Twists and turns

Oklahoma has just suffered one of the deadliest tornadoes in U. S. history, completely abolishing whole tracts of houses, flattening whole communities, two schools, and killing at least, many of them children in their schools.

Last year, Oklahoma's two Republican senators, Jim Inhofe and Tom Coburn voted against the relief bill for Sandy Hook hurricane relief.    They had also voted earlier to cut funding for FEMA.

Today, Sen. Inhofe was singing a different tune:   Federal aid for Oklahoma will be "totally different," he said.   How so, different?   Well, according to him, the Sandy Hook aid bill was a "slush fund" that people were taking advantage of.

Sen. Coburn is still insisting that funds for Oklohoma will have to be offset by spending cuts somewhere else.   Do you guys get it, now that it's in your own back yard?   If you hadn't cut FEMA, the money would be there for this Oklahoma disaster.   It's called planning and budgeting for contingencies so you don't have to scrounge for funds in the middle of a disaster.

But notice that neither is against Oklahoma receiving the help.  It's different when it's affecting the people who can vote you out of office.

Yes, it is.

Ralph

PS:   A later bulletin in the news says that FEMA has plenty of money on hand to help with the Oklahoma disaster.   Despite the Oklahoma senators' opposition, a disaster relief bill was passed to keep FEMA funded and ready to help.    So now that they're willing to take the money for the voters who keep them in office, will they agree to the next funding bill to replenish the money for others?