FEMA and Sullivan and Coburn

[iplaw]

HT

You stated:

quote:Then I go home and read stories about how JOHN SULLIVAN doesn't believe that Oklahomans need help from FEMA

Then go on and post this:

quote:He says he'll help in the appeal of FEMA's aid denial but adds that money must be spent wisely.

So which is it?  Are they willing to help with appeal to FEMA (like you said) or not (like you said as well).

After the discretionary abuses during Katrina is it unreasonable to ask that transparency be require during the process, or is fiscal responsibility only important to you when your hand isn't the one out for a gubment donation?

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

'Sullie' is playing politics with this, and doing it poorly. Like when he said that opponents of the Race Riot Memorial were bigots and had to backtrack.  He is scared of being unthroned and needs to at least give lip service to fiscal responsibility.

So what is the point of the letter? That Dr. Tom and 'Sullie' can write a better letter than Fallin et al?  Where in the letter does it say Okies deserve individual assistance?  All the letter says is for FEMA to waste time and effort and prepare a report justifying the decision.  Waste of time IMO but I suppose the least they could do.

That's not what the letter says.  It says that they are awaiting a written decision giving reasons for the denial.  I think the tone of the letter makes it perfectly clear that we will address our grievances when we know WHY they denied assistance.  You can't address issues that haven't been presented.

[tim huntzinger]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

That's not what the letter says.  It says that they are awaiting a written decision giving reasons for the denial.  I think the tone of the letter makes it perfectly clear that we will address our grievances when we know WHY they denied assistance.  You can't address issues that haven't been presented.

Why can we not have representation that will just say what they mean? The letter does not state any action line.  We do not want harsh language, we want action. And once FEMA justifies its decision will the two come forward and give it their blessing and proudly affirm that decision? No.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

That's not what the letter says.  It says that they are awaiting a written decision giving reasons for the denial.  I think the tone of the letter makes it perfectly clear that we will address our grievances when we know WHY they denied assistance.  You can't address issues that haven't been presented.

Why can we not have representation that will just say what they mean? The letter does not state any action line.  We do not want harsh language, we want action. And once FEMA justifies its decision will the two come forward and give it their blessing and proudly affirm that decision? No.

Fantastic.  I'm glad you can see the future...

So to sum it up.  They've said nothing remotely close to what was HT accused them of, but now you've moved the goal posts to say that we need action, not talk...

So how would you handle it if you were in office?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

That's not what the letter says.  It says that they are awaiting a written decision giving reasons for the denial.  I think the tone of the letter makes it perfectly clear that we will address our grievances when we know WHY they denied assistance.  You can't address issues that haven't been presented.

Why can we not have representation that will just say what they mean? The letter does not state any action line.  We do not want harsh language, we want action. And once FEMA justifies its decision will the two come forward and give it their blessing and proudly affirm that decision? No.

I think that is what happens when a "C" average student somehow becomes the pet of the Tulsa GOP.

Playing politics?  He's a politician, dude!

[]

[tim huntzinger]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Originally posted by tim huntzinger

Originally posted by iplaw

Fantastic.  I'm glad you can see the future...

So to sum it up.  They've said nothing remotely close to what was HT accused them of, but now you've moved the goal posts to say that we need action, not talk...

So how would you handle it if you were in office?

I would start by joining the rest of the OK delegation in their efforts and not create this schismatic distraction.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Originally posted by tim huntzinger

Originally posted by iplaw

Fantastic.  I'm glad you can see the future...

So to sum it up.  They've said nothing remotely close to what was HT accused them of, but now you've moved the goal posts to say that we need action, not talk...

So how would you handle it if you were in office?

I would start by joining the rest of the OK delegation in their efforts and not create this schismatic distraction.

Yeah...piddily little concerns like ensuring that OUR tax dollars aren't pissed away.  Good call.

[tim huntzinger]

Ha ha! Sullivan tried getting a $45M bailout for Great Plains, wanted County Tulsans to pay for the river thing, and voted for the Bridge to Nowhere.  When he encountered opposition to the Race Riot Memorial - on fiscal grounds - he called that opposition 'bigoted.'  NOW he is some kind of crusader? Ha ha ha!

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

Ha ha! Sullivan tried getting a $45M bailout for Great Plains, wanted County Tulsans to pay for the river thing, and voted for the Bridge to Nowhere.  When he encountered opposition to the Race Riot Memorial - on fiscal grounds - he called that opposition 'bigoted.'  NOW he is some kind of crusader? Ha ha ha!

Where is your source on the Great Plains bailout?  I remember it being in the neighborhood of $7.5+ million, and I don't believe that Sullivan was even in office yet when House Bill 2351 (I think) was passed.

[tim huntzinger]

No linkage that I will dredge up but he most definitely tried to get Federal bailout bucks for that.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

No linkage that I will dredge up but he most definitely tried to get Federal bailout bucks for that.

I just remember most of that stuff happening before he took Largent's position...

[tim huntzinger]

Nope. This was after he was in the US and GP was on the ropes.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

Nope. This was after he was in the US and GP was on the ropes.

Good luck finding it.  I can't find any info on $45 million in proposed federal funds, and the only bill through the Oklahoma house was before he took office in 02....

[tim huntzinger]

No no no silly. He tried as US Congressman to get bailout funding.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

No no no silly. He tried as US Congressman to get bailout funding.

Still finding nothing.  I did however see your comment in the Tulsaworld where you said that it was $90 million dollars...so which is it, 45 or 90 or nothing?