If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hot Air)   Votes on the cap-and-trade bill went for as much as $3.5 billion in taxpayer money   (hotair.com) divider line 78
    More: Sad  
•       •       •

1338 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Jul 2009 at 4:30 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



78 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-07-01 05:18:14 PM
PascalsGhost: WhileAmericaBurns: They can spend it on whatever they want! It's a free-for-all! I mean, how can you possibly have a problem with that?! What are you, some kind of America hater??s

It's perfectly rational to be against the bill.

To be against the way it was legislated like this article is absurd.

justtray: Someone enlighten me, isn't cap and trade a neo-classical economic approach? Don't conservatives support this? It actually allows for the free market to deal with it's own problems as opposed to having government mandates on pollution.

Yes. Modern Republicans aren't economic conservatives. They are economic idiots. This is, in fact, the conservative way to do it.


Government control is capitalism! Peace is war! Hate is love!
 
2009-07-01 05:18:37 PM
Freedom isn't free. So STFU and pay your taxes.
 
2009-07-01 05:20:01 PM
PascalsGhost:
justtray: Someone enlighten me, isn't cap and trade a neo-classical economic approach? Don't conservatives support this? It actually allows for the free market to deal with it's own problems as opposed to having government mandates on pollution.

Yes. Modern Republicans aren't economic conservatives. They are economic idiots. This is, in fact, the conservative way to do it.


Sad panda is sad... When is Libritarian going to become a legit, sane party that I can side with? Seems like it might be able to get quite a bit of the current Republican party and even a nice portion of the Democratic.
 
2009-07-01 05:20:15 PM
Von_Ruff: PascalsGhost: cchris_39: Is there anything Obama apologists won't try to rationalize?

Considering that he took over two major automakers, drove them into bankruptcy, and split the carcasses between the federal government and his union buddies......probably not.

Hey $3.5B for ONE VOTE. Business as usual......

I didn't vote for Obama and have little respect for this congress.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It is our system of governance you retards.

Well, I guess there's nothing we can do. CLOSE UP SHOP, EVERYONE! This is how government can run, so I guess we should be okay with it and not question any decisions made and not disagree with what our government is doing... you know, since we live in a tyranny and all.

/Descent is the highest form of patriotic


LOL, how do you want the government to decide where to spend money?
 
2009-07-01 05:21:40 PM
PascalsGhost: Von_Ruff: PascalsGhost: cchris_39: Is there anything Obama apologists won't try to rationalize?

Considering that he took over two major automakers, drove them into bankruptcy, and split the carcasses between the federal government and his union buddies......probably not.

Hey $3.5B for ONE VOTE. Business as usual......

I didn't vote for Obama and have little respect for this congress.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It is our system of governance you retards.

Well, I guess there's nothing we can do. CLOSE UP SHOP, EVERYONE! This is how government can run, so I guess we should be okay with it and not question any decisions made and not disagree with what our government is doing... you know, since we live in a tyranny and all.

/Descent is the highest form of patriotic

LOL, how do you want the government to decide where to spend money?


How about by reference to the Constitution? And if that's no good, maybe we need to do a little amending/rewriting of it.
 
2009-07-01 05:21:41 PM
justtray: Sad panda is sad... When is Libritarian going to become a legit, sane party that I can side with? Seems like it might be able to get quite a bit of the current Republican party and even a nice portion of the Democratic..

Nominating Bob Barr pretty much made them a joke until the end of time with me. And some social programs are good and valuable.
 
2009-07-01 05:21:43 PM
WhileAmericaBurns: PascalsGhost: WhileAmericaBurns: They can spend it on whatever they want! It's a free-for-all! I mean, how can you possibly have a problem with that?! What are you, some kind of America hater??s

It's perfectly rational to be against the bill.

To be against the way it was legislated like this article is absurd.

justtray: Someone enlighten me, isn't cap and trade a neo-classical economic approach? Don't conservatives support this? It actually allows for the free market to deal with it's own problems as opposed to having government mandates on pollution.

Yes. Modern Republicans aren't economic conservatives. They are economic idiots. This is, in fact, the conservative way to do it.

Government control is capitalism! Peace is war! Hate is love!


You've never taken economics before have you? Do you have even a basic understanding of how the economy works? Sorry, but your post just screamed, "I have no idea what I'm talking about." Maybe if you try to sound less snide....
 
2009-07-01 05:23:31 PM
WhileAmericaBurns: PascalsGhost: Von_Ruff: PascalsGhost: cchris_39: Is there anything Obama apologists won't try to rationalize?

Considering that he took over two major automakers, drove them into bankruptcy, and split the carcasses between the federal government and his union buddies......probably not.

Hey $3.5B for ONE VOTE. Business as usual......

I didn't vote for Obama and have little respect for this congress.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It is our system of governance you retards.

Well, I guess there's nothing we can do. CLOSE UP SHOP, EVERYONE! This is how government can run, so I guess we should be okay with it and not question any decisions made and not disagree with what our government is doing... you know, since we live in a tyranny and all.

/Descent is the highest form of patriotic

LOL, how do you want the government to decide where to spend money?

How about by reference to the Constitution?


Link (new window)


And if that's no good, maybe we need to do a little amending/rewriting of it.

You want to amend out Section 1 of the constitution?
 
2009-07-01 05:23:53 PM
justtray: WhileAmericaBurns: PascalsGhost: WhileAmericaBurns: They can spend it on whatever they want! It's a free-for-all! I mean, how can you possibly have a problem with that?! What are you, some kind of America hater??s

It's perfectly rational to be against the bill.

To be against the way it was legislated like this article is absurd.

justtray: Someone enlighten me, isn't cap and trade a neo-classical economic approach? Don't conservatives support this? It actually allows for the free market to deal with it's own problems as opposed to having government mandates on pollution.

Yes. Modern Republicans aren't economic conservatives. They are economic idiots. This is, in fact, the conservative way to do it.

Government control is capitalism! Peace is war! Hate is love!

You've never taken economics before have you? Do you have even a basic understanding of how the economy works? Sorry, but your post just screamed, "I have no idea what I'm talking about." Maybe if you try to sound less snide....


"If you had gone to a prestigious university like me, you would understand that big government is the new free market. You may think that's a contradiction, but that's only because you're not as smart or wealthy as I am."
 
2009-07-01 05:24:35 PM
www.suspect-device.com

/hotlinked
 
2009-07-01 05:26:07 PM
WhileAmericaBurns: justtray: WhileAmericaBurns: PascalsGhost: WhileAmericaBurns: They can spend it on whatever they want! It's a free-for-all! I mean, how can you possibly have a problem with that?! What are you, some kind of America hater??s

It's perfectly rational to be against the bill.

To be against the way it was legislated like this article is absurd.

justtray: Someone enlighten me, isn't cap and trade a neo-classical economic approach? Don't conservatives support this? It actually allows for the free market to deal with it's own problems as opposed to having government mandates on pollution.

Yes. Modern Republicans aren't economic conservatives. They are economic idiots. This is, in fact, the conservative way to do it.

Government control is capitalism! Peace is war! Hate is love!

You've never taken economics before have you? Do you have even a basic understanding of how the economy works? Sorry, but your post just screamed, "I have no idea what I'm talking about." Maybe if you try to sound less snide....

"If you had gone to a prestigious university like me, you would understand that big government is the new free market. You may think that's a contradiction, but that's only because you're not as smart or wealthy as I am."


What are you just trolling? Are you admitting that you are uneducated? Anyway, I'm pretty far from being for "Big Government," whatever that means, but keep thinking that, maybe you'll have a point in another 20-30 posts.
 
2009-07-01 05:26:24 PM
tedbundee: /hotlinked

I'm sure there exist no embarrassing photos of liberals at anti-Bush rallies. Nope. Liberals are always photogenic because they're such geniuses.
 
2009-07-01 05:27:05 PM
I just found coal in a mine I dug in the basement of my non-insulated lead painted house lit with gas lamps and 1000w bulbs, so I'm really getting a kick.....
 
2009-07-01 05:27:25 PM
justtray: WhileAmericaBurns: justtray: WhileAmericaBurns: PascalsGhost: WhileAmericaBurns: They can spend it on whatever they want! It's a free-for-all! I mean, how can you possibly have a problem with that?! What are you, some kind of America hater??s

It's perfectly rational to be against the bill.

To be against the way it was legislated like this article is absurd.

justtray: Someone enlighten me, isn't cap and trade a neo-classical economic approach? Don't conservatives support this? It actually allows for the free market to deal with it's own problems as opposed to having government mandates on pollution.

Yes. Modern Republicans aren't economic conservatives. They are economic idiots. This is, in fact, the conservative way to do it.

Government control is capitalism! Peace is war! Hate is love!

You've never taken economics before have you? Do you have even a basic understanding of how the economy works? Sorry, but your post just screamed, "I have no idea what I'm talking about." Maybe if you try to sound less snide....

"If you had gone to a prestigious university like me, you would understand that big government is the new free market. You may think that's a contradiction, but that's only because you're not as smart or wealthy as I am."

What are you just trolling? Are you admitting that you are uneducated? Anyway, I'm pretty far from being for "Big Government," whatever that means, but keep thinking that, maybe you'll have a point in another 20-30 posts.


I see. Education = prestigious university. My university isn't that prestigious. I guess that makes me uneducated. Carry on.
 
2009-07-01 05:36:30 PM
Rep. Kaptur gets $3.5 billion sweetener in climate bill
Democrats offered concession to Ohio's Kaptur.... From the Washington papers


Cap and confuse...

And from what I understand they have stuck a "placeholder" in the bill. Something Barney Frank "explained on the floor on Friday that the placeholder in the cap and trade bill apparently will deal with regulations of financial derivatives market associated with reducing carbon emissions. Frank said he was confident a good system will be in place."

Better read the fine print as Malkin said on her site.
There is no transperancy.


/tax
//cap and bureaucracy
 
2009-07-01 05:47:39 PM
Von_Ruff: nuclear-grade stupid


I'm stealing that one.

thanx
 
2009-07-01 05:48:22 PM
netcentric: Rep. Kaptur gets $3.5 billion sweetener in climate bill
Democrats offered concession to Ohio's Kaptur.... From the Washington papers


Cap and confuse...

And from what I understand they have stuck a "placeholder" in the bill. Something Barney Frank "explained on the floor on Friday that the placeholder in the cap and trade bill apparently will deal with regulations of financial derivatives market associated with reducing carbon emissions. Frank said he was confident a good system will be in place."

Better read the fine print as Malkin said on her site.
There is no transperancy.


/tax
//cap and bureaucracy



Riiiigggghhhhhtttt....
 
2009-07-01 05:50:51 PM
I love PascalsGhost's argument. Basically, he is saying that because it was legislated, it must be good.

"I don't like the 3 plus billion spent on getting one vote from Ohio. It seems like a payoff and a waste of money"

"ZOMG that's how things are done. Why do you hate America?!?!"
 
2009-07-01 05:54:44 PM
Frank N Stein: I love PascalsGhost's argument. Basically, he is saying that because it was legislated, it must be good.

"I don't like the 3 plus billion spent on getting one vote from Ohio. It seems like a payoff and a waste of money"


It's not. Unless every time a law that spends money is passed it is due to payoffs.

This is really obvious and simple to rational people dude. Again, you can rant against the bill, but the fact she voted for it when it favored her state is WHAT LEGISLATORS ARE SUPPOSED TO DO.

The amount of stupid is amazing.
 
2009-07-01 05:54:48 PM
Lol. Every thread that PascalsGhost shows up in to defend Obama and/or democrats, he always mentions how he didn't vote for Obama and/or said democrats.

Fark Independentry goes both ways, buddy.
 
2009-07-01 05:56:22 PM
PascalsGhost: I know D.C. is a mess and money runs everything, but think about how farking stupid this outrage is.

She's from Ohio, a huge coal state that will be hit by the bill big time, the article even states this:

It was a payoff for Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) to turn her back on coal-producing Ohio and vote to kill the economy in her state, and she wasn't alone:


So the state gets this to help overcome that:

stocked with up to $3.5 billion in taxpayer money available for lending to renewable energy and economic development projects in Ohio and other Midwestern states.


So now she decides it won't hurt the economy and will offset costs, so she likes it for her state.


I mean, if this kind of normal horse trading and representing the needs of your district bothers you, you must get furious when unethical stuff starts.

This is called legislating you dipshiats.


This.
 
2009-07-01 05:58:01 PM
Frank N Stein: Lol. Every thread that PascalsGhost shows up in to defend Obama and/or democrats, he always mentions how he didn't vote for Obama and/or said democrats.

Fark Independentry goes both ways, buddy.


You must miss a lot of threads :) Again, I'm not even commenting on whether the bill itself is good or bad, my point is the go off about a legislator voting with her states interest in mind and money being doled out to different states is completely retarded.

This isn't partisan. You can't say anything, even as PAINFULLY obvious as this to anyone without being a righty or an Obamabot.

Christ, you farking morons, to prove my point i linked to the CONSTITUTION. Not real partisan.
 
2009-07-01 05:58:27 PM
PascalsGhost,

I understand what you're saying. You just didn't frame your argument very well. It made it seem that your stance is "if its legislated, it's all good". Obviously you don't believe that, so I'm just sayin...
 
2009-07-01 06:04:13 PM
PascalsGhost:

First, I'd like to apologize for my slow responses. I'm farking on my blackberry.

Second, dude almost every time I see you pop into a thread, its to defend the Democrats. Now, there's nothing wrong with that at all. If you're a Democrat, that is what you believe in. But I many times I see you go the Fark Independent route and say "I didn't vote for_____, but I agree with _____"

I'd also like to point out that its pretty amusing how you get on Conservative's nerves in those thread. You argument style is usually hilarious and really grates on them.
 
2009-07-01 06:08:10 PM
Frank N Stein: PascalsGhost:

First, I'd like to apologize for my slow responses. I'm farking on my blackberry.

Second, dude almost every time I see you pop into a thread, its to defend the Democrats. Now, there's nothing wrong with that at all. If you're a Democrat, that is what you believe in. But I many times I see you go the Fark Independent route and say "I didn't vote for_____, but I agree with _____"

I'd also like to point out that its pretty amusing how you get on Conservative's nerves in those thread. You argument style is usually hilarious and really grates on them.


I lean left, I voted for no democrat, I attack the Obama defenders that bashed Bush for the same thing and get attacked.

I have no idea why I hang in politics so much, I don't care, I'm kinda addicted, but there are a whole lot of really stupid ass people in these threads and its hilarious.
 
2009-07-01 09:56:59 PM
PascalsGhost: Frank N Stein: Lol. Every thread that PascalsGhost shows up in to defend Obama and/or democrats, he always mentions how he didn't vote for Obama and/or said democrats.

Fark Independentry goes both ways, buddy.

You must miss a lot of threads :) Again, I'm not even commenting on whether the bill itself is good or bad, my point is the go off about a legislator voting with her states interest in mind and money being doled out to different states is completely retarded.

This isn't partisan. You can't say anything, even as PAINFULLY obvious as this to anyone without being a righty or an Obamabot.

Christ, you farking morons, to prove my point i linked to the CONSTITUTION. Not real partisan.


Did you use the Gen. Welfare clause to the constitution. I mean there is no way that the government could be limited to the powers that they are actually given. The Gen Welfare is there to create new powers that are needed right.
 
2009-07-01 10:44:29 PM
GeeksAreMyPeeps: So now she decides it won't hurt the economy and will offset costs, so she likes it for her state.


I mean, if this kind of normal horse trading and representing the needs of your district bothers you, you must get furious when unethical stuff starts.

This is called legislating you dipshiats.

This.


It's called pork, log-rolling, earmarks....

All words to describe different aspects/versions of buying votes in Congress with money or favors that will in turn help the politician pay off campaign donors and voters in his own district.

If you think this is what "legislating" is all about, you have no clear sense of ethics, or understanding of how government works when it's working well.

We should elect people to Congress to vote using their brains and hearts, not to vote any which way will bring the pork home and the votes in.

Our politicians' increasing stupidity and worthlessness is a reflection of the intellectual and moral weakness of the electorate.
 
2009-07-02 11:22:01 AM
its only pork when its not your district
 
Displayed 28 of 78 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report