The Three Worst Right-Wing Reactions to Disaster

Tragedy struck again in Tornado Alley on May 20 when a monster tornado ripped through Moore, Oklahoma, leveling much of the OKC suburb.  My thoughts go out to all the victims as they struggle to put their lives back together.  In today's hyper-politicized world with instant communication, reactions from politicians and pundits were inevitable.  They've pretty much run the gamut, with the only response I don't think I've heard yet being that God sent the tornado to punish Oklahomans for their sins (though I wonder, if the tornado had struck Minnesota a week after that state passed marriage equality, if we'd be hearing a different tune from hyper-conservative Christians).  There's still plenty of lunacy, though, and here I present the top three worst reactions from the right wing thought bubble, mainly featuring Oklahoma's own hardcore conservative Senators.

3.  Senator Inhofe Not Sure What Might Cause a Huge Tornado

Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe has made a name for himself as the biggest climate-change denier in Congress, firmly believing it to be a hoax concocted by Al Gore and the UN.  Never mind that 97% of climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warming (or, as Fox News would say, both sides have strong opinions).  Now, I'm not going to say that one tornado in Oklahoma is proof of global warming, as that's the same faulty reasoning employed by skeptics when they claim that one cold snap disproves it.  However, Infofe's complete disregard for science is on full display with this bone-headed comment:

 "So many things happen that are so hard to explain," he told the CNN host. "This thing was huge. This is one of the largest ones that we've had."

Um, actually, Sen. Inhofe, we can explain what happened.  We have created a scientific field dsigned to do just that.  It's called meteorology.  Maybe a dose of climatology for good measure.  If you and your fellow anti-scientists in Congress paid more attention to these, maybe we could focus more attention on the very real environmental threats posed to our country, whether global warming-related or not.  Or feel free to keep your head in the sand, where all you can hear is a monologue from the John Birch Society.

For good measure, here is a good article with lots of links to actual science-y stuff, explaining how climate change could intensify storms like Hurricane Sandy.

2.  Erick Erickson Just...Can't...Help...Himself

While the debris was still being searched Fox contributor Erick Erickson, editor of RedState and supposed deep thinker of the conservative movement, had this to tweet:  "I wonder when President Obama will find out about Oklahoma."  ROFL, right?  A Benghazi / IRS joke while a town is being destroyed.  When other Twitter users pointed out that he was being a classless jackass, he responded with the same tired "liberals don't have a sense of humor" victimhood schtick.  Leave the political comedy to Jon Stewart, Erick.  You suck at it.

1. The Okie Two-Step: Inhofe and Coburn Decide Which Disasters and Aid are Legit

Coburn and Inhofe: Is your disaster worthy?

We've seen this one coming since Sandy.  You might remember that many Republicans refused to vote for aid to Sandy victims unless it was offset dollar-for-dollar by cuts elsewhere (if at all).  Many people pointed out that many of these Republicans hailed from states that had faced disasters and had received federal aid with no strings attached.  Well, guess what?  Put shoe on other foot, Republicans.

 Last week Inhofe raised the possibility of impeaching Obama.  Now he's eager for the hated President to declare Moore a disaster area and deliver the goods.  This is, of course, "totally different" than the Sandy aid.  He claims that bill was full of pork because it included funds for DC and the Virgin Islands - completely ignorant of the fact that the hurricane struck those areas too.

Oklahoma's other Senator, Tom Coburn, is at least ideologically consistent.  As he did with Sandy, he is insisting that any relief funds to Oklahoma - to help his own constituents - be offset with budget cuts.  So the legitimate question to ask - that the press, as far as I know, hasn't - is: budget cuts from where?  The sequester is already taking its toll on programs such as Head Start and Meals on Wheels.  Congress looks set to substantially whack food stamp aid.  Here's a thought - how about instead of robbing one group of disadvantaged people to pay another, we cut subsidies to oil companies making record profits?  How about the annual payments to America's richest corporate farmers?  No?  Oh that's right, they're job creators so cutting their welfare would be wealth redistribution.  I forgot, it's only OK to take money from people that are already suffering.

While doing research for this post I came across one of my favorite Internet comments of all time that perfectly explains the position Inhofe and Coburn are in: "Selective austerity makes an excellent whine pairing with situational libertarianism."

Moreover, recent data from the Congressional Budget Office suggests that DC's obsession with debt is more pointless than ever.  You might have missed this, as it went under-reported during last week's Scandal-palooza, but the CBO reports that the deficit is expected to fall to a completely manageable level by 2015.  This has been possible through the tax increases and spending cuts already enacted as well as the recovering economy.  So, if it turns out that debt isn't a huge problem right now - as economists like Paul Krugman have been saying for years - why not invest more into our economy?  Rebuild our infrastructure?  Put tornado shelters in every school on the Plains?  But no, it's never enough for today's GOP - cut, cut, cut until a government agency can't perform its intended function - and that's the perfect excuse to cut some more.  The ultimate self-fulfilling prophecy of public policy.

Inhofe and Coburn can get away with saying stuff like this because they know full well any needed aid for Oklahoma will come through, likely without any stipulations.  It'll pass Congress easily (thought it'll be interesting to see how many Republicans resist, as they did for Sandy - will the Congress critters from Kansas turn their noses at help for a tornado, as they did for a hurricane?).  At least according to their rhetoric, they have no problem holding aid for their own Oklahomans hostage in the name of unnecessary budget cuts.  It's pure red meat for their hyper-conservative base, and it's pretty sad.  Perhaps Okies will realize how their Senators are using them as political props.  Given how red the Sooner State is, though, it seems unlikely.

P.S.  Credit where it's due: Moore's Republican Congressman, Tom Cole, voted for Sandy aid without condition, and seems relatively sane compared to Inhofe and Coburn.