Ron Paul: Abolish FEMA? Why Not?

From the department of incoherent psycho-babble comes Libertarian hero, and Republican presidential contender, Doctor Ron Paul. Paul, who was sent back in time from the dream-world of Ayn Rand, is here to deliver us from government oppression.

BLITZER: On the whole issue of FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, do you want to see that agency ended?

PAUL: Well, if you want to live in a free society, if you want to pay attention to the constitution, why not? I think it’s bad economics. I think it’s bad morality. And it’s bad constitutional law. Why should people like myself, who had, not too long ago, a house on the Gulf Coast and it’s – it’s expensive there and it’s risky and it’s dangerous. Why should somebody from the central part of the United States rebuild my house? Why shouldn’t I have to buy my own insurance and protect about the potential dangers? I mean it’s – it’s a moral hazard to say that government is always going to take care of us when we do dumb things. I’m trying to get people to not to dumb things. Besides, it’s not authorized in the constitution.

BLITZER: And if there’s a disaster, like flooding or – or an earthquake or Hurricane Katrina, what’s wrong with asking fellow Americans to help their – their – their fellow citizens?

PAUL: Nothing. And I think Americans are very, very generous and they have traditionally. The big problem is Americans are getting poor and they’re not able to voluntarily come to the rescue. But to coerce people, to ask them to help, that is fine and dandy. But when you bankrupt our country and nobody has a job and then they say, well, FEMA needs to bail out everybody, then all we’re doing is compounding our problems.

Apparently the key to life is "don't do dumb things." Dumb things like get struck by a tornado, a hurricane, a flood, a wildfire, an earthquake, or any other natural or man-made disaster which you have no control over. Got it.

I don't even know where to begin, honestly. Did anyone tell Ron Paul that Atlas Shrugged bombed at the box office? They even canceled its two planned sequels!

Maybe I am simply incapable of shoving my head far enough up my own ass to understand how managing recovery efforts and helping people recoup their loses after a disaster is "bad morality," nor understand how it is bad economically. Can you imagine the human and economic toll that would be incurred right now if a major hurricane struck and there was no governmental assistence provided? A scenario like may even resemble Hurricane Katrina.

How do the citizens of Alabama and Mississippi whose towns were recently wiped off the map by tornados feel about the idea of abolishing FEMA? From what I gather, the existence of FEMA is working out pretty well for them.

Virtually every corner of the nation is susceptible to one form of natural disaster or the another, whether its ice and snow in New England, tornados in the Midwest, hurricanes on the southern coast, or earthquakes and wildfires on the west coast. Simply telling people to not do "dumb things," and hope for the best, is not a serious governing strategy for a civilized nation.

For anyone who wasn't aware -- this is the face of true Libertarianism. It's absolutely bat-shit crazy and simply not compatible with the 21st century.