Good. Don Young deserves to be thrown under the bus for his disastrous policies.

lexnaturalis: Good. Don Young deserves to be thrown under the bus for his disastrous policies.

And his ilk in the GOP.

We get good people back into the GOP and I might just start voting Republican again.

If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994.

Yeah, If only.

Not just his policies, but the sneaky, underhanded ways he gets his pet projects.

When he got $10M approved for some road in FL, the original language in the bill said it was for improvements to I-75. After the Senate passed it & before it was sent to the President, he went back in & changed it to read Coconut Road.

And the fact that the developer who owned a bunch of property along this new road had given Young $40K for his campaign had nothing to do with it, I'm sure.

It's a wonder that bus can go anywhere at all, what with the enormous array of things, people, concepts, and causes being constantly thrown under it.

Cagey B: It's a wonder that bus can go anywhere at all, what with the enormous array of things, people, concepts, and causes being constantly thrown under it.

To be fair, the bus under which Congress throws things is notoriously short.

After going to AK I have a different perception on the whole "bridge to nowhere" thing. They do need it. Not at the grand level that was proposed, but they sure as hell do need a bridge to the airport in Ketchican.

BobtheFascist: After going to AK I have a different perception on the whole "bridge to nowhere" thing. They do need it. Not at the grand level that was proposed, but they sure as hell do need a bridge to the airport in Ketchican.

Airplanes don't need bridges.

I take it the "under a bus" meme is the latest and greatest, along with such memorable ones as "-gate" for 'scandal' and "[letter]-[weak political jibe"?

i thought it was ted stevens who inserted the bridge to nowhere?

BooBoo23: If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994.

Yeah, If only.

They also need to throw the theocrats out of the party, and maybe then moderates would vote for them, too. If they adopt real fiscal conservativism, instead of just cutting taxes for the rich, they could even appeal to social liberals.

depmode,

It was Ted Stevens, although Don Young has his own fiscal sins almost as bad..

If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994.

Conservatives, please read the above quote until it sinks in. Take back your party.

The Why Not Guy: If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994.

Conservatives, please read the above quote until it sinks in. Take back your party.

Exactly. While it may not be possible for the party to remove the likes of Young and Stevens from office, some voters like the bacon they bring home, the party certainly can remove them from positions of leadership and even remove them from the party. Stevens should have been forced to give up his position on the Senate Appropriations comm.

depmode98: i thought it was ted stevens who inserted the bridge to nowhere?

It looks like both are responsible (Don Young's the transportation committee chair), although Ted Stevens was the one who had the meltdown about it being pulled.

The Why Not Guy: If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994.

Conservatives, please read the above quote until it sinks in. Take back your party.

The only reason they were "fiscally responsible" in 94 was to tie Clinton's hands from implementing anything. This is laughable. They will again become suddenly "fiscally responsible" when Obama is elected. I am 35 and the Republican party has never been fiscally responsible in my life. This is oneo f those lies repeated over and over that has become a "truth".

Cutting taxes on the wealthy does not mean fiscal responsibility. If fact, often it is the opposite. I just shudder that people are this stupid.

BooBoo23: If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994.

Yeah, If only.

If they do that, then they can't help themselves to the gravy train. Afterall, Republicans are solely in the game for themselves, honesty and doing what you say be damned.

depmode98: i thought it was ted stevens who inserted the bridge to nowhere?

The House and Senate both have to agree on a budget. So I'm assuming that earmarks have to have a friend in both legislative bodies.

wrightb71: BobtheFascist: After going to AK I have a different perception on the whole "bridge to nowhere" thing. They do need it. Not at the grand level that was proposed, but they sure as hell do need a bridge to the airport in Ketchican.

Airplanes don't need bridges.

And how do you get to the airport when you want to catch a flight?

BobtheFascist: After going to AK I have a different perception on the whole "bridge to nowhere" thing. They do need it. Not at the grand level that was proposed, but they sure as hell do need a bridge to the airport in Ketchican.

I don't understand the distinction. You say they needed a bridge, and it WAS submitted "at the grand level that was proposed"... so this is still a pork-disaster of epic proportions. I'm sure you'll comment back on how you weren't defending Young, but it's notable that your apologist function is still working.

I_Love_Verdi: wrightb71: BobtheFascist: After going to AK I have a different perception on the whole "bridge to nowhere" thing. They do need it. Not at the grand level that was proposed, but they sure as hell do need a bridge to the airport in Ketchican.

Airplanes don't need bridges.

And how do you get to the airport when you want to catch a flight?

If I recall correctly, they use a ferry.

xanadian: We get good people back into the GOP ^* and I might just start voting Republican again.

* and if the GOP stops bottoming for "social conservatives" whose beliefs starkly contradict with true conservatism

The Rupert Murdoch Journal demands a sacrificial lamb!

I_Love_Verdi: wrightb71: BobtheFascist: After going to AK I have a different perception on the whole "bridge to nowhere" thing. They do need it. Not at the grand level that was proposed, but they sure as hell do need a bridge to the airport in Ketchican.

Airplanes don't need bridges.

And how do you get to the airport when you want to catch a flight?

I assume since it's AK, they ride some sort of bear or 'bar' if you will.

Headso: The Rupert Murdoch Journal demands a sacrificial lamb!

Pat Toomey was a fiscal conservative and was completely abandoned by the GOP at the state and National level in 2004. But I am sure he has no axe to grind.

Look, the only time one of the weasles attacks another is becuase the sinking. it is never because it is the right thing to do.

Nurglitch: I take it the "under a bus" meme is the latest and greatest, along with such memorable ones as "-gate" for 'scandal' and "[letter]-[weak political jibe"?

Where have you been? The MSM have been using that cliche all year.

I_Love_Verdi: wrightb71: BobtheFascist: After going to AK I have a different perception on the whole "bridge to nowhere" thing. They do need it. Not at the grand level that was proposed, but they sure as hell do need a bridge to the airport in Ketchican.

Airplanes don't need bridges.

And how do you get to the airport when you want to catch a flight?

What idiot built an airport on an island with no access roads?

I stopped reading TFA when he said that the bridge to nowhere is the reason the republicans list congress.

The modern GOP: Good at winning elections, terrible at actually governing.

PascalsGhost: The only reason they were "fiscally responsible" in 94 was to tie Clinton's hands from implementing anything.

You're right. But I don't really care what the movitation is, as long as it happens. And in a larger sense, my post was meant to express a desire that Republicans focus on smaller government rather than hating fags and brown people, not to suggest that they were ever the fiscal ideal. They weren't. But unlike now they were at least making an effort.

jcooli09: I stopped reading TFA when he said that the bridge to nowhere is the reason the republicans list congress.

You can pretend everything is peachy-keen or you can take a hard look at your party, identify areas where improvements need to be made, and make the changes; changes which will benefit your party and our country.

I can see which approach you've chosen.

If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994. This is no easy task. But the GOP can start by showing Mr. Young the door

Bullshiat. Republicans just need to present their Democrat opponent as a big scary lib that will let gay pron exec take away their guns while they teach 'evillotion' in state schools run by A-rab doctors that hand out free abortions and government cheese.

Because in the end, they know that Republicans are too chickenshiat to vote for a candidate that upholds true conservative principals when a liberal may get elected. So why not run one that will make your buddies rich?

syrynxx: Nurglitch: I take it the "under a bus" meme is the latest and greatest, along with such memorable ones as "-gate" for 'scandal' and "[letter]-[weak political jibe"?

Where have you been? The MSM have whole world has been using that cliche all year since buses were invented.

Mr. Young spends taxpayer money so wastefully he could make a liberal Democrat blush.

When can we retire this ignorant cliche? I don't claim that liberal Democrats aren't a bit prone to spending, but as compared to the Republican party - Jesus tittyfarking Christ.

FTA: But the bridge isn't Mr. Young's only earmark to draw negative attention. It seems the veteran lawmaker inserted a $10 million earmark into the 2006 transportation bill for a road project in Florida.

Of course, Florida is not exactly next door to Alaska, so more than a few people have wondered why Mr. Young pushed to fund the pork-barrel project. Among those inquiring into the matter is the Justice Department, which is looking at the fact that a Florida real estate developer, Daniel J. Aronoff, who stands to benefit from the federal earmark, has raised some $40,000 for Mr. Young's campaign coffers.

As a liberal Democrat, I'm highly offended to be compared to Republican Don Young. To throw him under the bus, you have to try and link him to those you Republicans automatically detest the most: liberals who believe in equal rights for all and so on. Just admit you all aren't all perfect and deal with it. Don't drag us into your dirty laundry and bathroom stalls. You can keep your crooks on your own clock. We kick out enough in our own party, now and then, on our own.

"Republicans just need to present their Democrat opponent as a big scary lib that will let gay pron exec take away their guns while they teach 'evillotion' in state schools run by A-rab doctors that hand out free abortions and government cheese."

Mmm... Evil Lotion...

I dislike the assumption that all federal money earmarked for projects in particular constituencies is all "pork barrel" spending to favor individuals who give lots of money to the particular legislator.

I worked for a Congressman as staff assistant in Southern California for a couple of years while working on my Ph.d. While there are definitely unprincipled, even corrupt legislators, there are also many who try to do good.

One of the most important things a Congressman does is to represent his communities interest in Congress, and get Federal dollars back to his/her community. Parks, community centers, extra law enforcement, roads, bridges, light rail, and other capital intensive projects are often beyond the local resources. Federal and state money make these projects possible. There is a limited amount of money available, and individual legislators want their fair share to flow back to their constituency.

On the other hand, the system is ripe for abuse and manipulation. The primary complaint is really how this spending is buried in Omnibus spending packages, or other complex pieces of legislation in an attempt to hide the fact rather than have more sunshine on the spending process.

This was done much more effectively with block grant money in the 1970's, for example.

Nurglitch: I take it the "under a bus" meme is the latest and greatest, along with such memorable ones as "-gate" for 'scandal' and "[letter]-[weak political jibe"?

It goes well with i[noun].

KATE
Our Congressmen are really really great
TREKKIE MONSTER
For pork!
KATE
We've got fair elections so we don't have to wait
TREKKIE
For pork
KATE
Huh?
There's always some new fight,
TREKKIE
For pork!
KATE
I lobby day and night
TREKKIE
For pork!
KATE
It's like i'm grifting at the speed of light
TREKKIE
For pork!
KATE
Trekkie!

TREKKIE
Our Congressmen are for pork
KATE
Trekkie!
TREKKIE
Our Congressmen are for pork,
KATE
What are you doing!?
TREKKIE
Shovel it in with a pitchfork?
Pork pork pork

It's not a bridge to nowhere, it's a series of re-bar tubes, steel, and cement emplacements!

Stevens and his family owns a large chunk of property on the island, and when it is fully connected with the "Bridge to nowhere", they value will skyrocket! Stevens and his ilk are the reason that I don't call myself a Republican anymore (Fiscal Conservative, Moral Libertarian).

The thrown under the bus meme needs to be thrown under the bus.

El_Dan: BooBoo23: If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994.

Yeah, If only.

They also need to throw the theocrats out of the party, and maybe then moderates would vote for them, too. If they adopt real fiscal conservativism, instead of just cutting taxes for the rich, they could even appeal to social liberals.


How are their theocrats any different than the Obama church of we be hatn whitey America? How many "Reverends" have run for the nomination on the Democrat party ticket? Howm any "Reverends" now endorse Obama?

Number41: depmode98: i thought it was ted stevens who inserted the bridge to nowhere?

It looks like both are responsible (Don Young's the transportation committee chair), although Ted Stevens was the one who had the meltdown about it being pulled.

Young had is own meltdown, telling those who wanted it pulled to kiss is a**.

BobtheFascist: After going to AK I have a different perception on the whole "bridge to nowhere" thing. They do need it. Not at the grand level that was proposed, but they sure as hell do need a bridge to the airport in Ketchican.

Confusing need with want. They probably would "want" a bridge to Adak also.

xanadian: lexnaturalis: Good. Don Young deserves to be thrown under the bus for his disastrous policies.

And his ilk in the GOP.

We get good people back into the GOP and I might just start voting Republican again.

Oh Bullsh*t, all the "good people" of the GOP were cheering and encouraging the crazies on with every electorial victory, the WSJ is just one of the many rats getting off the sinking ship of the GOP.

hasty ambush: How are their theocrats any different than the Obama church of we be hatn whitey America? How many "Reverends" have run for the nomination on the Democrat party ticket? Howm any "Reverends" now endorse Obama?

Are you suggesting that the politics of the Democrats is remotely near as driven by Religious leaders as the Republican party is?

Hilarious.



Komplex: xanadian: lexnaturalis: Good. Don Young deserves to be thrown under the bus for his disastrous policies.

And his ilk in the GOP.

We get good people back into the GOP and I might just start voting Republican again.

Oh Bullsh*t, all the "good people" of the GOP were cheering and encouraging the crazies on with every electorial victory, the WSJ is just one of the many rats getting off the sinking ship of the GOP.

This. They are losing now so they need "good people".

brigid_fitch:

When he got $10M approved for some road in FL, the original language in the bill said it was for improvements to I-75. After the Senate passed it & before it was sent to the President, he went back in & changed it to read Coconut Road.



How was this legal? Why has there not been systematic tar-and-feathering of politicians that do this?

Well then elect somebody with even a hint of integrity next time.

/America: we get what we deserve ... farked in the ass!

fjellt: (Fiscal Conservative, Moral Libertarian).

I like that, can I steal it?