I agree on Stone and Jones, don't agree on Cruz. Cruz is a public servant elected by the people of Texas to serve the people of Texas. In their time of need, he should have been there for them. He wasn't. Inexcusable.

@TyKC well I thought FEMA was responsible. You blame george bush and Republicans. Yet now Cruz is responsible instead of biden.
What was Cruz to do? What was any lawmaker to do. If you had means to leave. You would leave. Just because he represents texans. Doesn't mean he has to suffer needlessly
That is exactly the problem. The right holds the left accountable. Gives there people a pass. Same as Republicans. When common sense says. If you can get out and not suffer. Why do so.
Guarentee you most all politicians who could, left texas and went where they were comfortable, but yet only Cruz gets scorned.
The hypocrisy of both sides, elected and the supporters are the real problem.

@Kheare FEMA can only do so much. It's takes a team of people to succeed. Everyone has to do their part. Cruz should have done what Beto did. He organized thousands of people to help distribute supplies to those in need. Cruz is not like other Texans, he is an elected public servant who has a responsibility to the people of Texas. If other politicians ran like he did, I would criticize them too. There is no excuse for it.

@TyKC now I agree a good leader would stay and help people
It's what I would do, but I would like to know how many did run. It's not uncommon and happens all the time.
I just think signaling one person and for political reasons is immature and everything wrong with us today.
For the most part. If people don't like someone they will bash while defending those they do like

@Kheare Well the people of Texas bear some responsibility. They voted him in.

MSM heeps fire on the divide every single day, all day.

I don't agree that democrats condone looting and burning. Although some democrats understand that the discontent has valid justification. Evidently, most conservatives don't. The government mandates things all the time. You have to pay taxes, obey laws and pay into Social Security and Medicare. So long as the mandates are in the best interest of the public good, I can't imagine why anyone would object to them. Democrats don't want to stop free speech. They want to stop hate speech and disinformation. Democrats don't want open borders. They want dignified treatment of people in need and adherence to the spirit of the statue of Liberty. Democrats believe you should be responsible for paying for your own healthcare. If you fail that responsibility, mandates would and should follow.

@TyKC we object to some things because as supposedly free people and laws that government are supposed to follow that don't.
Why should we follow the law and they don't have to.
Alot of politicians encouraged the violence. Our vice president helped set up a find to bail some of these people out of jail
It really is sickening to watch how some are treated differently than others.
They are not interested in eqaulity. They are interested in a takeover and total control

@Kheare Yes, a lot of politicians encouraged violence, including Trump. They should be called out for it and sent packing. We should all have to follow the same laws and rules. But I don't see anything wrong with setting up a fund to help poor people with bail. Why should only the rich and the
privileged have access to bail? Those people are innocent until proven guilty and they should have the same rights as everybody else. Democracy is our friend when it comes to preventing takeover and total control, something Trump wanted to eliminate. You speak with your vote, your knowledge of the issues and candidates and the the way the government should work. The problem today is not Democrats. It's politicians on the take. They are beholden to those who pay for them to be reelected, instead of to their constituents. You can thank Citizens United for that. If you want a better country, stop reelecting politicians on the take. It is illuminating to know that in all elections in the U.S., 97% of incumbents are reelected. And therein lies the problem.

@TyKC the 2 party system is the problem and both are on the take. At least in washington.
Ultimately it's our fault. People just do not care about being free and having personal responsibility.
It's easier to blame someone else for a person's lack of having anything.
Only with freedom will a person truly be able to be self sufficient.
Trump wasn't perfect, but he cared about freedom more than most.
Your comment about a bail fund is laughable. So we set up a bail fund for people who burn their fellow citizens business down, or who steal from stores, or beat people with a different opinion.
You honestly think that is a good thing. Thousands of poor people who could use bail that did none of those things. Yet those are the ones being ignored.
You say democracy, I say BS. We are a democratic republic. Mob rule should never be the case here.
Government do not follow their own rules. So in turn more and more people have become the same way.
You can't have freedom when government is picking who to prosecute for breaking laws and who not to.
Anyone who breaks laws should be treated the same.
Both parties care nothing about freedom. So many examples I could give of this.

@Kheare You are guilty of the same sins you accuse the politicians of. You would deny certain people (the accused looters and the burners) due process, but would reward it to others. Later you say: "Anyone who breaks laws should be treated the same." The two positions you take are contradictory. Upon what grounds is this justified? I used the word "democracy" in the general sense. I was not claiming mob rule. By the government, I assume you mean the Legislature and the Executive branch. I agree that prosecutorial reform in government is required. But whose job is it to enable the reform? And what changes should be made?

@TyKC no you put words in my mouth. I would deny no one of their rights to due process. I am saying politicians have no business setting up money for bail for anyone. Especially those they favor. That is full blown tyranny.
When politicians step in and condone and justify and bail law breakers out. What kind of system is that. Sounds alot like the Nazis huh.
Think my way or we will allow people to do damage to you, and bail them out to show you we can hurt you.
The changes are easy. The feds have 26 articles in the constitution that they are responsible for. All other matters are left up to the states.
That is how this country was built and ran for over 100 years. It is what made us prosperous to begin with.
When did we start declining. When the feds took over everything. All the facts and numbers point to that.
If the country was ran how it was supposed to. The feds wouldn't even matter that much

@Kheare Providing bail for the accused is not condoning and justifying law breakers. Failure to allow them the same rights as other accused people is simply convicting them before they have their day in court. There is no justification for it. Why should some people be denied bail, but others granted it for essentially the same crime or similar crime? Would you deny bail to those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6th? And if so, why so?

@TyKC are you really saying that politicians should be providing bail for people who burn down stores, beat people up, and steal their stuff. If that is your position. Then what do we have left to discuss.
Of course all of them should get bail, but not provided by politicians. That is a ridiculous statement, and frankly if you don't know that that is wrong. We really can't even debate anymore.
By you justifying it. Just shows how bad our country is getting. These are nazi marxists tactics.
You call trump a dictator. Yet these actions are closer to a dictators actions.
America will be gone with attitudes like that. If you can honestly justify that. Then I am done with this conversation. You obviously havnt figured out right or wrong yet.

@Kheare Why should politicians not have the same rights as every other citizen? Do you really want the government to decide who can provide money to a bail bondsman and who can't? I can virtually guarantee you that any such law would be struct down as unconstitutional. There are checks and balances in the system. It is not the politicians who determine if someone gets bail. A judge determines if bail is granted and in what about. So, if you want to blame someone, blame the judges. All the politicians would be doing is putting up the money, which is the right of you and me and every other citizen. Happens everyday. I don't like the fact that Trump pardoned Roger Stone, but I would not argue he had no right to do it. Your argument that politicians should be denied the right to provide money to a bail bondsman makes absolutely no sense.

@TyKC last time when politicians actively bail out people who burn loot and hurt people. Yes that's a problem. Again if you can't see that. Then you have no sense of right and wrong.
That is straight up nazi shit, and an enemy to me.

Nope

@toronto_Georgia Yeah, me neither. I know that malicious actors on the opposite side of the political spectrum can be very effective at blocking a party's actions.

In this case, yes. The State is controlled by a Republican administration. It's on them.

@TyKC Really? Because I've seen a lot of people on the left complaining that the lack of hurricane Katrina support was Trump's fault... So now I'm curious is aid is handled by the state government or federal government...

@MassDebater Well if people are complaining about Trump not supporting Katrina, they don't know what they are talking about. Katrina happened during the Bush years, not the Trump years. The State is ultimately responsible for managing the aid. Under certain circumstances, the State can request aid from the federal government. In this case, aid was requested and granted. FEMA, for the most part, seems to have responded appropriately. For whatever reason, the State doing its part has gone badly.

I got the wrong hurricane name, yes.

Would you say this is a large-scale emergency?

I don't think it is an assumption. The Bush administration had a terrible record handling natural disasters. IMO it stems from the conservative view that government should be limited and sometimes they fail to appreciate that governments must play an important regulatory role. The behavior of the Texas State government is deplorable, trying to politicize an issue that shouldn't be politized. Meanwhile, Texas citizens are without power and clean water. Moreover, FEMA has rushed in bringing needed help and supplies, but a wholly incompetent distribution response from the State government has left Texas citizens in the lurch.

@TyKC You specifically said

"Is the delay because they don't want Biden to look good?"

Not only do I find that statement offensive, I also had seen that in fact Biden was slow (days) on declaring it a state of emergency requiring a FEMA response.

Did Biden "co-ordinate" FEMA's response with the necessary Texas government? One might want to look into that issue as well.

As to Texas' overall response, I do agree there truly are some serious issues there. I simply object to your way of stating it.

This article dated Feb. 17 speaks of generators just being delivered ... is this not 6 days after the emergency state was declared???

[abc13.com]

And, Biden's actual declaration wasn't until 3 full days later

[fema.gov]

And the poor old dottering President "MAY" visit Texas "next" week ... jeeze, isn't that fast?

[msn.com]

@toronto_Georgia I could care less that you find the statement offensive. It's a legitimate question given the remarks made by the governor. His statements about renewable energy sources are patently absurd and inappropriate. He knows that Biden supports renewable energy. He campaigned on it. This is a time just to accept FEMA's help for the sake of the people. FEMA simply has assets, they don't know the lay of the land in Texas. They necessarily depend on state official to guide them. This clearly isn't happening. Biden has to wait for the state to ask for help. He signed the order immediately upon request.

@toronto_Georgia The storm occurred on Feb 11. It does not say when the governor requested the relief. I don't think there was much of a delay.