FTFA, a quote about doing away with earmarks from another Texas Republican Senator (Jeb Hensarling)...

"We ought to call for a moratorium and come up with a new system that's competitive and passes the taxpayer smell test and take away any hint of pay for play," Hensarling said.

Dear lord. I almost passed out from the political cliche' overload.

Him doubleplusgood duckspeaker.

If the Republicans want to get any sort of traction with voters, then they have to COMPLETELY give up pork barrel spending. They have to stop with their own earmarks. Completely stop. And then use that against the Democrats.

But they won't do it. They're desperate....but they're addicted. They know what they have to do, but they can't do it. It's sad and pathetic, but if they don't take the first step, they'll lose their status as a national level party.

But if they give up their earmarks, how do they appease the corporate overlords?

As a resident of Texas, who used to be a Republican, let me state for the record that Kay Bailey sucks. Seriously. We hate her.

Can someone explain to me what exactly is bad about earmarks?

thalassatx: As a resident of Texas, who used to be a Republican, let me state for the record that Kay Bailey sucks. Seriously. We hate her.

What do you Think of Bill White? sure he screwed up a few times but he seems on the level

ProfessorTomoe: FTFA, a quote about doing away with earmarks from another Texas Republican Senator (Jeb Hensarling)...

"We ought to call for a moratorium and come up with a new system that's competitive and passes the taxpayer smell test and take away any hint of pay for play," Hensarling said.

Dear lord. I almost passed out from the political cliche' overload.

Him doubleplusgood duckspeaker.

He's the same asshole that thinks credit card companies should be able to jack up your interest rate at any time without reason... in the name of freedom, of course.

Weaver95: If the Republicans want to get any sort of traction with voters, then they have to COMPLETELY give up pork barrel spending. They have to stop with their own earmarks. Completely stop. And then use that against the Democrats.

I was reading an article that had the math showing that the Ds and Rs have very close to the same amount of total earmark spending but there are 59 Ds so pound for pound the Rs actually have more earmark spending than the Ds. I can't seem to find the article now though, I will keep looking.

But I agree if they want to use the anti-spending tactic effectively they actually need to be anti-spending. After the last 8 years they just sound like the boy who cried wolf.

attackingpencil: Can someone explain to me what exactly is bad about earmarks?

Personally, I think that having each proposal voted and debated on would bring about better transparency over how taxpayer money is being spent. I'd like to see these things voted on for their own merits, not because they were thrown into a "have to pass" bill.

Of course, that would probably be unwieldy. Maybe they bills could be lumped together by topic.

That's one thing you can respect about McCain, at least he had the decency to abstain from the process himself while he criticized it. Well that, or he had an iota of common sense and knew that the "Do as I say, not as I do" philosophy is generally pretty toxic politically.

attackingpencil: Can someone explain to me what exactly is bad about earmarks?

I think the problem is that they're stuck into a bill on the sly. And they cost money.

But the reality is that they amount to a hill of beans in the amount of money we blow through every year. Typically, they comprise less than 0.5% of total expenditures in a given year. Much ado about nothing (relatively speaking).

If they would argue and fight over the BIG expenditures like they do the little tiny ones, then we'd be in a lot better shape.

Mighty Taternuts: I was reading an article that had the math showing that the Ds and Rs have very close to the same amount of total earmark spending but there are 59 Ds so pound for pound the Rs actually have more earmark spending than the Ds. I can't seem to find the article now though, I will keep looking.

I know it was mentioned on Olbermann a couple of nights ago...

IXI Jim IXI: attackingpencil: Can someone explain to me what exactly is bad about earmarks?

Personally, I think that having each proposal voted and debated on would bring about better transparency over how taxpayer money is being spent. I'd like to see these things voted on for their own merits, not because they were thrown into a "have to pass" bill.

Of course, that would probably be unwieldy. Maybe they bills could be lumped together by topic.

But that's not what earmarks are.

Darwin's Prophet: That's one thing you can respect about McCain, at least he had the decency to abstain from the process himself while he criticized it. Well that, or he had an iota of common sense and knew that the "Do as I say, not as I do" philosophy is generally pretty toxic politically.

Or he's just sneakier about it.

The only Republican from Texas that I like is RON PAUL.

attackingpencil: Can someone explain to me what exactly is bad about earmarks?

They're bad when they go to something you don't want or some other district. When they go to something you want or your district, not so much.

Weaver95: But they won't do it. They're desperate....but they're addicted. They know what they have to do, but they can't do it. It's sad and pathetic, but if they don't take the first step, they'll lose their status as a national level party.

Lol, today's cause for the "end of the Republican Party" brought to you by...

Seriously the wet dream that so many Kosbags have of the Republican Party ceasing to exist, splitting up, etc. is pretty amusing to me.

Even Ron Paul wouldn't break from the party, because he knew doing so would automatically give full control to the Dems for at least 12 years while things adjusted. No one is willing to do that. The Republican party will not split, and it won't "die" either. Political parties have popular and unpopular periods, that generally come in 8-12 year phases, because that's about how long it takes the other party to seeming fark things up.

Siiighhh.

Am I going to have to explain the differences between "earmarks" and "pork" again?

Ok, here goes: An earmark is a point in a spending bill that dictates how money will be sent. Pork spending is wasteful earmarks, done by politicians with enough pull to get money to their states.

For example: When I get paid, I "earmark" some money for rent, utilities, food etc. Then, some money gets spent on shoes, which is "pork spending". Clearly, I could do something better with it.

It is not always clear what is pork, and what is valid. Usually, it's a matter of opinion.
Ex: Bridge repair- useful. Bridge to nowhere: pork.
Ex₂: Road construction: Useful. Big Dig: Pork.

Weaver95: If the Republicans want to get any sort of traction with voters, then they have to COMPLETELY give up pork barrel spending. They have to stop with their own earmarks. Completely stop. And then use that against the Democrats.

But they won't do it. They're desperate....but they're addicted. They know what they have to do, but they can't do it. It's sad and pathetic, but if they don't take the first step, they'll lose their status as a national level party.

Isn't that already happening? I mean, why would they try to block the inevitable? Wouldn't they rather save themselves politically and say to hell with the grand ol' party? Seriously, when the sinking ship is captained by egocentric blowhard with a 'hip' first mate, isn't everyone in a "save yourself!" mentality?

/98209809834 questions, i know
//btw, long time no see Weave

Cow dun left the barn.

Wendy's Chili: ProfessorTomoe: FTFA, a quote about doing away with earmarks from another Texas Republican Senator (Jeb Hensarling)...

"We ought to call for a moratorium and come up with a new system that's competitive and passes the taxpayer smell test and take away any hint of pay for play," Hensarling said.

Dear lord. I almost passed out from the political cliche' overload.

Him doubleplusgood duckspeaker.

He's the same asshole that thinks credit card companies should be able to jack up your interest rate at any time without reason... in the name of freedom, of course.

Unfortunately, he also happens to be my district's representative (yes, not senator, I farked that up - it's past my bedtime, I admit).

IXI Jim IXI: Mighty Taternuts: I was reading an article that had the math showing that the Ds and Rs have very close to the same amount of total earmark spending but there are 59 Ds so pound for pound the Rs actually have more earmark spending than the Ds. I can't seem to find the article now though, I will keep looking.

I know it was mentioned on Olbermann a couple of nights ago...

Democrats have "pork spending." Republicans have FREEDOM COSTS.

Freedom is not free, my friend.

Freedom is not free.

ZachF81: Lol, today's cause for the "end of the Republican Party" brought to you by...

Seriously the wet dream that so many Kosbags

I do believe that man just called Weaver95 a Kosbag.

Heeeee

attackingpencil: But that's not what earmarks are.

FTA -
earmarks - individual projects inserted into legislation by lawmakers without going through the usual legislative process

How is that not "something thrown into a bill" as I described it?

thalassatx: As a resident of Texas, who used to be a Republican, let me state for the record that Kay Bailey sucks. Seriously. We hate her.

Cornyn is still worse and much bigger hypocrite and all around dbag. I thought the guy that lost to Perry last go round, Chris Harris, would have had a better shot at unseating Cornyn. I'm not sure why he didn't run.

Top-dollar projects for Dallas include $13 million for the Dallas floodway extension of the Trinity River Project - a bipartisan measure that Reps. Edwards, Johnson and Pete Sessions, R-Dallas, all put their names on, along with the state's senators - Hutchison and fellow Republican John Cornyn.



The earmarks are for bipartisan endorsed projects. But the hinged Fark crowd will be up in arms about the irresponsible Republicans.

ZachF81: Seriously the wet dream that so many Kosbags have of the Republican Party ceasing to exist, splitting up, etc. is pretty amusing to me.

Perhaps you can explain why Republicans are railing against earmarks, but the biggest earmarker is a Republican, the top three out of five earmarkers are Republicans, the top six out of ten earmarkers are Republicans.

Any thoughts?

Lando Lincoln: Freedom is not free, my friend.

Freedom is not free.

The least they could do is offer coupons now and then...

ZachF81: Weaver95: But they won't do it. They're desperate....but they're addicted. They know what they have to do, but they can't do it. It's sad and pathetic, but if they don't take the first step, they'll lose their status as a national level party.

Lol, today's cause for the "end of the Republican Party" brought to you by...

Seriously the wet dream that so many Kosbags have of the Republican Party ceasing to exist, splitting up, etc. is pretty amusing to me.

Even Ron Paul wouldn't break from the party, because he knew doing so would automatically give full control to the Dems for at least 12 years while things adjusted. No one is willing to do that. The Republican party will not split, and it won't "die" either. Political parties have popular and unpopular periods, that generally come in 8-12 year phases, because that's about how long it takes the other party to seeming fark things up.

So you voted for the Whigs last election?

what_now: Siiighhh.

Am I going to have to explain the differences between "earmarks" and "pork" again?

Ok, here goes: An earmark is a point in a spending bill that dictates how money will be sent. Pork spending is wasteful earmarks, done by politicians with enough pull to get money to their states.

For example: When I get paid, I "earmark" some money for rent, utilities, food etc. Then, some money gets spent on shoes, which is "pork spending". Clearly, I could do something better with it.

It is not always clear what is pork, and what is valid. Usually, it's a matter of opinion.
Ex: Bridge repair- useful. Bridge to nowhere: pork.
Ex2: Road construction: Useful. Big Dig: Pork.

You have a fantastic point. Now, if the party's themselves, specifically the Republican Party, would explain this to their constituencies, we could get over this.

/but that wouldn't bode to well with the current republican anti-earmark = anti-pork = less reckless spending platform

That's why these fights over "pork" are always so amusing... at the 11th hour, after a moderate amount of negative press coverage, everyone is up in arms about all the earmarks so they delay or kill the bill... but they're the ones that put them in there in the first place! Selective memories.

HotWingConspiracy: ZachF81: Weaver95: But they won't do it. They're desperate....but they're addicted. They know what they have to do, but they can't do it. It's sad and pathetic, but if they don't take the first step, they'll lose their status as a national level party.

Lol, today's cause for the "end of the Republican Party" brought to you by...

Seriously the wet dream that so many Kosbags have of the Republican Party ceasing to exist, splitting up, etc. is pretty amusing to me.

Even Ron Paul wouldn't break from the party, because he knew doing so would automatically give full control to the Dems for at least 12 years while things adjusted. No one is willing to do that. The Republican party will not split, and it won't "die" either. Political parties have popular and unpopular periods, that generally come in 8-12 year phases, because that's about how long it takes the other party to seeming fark things up.

So you voted for the Whigs last election?

ZING!

HotWingConspiracy: So you voted for the Whigs last election?

Ron Paul is my rep, I don't get why he stays in the GOP when they don't even let him attend the RNC

I love it, weaver is now a lib in the eyes of the diehard "conservatives".

The comet can smash into the earth any time now, we're done here.

what_now: I do believe that man just called Weaver95 a Kosbag.

Heeeee

No, the wet dream is that of the Kosbags, but they're spreading it so much some people are actually starting to think it's possible.

Lando Lincoln: Perhaps you can explain why Republicans are railing against earmarks, but the biggest earmarker is a Republican, the top three out of five earmarkers are Republicans, the top six out of ten earmarkers are Republicans.

Any thoughts?

To test Obama. To force him to make the decision or appear weak.

FTFA: The package is largely left over from last year, and the White House has said that despite President Barack Obama's promise to cut pork, he will sign the measure if it is approved.

Yet I keep hearing conservatives that can't wait to call it "Obama's budget" and "Obama's debacle with the economy". Democrats may have 'taken the House', but I'm willing to be there's a great deal of 'right-wing-pork' that they hope isn't noticed even as they denounce it.

/Yep, I'm one of those people.

Anti_illuminati: Now, if the party's themselves, specifically the Republican Party, would explain this to their constituencies, we could get over this.

They can't. The spent the past 30 years making sure their constituencies only responded to bumper stickers and fear. Explaining a concept to them that's more complex than "Fire-bad, tree-pretty" won't work.

Mordant: I love it, weaver is now a lib in the eyes of the diehard "conservatives".

Just another case of the party moving, leaving people behind.

ZachF81: To test Obama. To force him to make the decision or appear weak.

How does the Republicans being hypocrites make Obama appear weak?

attackingpencil: Can someone explain to me what exactly is bad about earmarks?

As a Dallas resident for the last 10 years, I'm no fan of KBH and have voted against her twice, BUT since this state has little chance of electing a Democrat as governor, she has my full support in that endeavor if it means that ignorant piece-of-shiat twatwaffle Rick Perry is thrown out on his perfectly-coiffed ass.

Lando Lincoln: Perhaps you can explain why Republicans are railing against earmarks, but the biggest earmarker is a Republican, the top three out of five earmarkers are Republicans, the top six out of ten earmarkers are Republicans.

Any thoughts?

It's the conservatives railing against them. If that wing of the party thinks we are going to keep holding our nose and voting for them just because the alternative is worse, they are sadly mistaken.

I'm done with R's and D's. From now on it's C or L.

what_now: Siiighhh.

Am I going to have to explain the differences between "earmarks" and "pork" again?

Ok, here goes: An earmark is a point in a spending bill that dictates how money will be sent. Pork spending is wasteful earmarks, done by politicians with enough pull to get money to their states.

For example: When I get paid, I "earmark" some money for rent, utilities, food etc. Then, some money gets spent on shoes, which is "pork spending". Clearly, I could do something better with it.

It is not always clear what is pork, and what is valid. Usually, it's a matter of opinion.
Ex: Bridge repair- useful. Bridge to nowhere: pork.
Ex2: Road construction: Useful. Big Dig: Pork.

Republican morons have made this distinction ever so much simpler by just referring to any non-military spending as "pork".

Doesn't matter whether it's research, roads, trains, education, whatever. PORK PORK PORK.

Podna: HotWingConspiracy: So you voted for the Whigs last election?

Ron Paul is my rep, I don't get why he stays in the GOP when they don't even let him attend the RNC

But they will let him spec at CPAC this year.

They must be hurting for ideas then.

Remember, kids... It's only "pork" if it is outside your district. If your legislator gets $$$ for your area's project, then he/she is "bringing home the bacon."

Mmmmm.... bacon.

/term limits

Hutchison is a biatch, and so is her grandson.

/Just wanna throw that out there.

ZachF81: To test Obama. To force him to make the decision or appear weak.

"Hey guys, let's load up this bill with pork and when Obama doesn't shoot it down because it's loaded with pork, then we'll look like the good guys!"

It has promise.

cchris_39: Lando Lincoln: Perhaps you can explain why Republicans are railing against earmarks, but the biggest earmarker is a Republican, the top three out of five earmarkers are Republicans, the top six out of ten earmarkers are Republicans.

Any thoughts?

It's the conservatives railing against them. If that wing of the party thinks we are going to keep holding our nose and voting for them just because the alternative is worse, they are sadly mistaken.

I'm done with R's and D's. From now on it's C or L.

But haven't we already, as a society, labeled all Rs are Cs and all Ds are Ls? Therefore no Rs could ever be Ls or Ds be Cs?

Doesn't that leave us with the alternatives Ss and Fs?

Goddamnit, Kay. You were supposed to be the one I could count on to run off Governor Pretty Hair.

Thanks for nothing.

Anti_illuminati: But they will let him spec at CPAC this year.

They must be hurting for ideas then.

He needs to grow a spine and ditch them, I'm so gonna run against him if he is still alive when I'm 28(req age for rep right?)

cchris_39: It's the conservatives railing against them. If that wing of the party thinks we are going to keep holding our nose and voting for them just because the alternative is worse, they are sadly mistaken.

I'm done with R's and D's. From now on it's C or L.

Can you provide us with a list of the true conservatives so we can see how much money they put into this bill?