<p>She has experience, she was First Lady. It the “underpriviledge anyway” part that is so disgusting. As if losing everything they had was not so bad cause they didn’t have much.</p>
<p>If someone told you “well, you lost all your memories-wedding albums, all your records, your jobs, your pets, your school your church, your friends, but you were poor so this is a good thing”</p>
<p>What part of that is kind?</p>
<p>Exucse here all you want, she knew exactly what she was saying</p>
<p>She acted as if these people had little to lose, so this was a good thing</p>
<p>Look around you, if losing everything you had, how in anyway would that be a good thing and workng out well for you? No matter how much money you had.
Faring better than before- when they have nothing</p>
<p>And its not like these people weren’t working, having homes, having kids in school. If these were people living under a bridge before, maybe, it would be a good thing. But these people had lives that are desimated. But, hey this is working well for them.</p>
<p>Cruel.
I know I will get slammed for talking about this again. I don’t really care. I know meanness when I see it. Good she ws there helping, but after saying what she said, I don’t really think she cares very much.</p>
<p>A person who truly cared would realize what she said was hurtful to those that lost it all. That living in a dome is not “working out well” when you have nothing but the shirt on your back.</p>