Harry Reid was forced to drop the omnibus bill because 9 GOP'ers decided they must listen to the teabaggers and vote against the bill when previously they said they would vote for it. Fiscal conservatives are calling this a victory. They are such hypocrites! 6,000 earmarks totaling 8 billion dollars had GOP support until they found out teabaggers would go so far as ousting any Senator who voted yes on the measure. Boy those baggers are dead serious aren't they? Except when it comes to stuff like the tax cuts for the rich not being paid for, oh and the 2 wars which are breaking us....
The fiscally conservative Club for Growth predicted that any Republican who voted for the $1.1 trillion spending measure would face a primary challenge ahead of the 2012 elections. Too funny!
Mitch McConnell stood on the Senate floor and actually had the nerve to say members on his side of the aisle had concerns about the way Washington is doing business. This man is a total hypocrite.
Here's a funny post from REDSTATE... Brian Darling writes:
"House and Senate appropriators crafted a bill in secret and, just yesterday, provided text to Senators and the American people. The bill is 1,924 pages long and it will cost you $1.25 trillion, including $8 billion in earmarks. This appropriations measure is loaded with pork barrel projects, ObamaCare spending and other items on the liberal wish list. Conservatives are outraged. Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Jim DeMint (R-SC) are expected to make the Clerk of the Senate read this 1,924 appropriations bill. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has identified 6,488 earmarks."
And he put this in his post from Fox News:
Fox News reported that when the bill was shown to the Senate Republican Caucus, Republicans were, for the most part, outraged.
“All hell is breaking loose,” the source told Fox News, noting that Sens. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Jim DeMint of South Carolina were expected to insist the omnibus bill be read in its entirety by the clerk on the Senate floor before a vote is held. They also were expected to seek debate on all earmarks and any amendments. If the clerk follows the pace of last year’s reading of the health care bill — 53 pages an hour — it will take almost 40 hours to read the omnibus bill.
Wow that is too funny! Come on, the American people aren't stupid! We know Republicans love their pork as much as Democrats! This is hilarious...Just GOOGLE earmarks and see who is loving the pork.
Mr. Reid said that with the failure of the $1.1 trillion spending bill, the only option left would be to pass another short-term measure, called a continuing resolution, which allows the government to continue spending at last year's levels.
Mr. Reid said he would work with Mr. McConnell (R., Ky.) over the next 24 hours to determine the length of a new, short-term spending measure.
To fund the government, Senate Republicans have offered a two-month spending bill that would expire on Feb. 18. By then, the GOP will have assumed control of the House and picked up several seats in the Senate.
The GOP leadership believes that would allow Republicans to influence the levels at which the federal government is funded for the rest of the year. Republicans say they want to roll back funding to fiscal 2008 levels, which they say would save $100 billion over the next decade.
Good luck United States of America. The GOP and the teabaggers are ready to act fiscally responsible....Yea right LOL!!
20 comments:
Pork is much more insidious than the 1% that it represents (and, yes, the Republicans are hypocritical and should be shamed). It leads many people to support and to vote for bills that they normally wouldn't support. The 1% is just the tip of the iceberg.......And, really, only in Washington (where 2 rump political parties are basically taking turns trying to bribe the American people) is 8 BILLION dollars considered chump change (you could probably go along way toward eliminating malaria in certain parts of Africa for that).
yes Will the pork is insidious and the GOP are even more so. Claire McCaskill did a great job calling out the hypocrites didn't she?!
I've noticed, Sue, there is at least one thing that you and Linda DO have in common. You both make a lot of disparaging remarks about people who you disagree politically with. And, yes, I've told HER this also (I think that she liked me until I defended Mr. Obama against charges of "extremism"). The way that I see it, we're going to be needing people like Snow, Collins, Brown, Murkowski, Voinovich, Lugar, maybe a few others whose names I can't remember now to pass DADT, START, etc., and that maybe it's not the best strategy to dampen every single ounce of powder all at once.
that's why I'm here Will, to make disparaging remarks about the GOP so the truth can get out there. How else would the Faux Noise viewers get the truth? :-) A girls gotta do what a girls gotta do!
I'll tell you what, Sue - if Snow, Collins, Brown, Murkowski, Voinovich, etc. refuse to step up and vote for DADT this weekend (I do believe that a vote is scheduled), I will gladly join in with you in your condemnation. Agreed?
Will you are making this post about hypocrites to be much more than it was intended to be. The bill was drafted by both sides, both sides had earmarks totaling 8 billion dollars, but in the end the teabaggers got to the GOPers and they retreated but not only did they back down they blamed the whole bloated bill on the democrats! That's hypocrisy!
the voting begins mid-morning, I'll be watching!
Are you asking me if Republicans are hypocrites? Uh, yah!! But, Sue, I also think that some of the Dems are hypocrites, too; the Kennedy family coming out for clean energy but then opposing windmills on Cape Cod, Al Gore talking about renewable energy and then having that mansion of his run strictly on natural gas, etc.. If you're asking me here, I don't have a lot of faith in any politician.
Sue, quick, do another post. That way we can forever look back to this one as "our post".
I think a lot of voters don't understand what earmarks are. They think that if there are no earmarks money will be saved. It won't.
From Wikipedia: In United States politics, an earmark is a legislative (especially congressional) provision that directs approved funds to be spent on specific projects...
It's the Constitutional duty of the Congress to propose earmarks (direct how funds that HAVE ALREADY BEEN ALLOCATED be spent).
It's legitimate to criticize a Congressperson for a wasteful earmark, but earmarks in general? The controversary over earmarks in general is complete nonsense.
I've heard that, too, wd. There's got to be a way, though (pass a law or something) that they can strip out the more wasteful spending and, instead of it being transfered into collateral waste, have it be returned to the treasury for debt reduction.
Dervish, the problem with earmarks had become the secrecy of them. it was impossible to determine who asked for the earmarks and how they got into bills.
There has been substantial work on that recently, but many still believe that if a congressman wants the $$$ for his district, they should openly request that $$$ and not cram it into omnibus spending bills.
Will are you flirting with me??
Of course A FEW Dems are hypocrites, it's much more fun to highlight the GOPers though.. :-)
It is nonsense w, especially when the republicans stand on the Senate floor and complain about the bill having DEMOCRAT earmarks and they are outraged about it. Hilarious...
Hi Dave
Will ~ I do disagree with those republicans who participated in adding earmarks to this bill and hope they got an earful from voters over it. Not all who claim to be republicans have the same ideology, you know. That being said, 90% of the earmarks were put there by liberals...after their beloved president campaigned and won on a platform including "no more earmarks." There is enough hypocrisy to go around BOTH sides of the isle in DC.
I don't know what makes you think that I don't "like" you anymore. Since I disagreed with you, that means I don't like you? I don't even know you.
I also respectfully disagree with your statement that I disparage those with whom I disagree politically. Disagreeing with policy does not equal "disparaging."
Sue ~ I'll go back to my own blog now...I didn't mean to intrude on liberal hallowed ground.
Linda you always make me laugh! Show us where 90% of the earmarks are from the liberals.
Merry Christmas Linda
Linda, Sue, I'd like to apologize to both of you. You're both nice people whose comments are always fresh and provocative. I do confess, though, I am getting a little weary of the strident partisanship that's constantly transpiring, not just on the internet but in society at large. And, plese, let me just remind you, Sue, that not all Republicans are bad (8 of them just voted to end DADT) and you, Linda, that Mr. Obama is NOT the second coming of Chairman Mao.
Will, no need to apologize! And no need to be weary either. Partisanship will always be, and even more with a black man in the White House. Sorry but it's the truth. We will always have a segment of our population who won't accept Obama because of race. I'm a partisan, I admit it. I also gave the 8 republicans their due in the post. It would have been nice to see a larger number tho. And now we have the START treaty and partisanship front and center. The GOP are not gonna give an ounce are they?
Mr. McConnell, while not as obviously obnoxious as Tom DeLay, is every bit as underhanded. To ignore the advice of 5 former REPUBLICAN Secretaries of State, like the fellow's doing, is just plain despicable. Yes, I think that we agree on this one. LOL
I read somewhere (so don't quote me) that $2B of those earmarks for from DeMint (R-SC) alone. I could be wrong on that and maybe it was $2M but that is still a shitload of money for one tiny little state. And him standing up there, raging about earmarks is the height of hypocrisy. Dumass.
And Linda - 90%. Really??? Where did you pull that on out of - your ass?
Jim Demint requested no earmarks.
Post a Comment