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.

(Huffington Post)   Congressman Clown from the Spawn comics says that his constituents want more sequester cuts. His actual constituents, however, are asking for the exact opposite   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 64
    More: Obvious, Billy Long, spawns, Carl Rosenkranz, Head Start, Springfield News-Leader, Project On Government Oversight, Dean Baker, block grants  
•       •       •

3420 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 May 2013 at 11:45 AM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



64 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-03 09:56:38 AM
Whenever a politicians says "constituents" what they're really saying is "My biggest financial backers"
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-05-03 10:09:33 AM
Is that guy's head really pointed the way it looks in the photo?
 
2013-05-03 10:40:07 AM
I was thinking more this comic:

img404.imageshack.us

But Clown seems more fitting.
 
2013-05-03 10:55:13 AM
I'm a little surprised he voted no on H.R. 1765: Reducing Flight Delays Act of 2013.  I expect more hypocrisy from our GOP members of Congress.
 
2013-05-03 11:09:55 AM
Eventually, all Republicans start to look like that.
 
2013-05-03 11:47:22 AM
This just in from Romero HQ: people often enjoy government spending when it benefits them, but are opposed to the idea for anyone else.
 
2013-05-03 11:50:32 AM

Diogenes: I'm a little surprised he voted no on H.R. 1765: Reducing Flight Delays Act of 2013.  I expect more hypocrisy from our GOP members of Congress.


Technically it just allowed the FAA to move money around, it didn't mean more money. So they could take money out of long term runway repair funds and put them to tower control today.  Flying in a few year once these fund cuts have come home to roost may be fun.
 
2013-05-03 11:52:02 AM

FloydA: Eventually, all Republicans start to look like that.


Mild fetal alcohol syndrome?
 
2013-05-03 11:52:35 AM

Diogenes: I was thinking more this comic:

[img404.imageshack.us image 541x381]

But Clown seems more fitting.


www.iconsoffright.com

Nah, subby had it right.  The clown was a demonic entity and I believe, serial child molester/murderer.
The Supreme Intelligence was usually motivated by trying to advance the Kree race.  The worst he could be accused of is breaking a lot of eggs to make an omelet.
 
2013-05-03 11:53:55 AM
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
BTW, he's called The Violator and bears an unsettling resemblance to Honey Boo Boo's mom.
 
2013-05-03 11:54:34 AM

thismomentinblackhistory: FloydA: Eventually, all Republicans start to look like that.

Mild fetal alcohol syndrome?


talkingpointsmemo.com
 
2013-05-03 11:55:59 AM
I was thinking he was a ringer for Jabba the Hut, but all the above suggestions are spot on.
 
2013-05-03 11:56:01 AM
"Oh, come on, no Congressman looks like tha-"

*click*

"AUGH JESUS CHRIST HOW HORRIFYING."

Diogenes: I was thinking more this comic:

[img404.imageshack.us image 541x381]

But Clown seems more fitting.


Both are eerie in their resemblance.
 
2013-05-03 11:56:22 AM
To be fair, the cuts are hurting Rep. Long too.  Why just the other day he had to order only two bottles of his customary wine with dinner!
 
2013-05-03 11:57:29 AM
So - the sequester has had no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see. Most people DO think we need more cuts (yes, HuffPo, we know that the professional politician Democrats you talked to are all panicky about it and stuff), so... let's go with it.

Meanwhile, a lot of lefties have been screaming about the "inactivity" in Congress - while the deficit gets slightly smaller due to a lack of spending, and the overall economy is getting slightly better.

It's almost like "the less Congress does, the better it is for all the rest of us." Which is anathema for the big government folks...
 
2013-05-03 12:01:06 PM

cirby: So - the sequester has had no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see. Most people DO think we need more cuts


Both of these things are demonstrably false.
 
2013-05-03 12:04:02 PM

cirby: So - the sequester has had no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see.


That depends a lot on where you've chosen to stick your head.
 
2013-05-03 12:05:54 PM

Aarontology: Whenever a politicians says "constituents" what they're really saying is "My biggest financial backers"


From the 'Comments': What he really meant was that he had spoken to those constituents that really mattered...like the ones outside the four star upscale dining establishment he was at and on the back nine at the country club...
 
2013-05-03 12:06:44 PM
Soon Congress will be able to go back to day trading on inside information without penalty the way Jebus intended having finished their therapeutic of telling their constituents "I got mine, you can fark off."
 
2013-05-03 12:07:16 PM
:%s/constituents/donors/g
 
2013-05-03 12:07:49 PM
Christ, what an asshole.
 
2013-05-03 12:08:42 PM
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-05-03 12:08:54 PM
And he'll be reelected comfortably.
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2013-05-03 12:09:03 PM
Done in one.
 
2013-05-03 12:11:02 PM

cirby: So - the sequester has had no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see. Most people DO think we need more cuts (yes, HuffPo, we know that the professional politician Democrats you talked to are all panicky about it and stuff), so... let's go with it.

Meanwhile, a lot of lefties have been screaming about the "inactivity" in Congress - while the deficit gets slightly smaller due to a lack of spending, and the overall economy is getting slightly better.

It's almost like "the less Congress does, the better it is for all the rest of us." Which is anathema for the big government folks...


You sound almost proud of these nonprofits' inability to help the future generation to pay down your share of the debt because it's suddenly time to curtail spending.
 
2013-05-03 12:12:50 PM

cirby: So - the sequester has had no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see. Most people DO think we need more cuts (yes, HuffPo, we know that the professional politician Democrats you talked to are all panicky about it and stuff), so... let's go with it.

Meanwhile, a lot of lefties have been screaming about the "inactivity" in Congress - while the deficit gets slightly smaller due to a lack of spending, and the overall economy is getting slightly better.

It's almost like "the less Congress does, the better it is for all the rest of us." Which is anathema for the big government folks...


Your "no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see" only applies if "anyone" excludes the poor, vulnerable, downtrodden, unemployed, et cetera. Which, in your case, it most likely does! Good job, screw the poor.

As for the deficit getting slightly smaller, WOW, isn't that great?? Look at that big number getting slightly smaller. That deficit sure was hurting... umm... SOMEONE, wasn't it? Lowering that score on the leaderboard was worth burning poor children's futures at the stake so we could prevent, um... vague deficit-related consequences! That nobody has seen! How glad we are that we averted it! Less money we have to pay to China, except most of the debt we have is owed to ourselves anyway! Let's pat ourselves on the back for taking TOUGH sacrifices to make a dent in that meaningless problem.

Better round up some poverty-liners and laid-off people to slay them so their blood can fertilize more deficit reduction, it's all worth it in the end, right???

We need more government debt right now, not less. Malaise at the top and savage cuts at the state and local levels are working together to make this stagnating clusterfark last even longer.
 
2013-05-03 12:13:41 PM
Holy crap

/I thought subby was exaggerating
 
2013-05-03 12:14:46 PM

thismomentinblackhistory: Mild fetal alcohol syndrome?


www.popvox.com
 
2013-05-03 12:26:03 PM
"GOP Rep. makes out of touch remarks"

Couldn't that be a byline of basically every story about the GOP for the last two decades or more?
 
2013-05-03 12:26:07 PM
www.freealbumart.com
 
2013-05-03 12:28:23 PM
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-05-03 12:28:56 PM

cirby: So - the sequester has had no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see. Most people DO think we need more cuts (yes, HuffPo, we know that the professional politician Democrats you talked to are all panicky about it and stuff), so... let's go with it.

Meanwhile, a lot of lefties have been screaming about the "inactivity" in Congress - while the deficit gets slightly smaller due to a lack of spending, and the overall economy is getting slightly better.

It's almost like "the less Congress does, the better it is for all the rest of us." Which is anathema for the big government folks...


FTFA (you seem not to have read):
...The cuts, which translate to more than $600,000 out of the organization's budget, mean that it's closing five Head Start classrooms, reducing enrollment at three Early Head Start locations and laying off 42 staffers. About 200 children are losing their Head Start slots, and another 81 staff positions are being "reorganized."
 Meanwhile, Brendan Griesemer, the planning and development manager for Springfield, the largest city in Long's district, said his budget has already been hit with major state cuts over the last four years -- a 50 percent reduction in affordable housing programs and a 30 percent reduction in block grants -- so sequestration is just the cherry on top...noting that sequestration isn't set to hit his programs until July 1.

"The not-for-profit agencies that are providing the Weekend Backpack Program [which gives food to low-income children], providing social services to persons facing homelessness, providing educational opportunities for our Title I schools, I can tell you that they are really feeling the impact of all the cuts, including the sequester...


So, when you say "no effect anyone can see," and "all the rest of us," you really mean, "fark those poors." Is that about right?
 
2013-05-03 12:29:11 PM
To be fair he is Republican......the only constituents he owes fealty to are his corporate sponsors.
 
2013-05-03 12:33:50 PM
i236.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-03 12:52:00 PM
1.bp.blogspot.com

"I won't tell you who the traitor is, or when we'll attack. However, the Duke will die before these eyes and he'll know, he'll know, that it is I, Congressman Harkonnen, who encompasses his doom!"
 
2013-05-03 12:52:15 PM
The Bizzaro world is where the GOP is from, isn't it?

//I just learned the Feds are asking for $18million in timber payments to PNW counties back.  No.
//Fark the modern GOP.
 
2013-05-03 12:53:16 PM

DarwiOdrade: [upload.wikimedia.org image 230x185]


Darn you.  You got there first.

/Shakes tiny fist of internet raeg.
 
2013-05-03 12:56:39 PM
i.huffpost.com
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-05-03 12:59:09 PM
BlastYoBoots:
Your "no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see" only applies if "anyone" excludes the poor, vulnerable, downtrodden, unemployed, et cetera.

...so, in your world, what actuals effect HAVE hit those people?

Aside, of course, from a small handful of attempts by Democrat politicians to create effects that wouldn't happen in the first place?

You do know the sequester "cuts" are just a reduction in the INCREASE in spending, right?
 
2013-05-03 01:00:41 PM

FlashHarry: thismomentinblackhistory: Mild fetal alcohol syndrome?

[www.popvox.com image 200x244]


www.popvox.com
img2-3.timeinc.net

It's good to know that ol' Lonnie made something of himself and served his countrymen to boot.
 
2013-05-03 01:05:18 PM

Smirky the Wonder Chimp: DarwiOdrade: [upload.wikimedia.org image 230x185]

Darn you.  You got there first.

/Shakes tiny fist of internet raeg.


Well, he is my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grea t-great-great-great-grandfather.
 
2013-05-03 01:06:18 PM

cirby: BlastYoBoots:
Your "no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see" only applies if "anyone" excludes the poor, vulnerable, downtrodden, unemployed, et cetera.

...so, in your world, what actuals effect HAVE hit those people?

Aside, of course, from a small handful of attempts by Democrat politicians to create effects that wouldn't happen in the first place?

You do know the sequester "cuts" are just a reduction in the INCREASE in spending, right?


You know how our GDP actually increases year after year? That's because of something called population growth, business growth, et cetera. People multiply! Spending needs to keep pace.

If it doesn't, programs can't expand to meet the needed number of people. Try putting an absolute cap on spending, and what happens? You stretch and starve everyone indiscriminately. And the "CUTS FROM EVERYTHING EVENLY" sequester forbids organizations much of the authority to make sure cuts hit places that make sense. Why did the FAA furloughs have to be mitigated by bipartisan legislative action if "Democrat politicians" could control where the spending cuts hit?
 
2013-05-03 01:15:42 PM

BlastYoBoots: cirby: BlastYoBoots:
Your "no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see" only applies if "anyone" excludes the poor, vulnerable, downtrodden, unemployed, et cetera.

...so, in your world, what actuals effect HAVE hit those people?

Aside, of course, from a small handful of attempts by Democrat politicians to create effects that wouldn't happen in the first place?

You do know the sequester "cuts" are just a reduction in the INCREASE in spending, right?

You know how our GDP actually increases year after year? That's because of something called population growth, business growth, et cetera. People multiply! Spending needs to keep pace.

If it doesn't, programs can't expand to meet the needed number of people. Try putting an absolute cap on spending, and what happens? You stretch and starve everyone indiscriminately. And the "CUTS FROM EVERYTHING EVENLY" sequester forbids organizations much of the authority to make sure cuts hit places that make sense. Why did the FAA furloughs have to be mitigated by bipartisan legislative action if "Democrat politicians" could control where the spending cuts hit?


Well first you would have to ask if they know what acronym GDP stands for, then if they understand what it is. (i.e. how it is calculated).
 
2013-05-03 01:17:13 PM

cirby: Aside, of course, from a small handful of attempts by Democrat politicians to create effects that wouldn't happen in the first place?


Still trotting out this lie I see.
 
2013-05-03 01:19:03 PM
His district includes Southwest Missouri which is as Conservative as Conservative can be (it includes Springfield, Branson, and Joplin).

Sad thing is that even though all these organizations are being negatively impacted by these sequester cuts, the rest of his constituents won't care as long as they can stick it to Obama.
 
2013-05-03 01:20:01 PM

BlastYoBoots: cirby: BlastYoBoots:
Your "no actual overall economic effect that anyone can see" only applies if "anyone" excludes the poor, vulnerable, downtrodden, unemployed, et cetera.

...so, in your world, what actuals effect HAVE hit those people?

Aside, of course, from a small handful of attempts by Democrat politicians to create effects that wouldn't happen in the first place?

You do know the sequester "cuts" are just a reduction in the INCREASE in spending, right?

You know how our GDP actually increases year after year? That's because of something called population growth, business growth, et cetera. People multiply! Spending needs to keep pace.

If it doesn't, programs can't expand to meet the needed number of people. Try putting an absolute cap on spending, and what happens? You stretch and starve everyone indiscriminately. And the "CUTS FROM EVERYTHING EVENLY" sequester forbids organizations much of the authority to make sure cuts hit places that make sense. Why did the FAA furloughs have to be mitigated by bipartisan legislative action if "Democrat politicians" could control where the spending cuts hit?


Does cirby not realize that the sequester was intended by both sides to be punitive or is he really just this stupid and ignorant?
 
2013-05-03 01:20:21 PM

vpb: Is that guy's head really pointed the way it looks in the photo?


i.huffpost.com
www.baltimorebrew.com


More than you can possibly imagine.
 
2013-05-03 01:22:16 PM
A very Boss Hogian motif with hints of Pappy O'Daniel.
 
2013-05-03 01:22:59 PM
Rosenkranz told The Huffington Post. "Just a minimal understanding of what we're going through here would help."

You keep reaching for those stars!
 
2013-05-03 01:37:50 PM
When your head actually starts to look like a Butt Plug...

Youre gonna have a Bad Time.
 
Displayed 50 of 64 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report