Why Is There Always A Big Screen TV?

National Post;

The cost of caring for the evacuees has ballooned to just over $80 million so far. Officials say it takes about $1.5 million a month to care for First Nations residents, who are still unable to return to their homes following severe spring flooding in 2011. The evacuees, scattered around Winnipeg and the province, live in hotels and rental accommodation while officials search for permanent homes.

h/t Bob H.

31 Replies to “Why Is There Always A Big Screen TV?”

  1. That’s it. I’m changing my name to Cloud Big Lickmuffin and flooding the basement with my garden hose. I want a piece of that sweet, sweet flood relief action.

  2. Where are they searching for permanent homes? Are there homes for sale in the wilds where there are no facilities or infrastructure? OOPs, they don’t buy, we the taxpaying public build the houses in remote areas of their choice, accessible by plane and they let them fall apart. Not only do we supply them with TV’s but snowmobiles, three wheelers, four wheelers, you name it. These are the people who want to live as their ancestors did as their excuse for living in the these places? If they were living off the land instead of the people of the land we might show them more respect, they’d be wearing animal skins and living in Tepees.
    How stupid are we? We’re damned stupid, they’re laughing at us while we cater to them. Fish Soup Theresa is an example of how well the ordinary Natives are taken care of by their Cadillac Chiefs who are supposed to look after them. They yelp for respect but show none. Of course when their children have problems, that’s our fault as well.

  3. “Cloud Big Lickmuffin”
    Try to say that fast three times. Bad choice.
    Better: Winnipegapizza

  4. WTF happened to their “mystical” connection with the Land(TM)? I thought they wanted to live a traditional lifestyle? Why aren’t they erecting their teepees on higher ground?

  5. Perhaps some of the officials could start showing at least half the concern for the business owner who hasn’t been paid for the shelter he provided, as they do for those who received the benefit of that shelter.
    No more funds should be advanced until the bill is settled.

  6. I thought we were starving them to death. Took away their milk. What exactly did Indians milk? – moose?

  7. No different than any people taking welfare because they were flooded. They probably have big screen TVs too…

  8. Two years out of their homes? By now a self-reliant person (or a ‘nation’ thereof) would have either rebuilt their houses on raised pilings or relocated the entire village to high ground. Can you imagine how the proud warriors of the past would react to seeing their descendants so dependent on others?
    Did the RCMP seize their hunting rifles yet?

  9. stradivarious: No different than any people taking welfare because they were flooded.
    Except that most groups of “any people” would probably have personal plans for returning to their previously productive lives.

  10. Strad, the main différence is that they paid for their own TVs and housing whereas the natives are mostly supported by us. And the natives have no plans to look for their own housing but would rather have the government do it for them. Nothing but pampered parasites.

  11. Yeah, some aren’t as bad as others. It’s like being a little bit pregnant, though.
    I’m betting there’s some big screen TVs, as well as other toys. Maybe they should have used that money to build their own insurance policy, rather than raiding taxpayers like me who don’t have big screen TVs just so they can live where it floods.
    There’s all kinds of excuses, but they’re only excuses…

  12. This begs the question: Will Red Ali stop the FNs folks from rebuilding in the flood plains?
    We’re all Indigenous to Somewhere!

  13. Holy Mackerel! Who do these uppity Indians think they are?
    I mean, they keep this up and they’ll be pissing away our tax dollars as fast as Dildo McDinky, or Duffy, or Turdo la Doo, or Clement, or Wallin….you know….important people!

  14. “Two years out of their homes?”
    C’mon Al. Have some pity for the poor ‘exiles’.
    By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.

  15. The fair thing to do would be to take the welfare payments and give them to the hotel owner so that he might repair his business. Anything left over can be given to the Indians along with an eviction notice.

  16. I just helped a friend do a demolition at a Hilton, should have just housed the indians there and it would have saved the cost of the demolitionqpz

  17. stradivarious: There’s all kinds of excuses, but they’re only excuses…
    Excuses are useless, blame is more useful.
    I don’t blame any particular Indians for the overall problem, but to generally excuse them all simply because they’re part of a degenerate system is not helpful.
    Individual Indians must be blamed in accordance with their level of collusion with that system.
    There are many Indians that are blameless; there are more that need to grow up and accept responsibility for their lives.

  18. Good question about the rifles,Al. I doubt the RCMP even looked for them, the Rez Injuns were exempted from the Firearms Act,in one of the most racist laws ever passed in this Country.
    I saw some of these people being interviewed on TV last night,and was knocked over by their childlike helplessness, just sitting ,waiting, for someone to do something for them.
    In two years,any able-bodied person could have found work, found their own living accommodations, made their own life, but not these perpetual “victims”.
    I felt bad for the poor hotel owner who is the person really getting the royal shaft.If Indian Affairs has any sense of decency at all,they should see this man is paid the money they owe him for babysitting their helpless wards, and damned quickly,too!

  19. Figures that the comments are shut off for this story on the National Post site. The national Post has become a joke, to scared to allow any warranted criticism of a special victim group. Same thing for stories about gay groups that bully people. National Post is mostly just a progressive paper now.

  20. Dollars to donuts they hired relatives of the Hurricane Katrina Organization to administer the program, eh. Love the way the noble white resort guy gets the shaft for opening up his doors to these “victims.”

  21. 1.5 million a month? What a bar tab.
    Return to res updates will be broadcast on Brocket 99.

  22. Did I read this right 1.5 million a month to take care of 65 people? That is over $20,000 a month each.

  23. Anybody think all the High River people will still be living in government funded hotels in 2015?
    $80 million versus over a billion. Who’s the bigger parasite? If you want to measure it that way…

  24. Two years?? Anyone and I mean virtually anyone would have done something for him/herself by now. Is it any wonder natives don’t get any respect when it seems that they have absolutely no desire to join the 21st century and want to be, demand to be, cared for like children. The only time we see any motivation from them is when they glom onto another opportunity to extort tax payer money which is exactly what the vitamin thing that has suddenly shown up, will become. Someday governments will have to “grow some” and firstly demand accountability and then cut them loose so they have some incentive to get onto the planet and provide for themselves like the rest of us. They seem to discount the fact that no one gave most of us a plugged nickel and we worked our way to wherever it is we are and whatever level of success we enjoy. One could go on and on but I’m just sick of it all.

  25. One Billion $ for rebuilding a productive community of people who actually contribute something of value to society … vs…. $80 million to a bunch of freeloaders for room and board!
    Better than a ten to one value proposition as I see it.
    BTW … who pays your rent little fiddle?

  26. Better than a ten to one value proposition as I see it.
    The entitled always excuse themselves by calling a raid on the taxpayers an ‘investment’.

Navigation