Jon Stewart "encouraging" congress.

[Alcoholic Actuary]

You seem uninformed about the scope of this issue. Let me try to inform you:

• the World Trade Center contained the stock market apparatus for the US publicly traded companies and was therefore a military target to hurt the country by a terrorist organization which sought to disrupt the national economy;
• Persons working at the WTC, included many non-NYC persons, many non-NY state persons, such as New Jersey and Connecticut residents but not limited to those other states, and the applicability of the work was to the entire nation as such public companies had incorporation across the US;
• Responders to the national emergency included not merely NYC persons, but NY state persons, NJ persons, CT persons, and federal persons;
• Persons working in the areas of medicine, military (national guard, coast guard, marines, navy), firefighters, construction, metal, police helped with not merely the first response but also saving people from the rubble and then the cleanup;
• Many persons helping first response, cleanup and save people in this national emergency were voluntary but their service was necessary.

Not to mention global organizations in all of the towers impacted, such as:

1. Royal Thai Embassy Office
2. Korea Local Authorities
3. Taipei Bank
4. Bank of Taiwan
5. Daehan International
6. Hyundai Securities Co., Ltd.
7. Asahi Bank, Ltd.
8. Banco LatinoAmericano de

And Federal Institutions like:

1. U.S. Secret Service
2. U.S. Department of Commerce
3. BATF (Alcohol Tobacco & Firearms)
4. U.S. Department of Agriculture
5. U.S. Department of Labor
6. Securities & Exchange Commission
7. Federal Home Loan Bank

And, of course, the dozens of national and multi-national private corporations (like AT&T and American Express etc).

The Pentagon was also attacked.

aa

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

The Pentagon was also attacked.

Indeed, but the level of collateral damage that first responders had to endure there was extremely minimal compared to the massive amount of collateral damage caused by numerous skyscrapers (filled with asbestos) collapsing in NYC.

But, yes, in regard to the fact that it was an attack on America--not just an attack on Manhattan--that would be further evidence. Why we need any evdience at all is still a mystery, but for some reason there are assholes in the world who will do anything possible to not pony up the .000000001 cent it will cost them individually in taxes to do right by these heroes who acted without regard to their own personal safety to save the lives of as many survivors as they possibly could.

Some people just need to be jettisoned into the sun for the good of all mankind.

 

[Playball40]

They don't. This was something that was out of the actuary calculation and therefore should fall under Federal Emergency.

Did they attack only NY or the US? There's your answer.

Why is this congresses' job/a federal issue and not an NYC issue (or perhaps NY state issue)? They primarily worked for the city and helped victims in the city. The richest city in the US. Why can they not provide everything these first responders need?

Makes no sense why NYC hasn't covered the bills. Does not answer the question.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Indeed, but the level of collateral damage that first responders had to endure there was extremely minimal compared to the massive amount of collateral damage caused by numerous skyscrapers (filled with asbestos) collapsing in NYC.

But, yes, in regard to the fact that it was an attack on America--not just an attack on Manhattan--that would be further evidence. Why we need any evdience at all is still a mystery, but for some reason there are assholes in the world who will do anything possible to not pony up the .000000001 cent it will cost them individually in taxes to do right by these heroes who acted without regard to their own personal safety to save the lives of as many survivors as they possibly could.

Some people just need to be jettisoned into the sun for the good of all mankind.

^Right on.

Also, we need the government to take care of victims of an act of war or more generally to assist in national emergencies where we go beyond the scope of private or local liability.

And right now it shouldn't be about why does the govt have to do this...it should be what else can the govt do? I'm ready to give more taxes to help these guys, not less. Congress critters are more interested in supplying the military industrial complex than helping victims of an act of war. It's shameful, like Jon Stewart says. That video had me holding back tears.

What the hell is wrong with people? They couldn't even show up.

 

[SimpleDon]

Indeed, but the level of collateral damage that first responders had to endure there was extremely minimal compared to the massive amount of collateral damage caused by numerous skyscrapers (filled with asbestos) collapsing in NYC.

But, yes, in regard to the fact that it was an attack on America--not just an attack on Manhattan--that would be further evidence. Why we need any evdience at all is still a mystery, but for some reason there are assholes in the world who will do anything possible to not pony up the .000000001 cent it will cost them individually in taxes to do right by these heroes who acted without regard to their own personal safety to save the lives of as many survivors as they possibly could.

Some people just need to be jettisoned into the sun for the good of all mankind.

^Right on.

Also, we need the government to take care of victims of an act of war or more generally to assist in national emergencies where we go beyond the scope of private or local liability.

And right now it shouldn't be about why does the govt have to do this...it should be what else can the govt do? I'm ready to give more taxes to help these guys, not less. Congress critters are more interested in supplying the military industrial complex than helping victims of an act of war. It's shameful, like Jon Stewart says. That video had me holding back tears.

What the hell is wrong with people? They couldn't even show up.

The majority of the Representatives who weren't there or who attended part-time said that they support the bill and that it would pass easily.

 

[Gun Nut]

The bill passed.

Perhaps Jon was just being an asshole. Why show up to a hearing (with a political comic speaking) when your mind is already made up for the side of those speaking to support it? Jon would only have been speaking to the choir.

 

[laughing dog]

The bill passed.

Perhaps Jon was just being an asshole. Why show up to a hearing (with a political comic speaking) when your mind is already made up for the side of those speaking to support it? Jon would only have been speaking to the choir.

Since Congress has had 8 years to deal with this issue and had yet to adequately address it, there was no reason for anyone to think they would do so right now. And even if the bill passed the House, it still needs to get through the Senate. So it makes perfect sense for any rational supporter to show up to the hearing.

 

[Worldtraveller]

The bill passed.

Perhaps Jon was just being an asshole. Why show up to a hearing (with a political comic speaking) when your mind is already made up for the side of those speaking to support it? Jon would only have been speaking to the choir.

Since Congress has had 8 years to deal with this issue and had yet to adequately address it, there was no reason for anyone to think they would do so right now. And even if the bill passed the House, it still needs to get through the Senate. So it makes perfect sense for any rational supporter to show up to the hearing.

Also, the bill passed the house. It will probably face stiffer opposition (for some stupid reason) passing the senate with russian puppet mcconnel in charge.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The bill passed.

Perhaps Jon was just being an asshole. Why show up to a hearing (with a political comic speaking) when your mind is already made up for the side of those speaking to support it? Jon would only have been speaking to the choir.

Jon was speaking not just to the House committee, many of whom were not there but also to Americans and the media. He was bringing attention to the issue. Some of what he said was not to have these continued renewal bills that may or may not persist and not to wrap this bill up in another bill, like they tried to do before to support an agenda. Let's review. It is now 2019. The funding is up for renewal yet again in 2020. That's because every 5 years it is up for renewal and that's because that is how some politicians made it, instead of funding the victims throughout their lives. And each time the funding is up for renewal, someone tries to wrap it in other legislation, like in 2015 it was wrapped up in a transportation bill to be used as leverage. Other politicians probably hope it will go away as issue people care about and so it might not be renewed in 20 or so years. Therefore, this time, the bill is different. It's meant to be solo and it's meant to go to 2090 or something large enough to cover the lives of the victims. It's been 18 years that this crap has been going on.

 

[Keith&Co.]

The bill passed.

Perhaps Jon was just being an asshole. Why show up to a hearing (with a political comic speaking)

A political comic speaking? We have a reality-TV-show host as the president. Can't use career paths to determine the worth of testimony.
If nothing else, his celebrity status ensured that his little speech got far wider distribution than any of the firefighters' bitching would have.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

The bill passed.

Thanks in no small part to Stewart's impassioned plea (and the fact that it went viral in milliseconds).

Perhaps Jon was just being an asshole. Why show up to a hearing (with a political comic speaking) when your mind is already made up for the side of those speaking to support it? Jon would only have been speaking to the choir.

That's what they are claiming now, after they just got their asses handed to them and it went round the world. It's not unreasonable (particularly given the history of the fight for this funding) for anyone on Stewart's side (including him) to assume that a lack of attendance would also equate with a lack of support and/or an intention not to vote for the bill.

Regardless, his tirade was primarily about their disrespect in not showing up; that they did not take the time and/or have the common decency to be physically present at an event that--due to Stewart's participation--was assured to be televised, thus raising awareness for the cause. It wasn't just that Stewart was speaking; so were actual victims, which to them would obviously have been a very big deal. They all took time out of their own lives to travel all that way for something deathly important, after all, so, even if all of the congresspeople that didn't show had fully intended to vote in favor of the bill, that still would not excuse the disrespect shown by not showing up.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The bill passed.

Perhaps Jon was just being an asshole. Why show up to a hearing (with a political comic speaking) when your mind is already made up for the side of those speaking to support it? Jon would only have been speaking to the choir.

Since Congress has had 8 years to deal with this issue and had yet to adequately address it, there was no reason for anyone to think they would do so right now. And even if the bill passed the House, it still needs to get through the Senate. So it makes perfect sense for any rational supporter to show up to the hearing.

Also, the bill passed the house. It will probably face stiffer opposition (for some stupid reason) passing the senate with russian puppet mcconnel in charge.

^This.

The bill is being blocked in the Senate. So, no, it didn't pass yet.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...-senate-vote-on-9-11-victim-compensation-fund