In response to:

Disaster Response and Federalism

loadstar Wrote: Nov 04, 2012 8:35 AM
America SAW in the debates that the months of $ millions spent by the Obamanators trying to assassinate Romney's character did not dovetail with the man they saw-- and they found Romney reasonable, thoughtful, and likable-- and HE has new ideas. Attacking Romney is NOT a vision or a plan. Obama is playing Small Ball...we need someone with a record of winning and succeeding when he engages, not someone trying to learn on his first EVER executive job. We have been there, done that with the ObaMessiah. It is OK to admit our collective mistake and dump the socialist dissembler and excuse-maker who is clueless about leading. Clint Eastwood is RIGHT-- on election day, "Make My Day!" Take pride again in American exceptionalism-- vote ROMNEY!
comsense08 Wrote: Nov 04, 2012 9:52 AM
I'm also pretty certain Romney is not going to be the arrogant "I know it all" type leader. He's smart enough to know he can't know everything, and will seek out the most qualified folks who DO know about specific things. That's where true leadership comes in. No one person can know and do all things. You don't just see a quarterback on the field, you see a team.

The title of a New York Times editorial claims that “A Big Storm Requires Big Government.” The Times implies that when confronted with a major natural disaster like Hurricane Sandy, Americans would be screwed if they didn’t have bureaucrats from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to “to decide where rescuers should go, where drinking water should be shipped, and how to assist hospitals that have to evacuate.”

(Gee, I had no idea that it was government planners who directed my local Wegmans to ramp up shipments of bottled water to meet the demand of people rushing to stock up on...

Related Tags: Federalism