame people for seeking relief in these situations. Our government has trained people well to grow dependent on it to solve all sorts of problems in which it should not be involved. I blame the government for burying this country under a mountain of debt that is already dragging our economy down the tubes and discouraging companies from hiring employees.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Actually, no I was not aware that of the flooding that took place last night. I no longer live in the area. But that does not change my opinion of the federal government's role in natural disasters one bit.
As for my pigs lining up at the trough, the comment was aimed at nobody in particular but directed generally at liberals, moderates, and even some conservatives who look to the federal government to bail them out of situations that are entirely predictable.
The federal government has no right to borrow money to bail out victims of predictable natural disasters and sticking me, my children, and every other current and future taxpayer with the tab. As I said before, in the not so distant future the federal government will no longer be able to provide this kind of relief, yet people who receivd no benefit will still be paying for peoples' failure to behave responsibly.
Finally, I do not blame people for seeking relief in these situations. Our government has trained people well to grow dependent on it to solve all sorts of problems in which it should not be involved. I blame the government for burying this country under a mountain of debt that is already dragging our economy down the tubes and discouraging companies from hiring employees.
He is in a no flood zone there for he wasn't behaving irresponsible. Why would you buy flood insurance when your not in a flood zone or anywhere near a flood zone. As he said the water had never been there before.
I could imagine your reaction to someone drowning in a lake, "They should have been wearing a life jacket," "Let Them Drown."
How about you quit being a politician for 5 minutes and be a human being.
Benchwarmer Wrote:So we used tax payers money to build levees so people can live in New Orleans? A earthquake and Tornado proof house?
The flooding that did most of the damage in New Orleans took place immediately after Hurricane Katrina when large pumps failed and levees were breached. Much of the worst flooding came from Lake Ponchartrain, not the rains from the hurricane. Federal funds that were approved for raising the height of the levees were spent on other projects over the years at the request of state and local politicians. Had the levees been enhanced before Katrina, much of the worst flood damage would not have occurred.
That is why the state and federal governments deserved more blame in the case of Katrina than in most other cases. As for bailing out people all along the Mississippi and Louisiana coasts for the Katrina damage, I was opposed to it.
As for houses that are earthquake and tornado proof (or at least highly resistant), they do exist. Houses based on the geodesic dome design can withstand winds exceeding 300 mph. If California did not have very strict building codes, structural damage from earthquakes would make large areas uninhabitable. Unfortunately, California allows people to build in areas unsuitable for construction such as areas prone to mudslides and forest fires and not a year goes by that taxpayers are not stuck with a large tab as a result.
People need to either build houses that can withstand the worst that Mother Nature can throw at them or maintain insurance to provide gap coverage.
I do not want my government acting as an insurance company and as federal income taxes rise and other benefits decline, an increasing number of people will agree with me. When the federal government starts printing more money to pay its bills because it can no longer borrow or tax people enough, who will bail us out?
Wildcatk23 Wrote:He is in a no flood zone there for he wasn't behaving irresponsible. Why would you buy flood insurance when your not in a flood zone or anywhere near a flood zone. As he said the water had never been there before.
I could imagine your reaction to someone drowning in a lake, "They should have been wearing a life jacket," "Let Them Drown."
How about you quit being a politician for 5 minutes and be a human being.
Any area near a creek in eastern Kentucky is subject to flash flooding periodically and flood insurance is affordable - that is why you would want a rider on your home owner's policy. Why don't you learn to debate using some logic and dispense with the insults and name calling?
I am not a politician and have no desire to be one. Politicians with the courage and conviction to do the right thing have a very difficult time getting elected with so many selfish, short-sighted voters. As for your implication that mine is a selfish position, it isn't. Thinking that the federal government owes you something is the selfish view. Ask not what your country can do for you....
PC_You_Know Wrote:Wow, I really can't believe some of the things I have read Hoot post in this thread. Unbelievable.
In my defense, I was not aware of the flooding that occurred last night. Knowing that fact, I would not have posted in this thread but my opinion would have been no different. My thoughts and prayers are with those who were affected by last night's flooding.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Any area near a creek in eastern Kentucky is subject to flash flooding periodically and flood insurance is affordable - that is why you would want a rider on your home owner's policy. Why don't you learn to debate using some logic and dispense with the insults and name calling?
I am not a politician and have no desire to be one. Politicians with the courage and conviction to do the right thing have a very difficult time getting elected with so many selfish, short-sighted voters. As for your implication that mine is a selfish position, it isn't. Thinking that the federal government owes you something is the selfish view. Ask not what your country can do for you....
Name Calling? Insults?
But hes not in a flood zone. I really don't see why you came into this thread just to run your mouth about liberals and democrats when all the dude wanted was support and comfort. The guy just lost everything and you find yourself necessary to insult his actions. He wants the government to assist us in our time of need. I am pretty sure that we have agencies like FEMA to help people in need.
Wildcatk23 Wrote:Name Calling? Insults?
But hes not in a flood zone. I really don't see why you came into this thread just to run your mouth about liberals and democrats when all the dude wanted was support and comfort. The guy just lost everything and you find yourself necessary to insult his actions. He wants the government to assist us in our time of need. I am pretty sure that we have agencies like FEMA to help people in need.
I have already explained twice that I missed the fact that there was widespread flooding last night. I am sure that you read those posts but chose to ignore them. After rereading the initial post, and reading that this is the third instance of flooding in the area in just over a year - it just makes it more clear to me how inappropriate it is for the federal government to be repeatedly spending money on flood relief. Yes that is what FEMA is for, and citizens have the write to demand whatever they want of their government, but spending money in this way is inherently unfair to taxpayers and future generations.
This is the kind of event for which friends,, neighbors, and churches should provide immediate assistance - not the federal government. Even if I believed that there was a role for government to play in flood relief, I would argue that the relief should be provided at the local and state level. It makes no sense for people in Washington, DC to be directing relief from flash flooding in eastern Kentucky or anywhere else outside of the District of Columbia.
PC_You_Know Wrote:Wow, I really can't believe some of the things I have read Hoot post in this thread. Unbelievable.
I will never reply to a Hoot Gibson comment again. No heart:redboxer:
Benchwarmer Wrote:I will never reply to a Hoot Gibson comment again. No heart:redboxer:
Good bye and good riddance.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Good bye and good riddance.
I'm sure u would see things differently if something like this happened to you or a family member.
Wildcatk23 Wrote:I'm sure u would see things differently if something like this happened to you or a family member.
Wouldn't we all.
Wildcatk23 Wrote:I'm sure u would see things differently if something like this happened to you or a family member.
I am sure that you do not know me at all. I am not nor will I ever be looking to the federal government for help. All I want from the federal government is to stay out of my pockets as much as possible, keep our borders secure, maintain our interstate highway system, and to break up a monopoly on occasion. Other than those few things and whatever else the US Constitution explicitly requires it to do, the less the federal government does for me, the happier I will be.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:I am sure that you do not know me at all. I am not nor will I ever be looking to the federal government for help. All I want from the federal government is to stay out of my pockets as much as possible, keep our borders secure, maintain our interstate highway system, and to break up a monopoly on occasion. Other than those few things and whatever else the US Constitution explicitly requires it to do, the less the federal government does for me, the happier I will be.
So what if your pockets are emptied? What if your home is destroyed along with family members and you have no place to stay or money to feed your family? What then hoot?
The Christian Appalachian Project is setting up a disaster center at First Presbyterian Church in Pikeville. They are setting up now and should be operational by later on Sunday night. They will start training volunteers to help on Monday.
If anyone is interested.
Wildcatk23 Wrote:The Christian Appalachian Project is setting up a disaster center at First Presbyterian Church in Pikeville. They are setting up now and should be operational by later on Sunday night. They will start training volunteers to help on Monday.
If anyone is interested.
Great news.
Seriously hoot you come in here with your liberal jokes and and conservative tactics, when none of that is needed at this time,.. I dont get it. Have you seen some of the pictures and Stuff?
Wildcatk23 Wrote:So what if your pockets are emptied? What if your home is destroyed along with family members and you have no place to stay or money to feed your family? What then hoot?
My political views will not change because of my personal financial situation. Never have. Never will. Dependency on the federal government creates more problems than it solves.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:My political views will not change because of my personal financial situation. Never have. Never will. Dependency on the federal government creates more problems than it solves.
Have you ever been faced with this type of Disaster?