Another silly picture

First off let us acknowledge either candidate going to disaster areas is at best a good photo opportunity and at worst blatant pandering where they likely get in the way and slow efforts more than they help.  

However, the selective memory of the Left never stops amazing me.  Romney sent his own resources to help.  http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/264547-romney-campaign-bus-to-deliver-supplies-to-storm-relief- Obama sent yours, taking Air Force One and spreading around your tax dollars.  Now I ask which is showing more "charity".  Perhaps we should talk about how much each of these candidates gave to charity over the last four years?  One gives millions.  The other gave almost nothing while living off of your tax dollars and saw his net worth grow from 1 to 11 million dollars over the last four years. 

Should we talk about turning down $5 million that could go to charity, but it is more important to hide his past?   What is in his past so terrible it is more important than helping the homeless, Sandy victims, or maybe the families of the persons killed in Libya?  All the while let’s not forget how important it was to the left to look into Romney's past.

But, let us get beyond all of that.   Let’s talk about the Federal government and if it should be involved to this extent in the first place.   Can we keep paying for everyone’s food, healthcare, retirement, cell phones, subsidizing people not to work, corporate handouts, and pay for every disaster that comes along?    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/01/fema-comes-to-rescue-in-wake-sandy-but-will-it-need-saving/

At some point we need to assign priorities to what is important before we end up like Greece. 

We need to ask ourselves is the Federal government is the best ones to be addressing these things.   I remember during Katrina a friend of mine loaded up a truck full of water from the Wal-Mart warehouse she managed and had it there before FEMA was on-site.   Would we be better served by local governments and private businesses addressing these disasters? 

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/femas-topdown-approach-disaster-relief-is-fundamentally-flawed

Are we stronger as a country asking others living in less disaster prone areas to subsidize more dangerous areas? 

Are unions helping in such efforts?   http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/02/theres-more-georgia-power-crew-turned-away-from-sandy-stricken-new-york-for-refusing-to-join-union/

And, finally the most important question?  Is it even Constitutional for the Federal government to be participating in this manner.  How much more prepared could local government be if the Federal government had not overstepped the boundaries established for it by the Constitution.  If the money the Federal government took from us was reduced by 60, 70 even 80% how much more could your local government do with that money?  Who knows better your state’s needs, a Washington bureaucrat or your local officials?  http://therightpointtoo.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-enumerated-powers.html

I would suggest there is a likely a middle ground where FEMA is a smaller leaner organization that can specialize in managing and helping others in reacting to emergencies.