Some moron was allowed out into the light, and apparently, like a vampire threatened by the sun, began screaming babble:
' "On the October 14 broadcast of his daily radio show, right-wing radio host [moron] stated that if the country is faced with an impending national disaster, it should make it a higher priority to save rich Americans rather than poor Americans.
An October 13 New York Daily News article spurred [moron]'s comments. The front-page story, headlined "Rich Got Terror Tip," reported that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has launched an investigation into whether its officials alerted certain New Yorkers of a terror threat to the city's subway days before the rest of the city learned of the possible plot...
After summarizing the story, [moron] responded, "This is as it should be." He went on to imagine a scenario in which the country is forced to "set some priorities" regarding who will be notified of an impending disaster. "We should save the rich people first," [moron] declared. "You know, they're the ones that are responsible for this prosperity." [moron] described the poorest Americans as "a drag on society" and stated that they "don't achieve squat. They sit around all the time waiting for somebody else to take care of them. They have children they can't afford. They're uneducated. They can barely read." '
I apologize partly for the ad hominem attacks, but there is no reason to offer this individual any recognition, nor argue his logic, since there really is none, worth thinking about. If you do not believe me, ask yourself this of the following two individuals who would you want to have your back when the proverbial shite hits the fan: a well paid CEO or a former police officer? Did you think about how much they had the bank before you made your decision?
In a disaster, money just becomes paper: wits, knowledge, clear thinking become more valuable than gold. I have discovered, working in various high level offices, where more money than you could imagine, changes hands daily, those virtues are often scarcer than water in a desert. People's skills in one area (such as moving money from place to another) may have no bearing on how useful they would be in another (such as rebuilding after a collapse). Anyone who believes that is an idiot, and of little value in the way of national discussion.
I bet dollars to donuts that [moron]'s favorite book is the Bell Curve, the only book that was ever discounted before it was written. There is something uniquely stupid about an individual that most rich people would disdain for his position in life (if this guy makes millions, what does that mean to guy who makes 100 of millions?) arguing how the poor should be abandoned in favor of the rich during a disaster. Besides, who is doing the rescuing? Are they rich? The median fireman's pay is $19.00/hr, a police man is about the same. Coast Guard members receive much less than that, as do National Guardsmen, EMS, nurses, and the various groups of other people who sacrifice, protect, and serve during national disasters. I dare [moron] to look them in the eyes and tell them they will be abandoning huge swaths of the people in their city based on tax bracket. I think the only person they will be abandoning would be him.
We live in a nation and for most of us, rich or poor, we share the fortune of this place together. To argue that large amounts of people should be abandoned in times of trouble because of their yearly wage is not only immoral, is treason. We share in this venture called 'country' together, and those who think that they somehow want to disavow a certain segment of the population based on something as shallow as paycheck size, is welcome to leave and live somewhere his elitist fantasies can be indulged.
Original Article at Media Matters