I live in an area where some wealthy urbanites have second homes. Since covid many of them have fled their primary residence, come here, even enrolled their kids in the local school, which has had hybrid and now in-class education.
At the beginning of the covid crisis, there were many stories on the news about wealthy people from Manhattan fleeing to their Long Island mansions. The covid crisis has also caused something called “vaccine tourism” - people who can afford to, and who may have a second residence in a state where they can get to the front of the vaccine distribution line are traveling out of state to get it.
So is the issue whether it is right for someone who has the ability to leave home to go to a safer/warmer/more comfortable place? Because we’ve seen many of the wealthy and celebrity class do just that over the past year. Or is the issue whether a US senator should remain in his state during the crisis for the sake of the photo op, because other than that, I’m not sure what difference his presence or absence makes, how how remaining would remediate the crisis.
“Hypocrites. Complete and utter hypocrites. And don’t forget @MayorAdler who took a private jet with eight people to Cabo and **WHILE IN CABO recorded a video telling Austinites to 'stay home if you can…**this is not the time to relax”
No. NOt even close to the same thing unless we see the video of Cruz telling people to stay home.
Also, there is a difference between the responsibilities of a mayor and the responsibility of a Senator. A mayor is the chief executive of a town. He runs things. A Senator votes on legislation.
“When Ted Cruz left for Mexico the power was out. His wife Heidi texted a friend it was freezing. While he was gone the power came back. So Snowflake was in the cold for part of a day, but it could well have been longer. Ted left a security guard to take care of Snowflake.”
He is a monster for leaving someone to take care of the dog?
Oh…but if Hillary says so.