Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Yahoo)   Kansas Tea Party Representative discovers why it's so hard to cut government spending   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 91
    More: Obvious, Kansas Association, backlash, U.S. Rep. Tim Huelskamp, Garden City, commodity markets, political action committees, renewable fuels, farmers  
•       •       •

5000 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Aug 2014 at 7:20 AM (42 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-31 11:34:28 PM  
"I got mine, fark you. Heeeey, wait a minute, I don't got mine no more! YOU GET BACK HERE!"
 
2014-07-31 11:47:48 PM  
There are very few things that Teabaggers can't fark up.
 
2014-07-31 11:48:39 PM  
If both Brownback and Huelskamp lose, I'm throwing a party.
 
2014-07-31 11:58:35 PM  
The Derpers in Kansas are getting blowback from trying to kill wind power in the state too.
 
2014-08-01 12:01:10 AM  
Everybody wants their free stuff. Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others. People are idiots.
 
2014-08-01 12:05:52 AM  

DrPainMD: Everybody wants their free stuff. Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others. People are idiots.


Free stuff?  You mean like subsidies to the oil companies and sweetheart deals for coal? Is it just subsidies for people that you object to?
 
2014-08-01 12:35:14 AM  

DrPainMD: Everybody wants their free stuff. Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others. People are idiots.


This coming from someone who thinks climate change is good because back when there were dinosaurs there was more CO2 in the air so it's all good people nothing to worry about. Oh, but I love that your first two sentences are chock full of weak, overly simplistic generalizations that don't stand up to any sort of scrutiny but only further relegate you to the same group of people you condemn as less intelligent.
 
2014-08-01 12:51:03 AM  

fusillade762: "I got mine, fark you. Heeeey, wait a minute, I don't got mine no more! YOU GET BACK HERE!"


THIS
poor stupid gop voters.
they thought big government only helped brown people and poor people and them shiftless liberals

shucks billy bob, of course we DESERVE OUR guberment handouts ... we are WHITE!!!
 
2014-08-01 01:01:30 AM  
No one is in favor of government waste. The problem this guy is discovering is that everyone's definition of waste depends on whether or not the government money is coming to them or not. Money the government spends on other people is waste. Money the government spends on me is a good use of taxpayer funds. And instead of representing his corn-dependent constituents, he sides with the Tea Party philosophy of...wait, what was it exactly?

Personally, I'm against subsidies that go to profitable companies, but I also acknowledge that this may be an oversimplified position.
 
2014-08-01 02:08:17 AM  

Mitch Taylor's Bro: No one is in favor of government waste. The problem this guy is discovering is that everyone's definition of waste depends on whether or not the government money is coming to them or not. Money the government spends on other people is waste. Money the government spends on me is a good use of taxpayer funds. And instead of representing his corn-dependent constituents, he sides with the Tea Party philosophy of...wait, what was it exactly?

Personally, I'm against subsidies that go to profitable companies, but I also acknowledge that this may be an oversimplified position.


ethanol is social engineering
it is ADM welfare

nothing more, nothing less
IF we give "them" farm money, "we" get food stamps.
nothing more, nothing less

strange that the teahadist congress critter didnt have this explained to him. guess he isnt too bright.
 
2014-08-01 02:46:29 AM  

Mitch Taylor's Bro: No one is in favor of government waste. The problem this guy is discovering is that everyone's definition of waste depends on whether or not the government money is coming to them or not. Money the government spends on other people is waste. Money the government spends on me is a good use of taxpayer funds. And instead of representing his corn-dependent constituents, he sides with the Tea Party philosophy of...wait, what was it exactly?

Personally, I'm against subsidies that go to profitable companies, but I also acknowledge that this may be an oversimplified position.


If we're talking about bang for the buck this bears examining:

www.motherjones.com

Of course that's from 2009, but I doubt things have changed all that much.
 
2014-08-01 06:58:49 AM  
Huelskamp said his bill includes provisions that would help the Kansas economy by easing environmental roadblocks for expansion of the Sunflower coal-fired power plant and deterring new regulations on hydraulic fracturing in oil drilling.

So... he co-sponsers a bill that will cut demand for ethanol but he promises to make up for it with an expanded coal-fired power plant and more unregulated fracking?

Such a deal! Who could refuse?
 
2014-08-01 07:26:12 AM  

quatchi: Huelskamp said his bill includes provisions that would help the Kansas economy by easing environmental roadblocks for expansion of the Sunflower coal-fired power plant and deterring new regulations on hydraulic fracturing in oil drilling.

So... he co-sponsers a bill that will cut demand for ethanol but he promises to make up for it with an expanded coal-fired power plant and more unregulated fracking?

Such a deal! Who could refuse?


Guys! It's okay! Instead of buying your corn, we're going to pollute the water tables below it and the air above it so you won't have to worry about growing it in the first place! It's a sweet deal!
 
2014-08-01 07:29:55 AM  
DrPainMD: Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others.

Your math is not like our Earth math.
 
2014-08-01 07:30:51 AM  
these people are find out slogans don't make good policy.
 
2014-08-01 07:30:53 AM  

namatad: Mitch Taylor's Bro: No one is in favor of government waste. The problem this guy is discovering is that everyone's definition of waste depends on whether or not the government money is coming to them or not. Money the government spends on other people is waste. Money the government spends on me is a good use of taxpayer funds. And instead of representing his corn-dependent constituents, he sides with the Tea Party philosophy of...wait, what was it exactly?

Personally, I'm against subsidies that go to profitable companies, but I also acknowledge that this may be an oversimplified position.

ethanol is social engineering
it is ADM welfare

nothing more, nothing less
IF we give "them" farm money, "we" get food stamps.
nothing more, nothing less

strange that the teahadist congress critter didnt have this explained to him. guess he isnt too bright.


No, it's not "nothing more, nothing less."  What is "nothing more, nothing less" is a SCOTUS decision that corporations can make unlimited campaign contributions because freedum.  That is a greenlight to buy politicians and mandate legislation.  What is "nothing more, nothing less" is building tanks and planes when it is known that they are not needed and they will be parked in the desert as soon as they roll off the assembly line, because a powerful congressman wants the pork for his district.

This is two different things.  Nobody said, "OK I'll vote for a guy who supports biofuels because that means I get my food stamps."  People have said, "OK I will vote for a bill that is in your corporation's favor now that your money got me elected."  They have said, "OK I will vote for this other bill that normally I wouldn't touch with a 50-foot pole because my defense spending was approved and I'm re-elected for sure."

You need to adjust the targeting mechanism of your cynicism.  The little people at the bottom surviving on food stamps are not the slick operators or the cynical manipulators.  This is the fundamental mistake the right has been make since Jan. 2009.

This in spite of the fact that I'm opposed to ethanol, it has proven to be another scam.
 
2014-08-01 07:31:41 AM  

quatchi: Huelskamp said his bill includes provisions that would help the Kansas economy by easing environmental roadblocks for expansion of the Sunflower coal-fired power plant and deterring new regulations on hydraulic fracturing in oil drilling.

So... he co-sponsers a bill that will cut demand for ethanol but he promises to make up for it with an expanded coal-fired power plant and more unregulated fracking?

Such a deal! Who could refuse?


Yeah. Today's Republicans have this 'political correctness' problem.
 
2014-08-01 07:31:45 AM  

Mitch Taylor's Bro: No one is in favor of government waste. The problem this guy is discovering is that everyone's definition of waste depends on whether or not the government money is coming to them or not. Money the government spends on other people is waste. Money the government spends on me is a good use of taxpayer funds. And instead of representing his corn-dependent constituents, he sides with the Tea Party philosophy of...wait, what was it exactly?


I think the pic from the article sums that up nicely.

img.fark.net
 
2014-08-01 07:38:04 AM  
First he was like:  "I don't think Washington should be picking winners and losers," Huelskamp said. "I think industry should be able to compete in the marketplace."

But then he was like: Huelskamp said his bill includes provisions that would help the Kansas economy by easing environmental roadblocks for expansion of the Sunflower coal-fired power plant and deterring new regulations on hydraulic fracturing in oil drilling.
 
2014-08-01 07:43:08 AM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Guys! It's okay! Instead of buying your corn, we're going to pollute the water tables below it and the air above it so you won't have to worry about growing it in the first place! It's a sweet deal!


Best of all it really sticks to those Libs who care about things like clean air and water. Eyes on the prize!
 
2014-08-01 07:43:57 AM  

Zagloba: DrPainMD: Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others.

Your math is not like our Earth math.


What do you mean? Let's imagine some bootstrappy guy making $40,000 a year, and his job has a 45-minute interstate highway commute. He pays, what, $7,500 a year in federal taxes?

Gotcha! That interstate totally wasn't worth $7,500. The government is clearly taking more from him than the free stuff he is getting.
 
2014-08-01 07:47:12 AM  

DrPainMD: Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others.


You're right.  I'm going to go tell the government to fark off and build my own highway so I can get to my job creator's location in a timely manner.  Guess I should hire a couple of cops to keep an eye on the rabble-rousers out there, too, while I'm at it.  I hope they work for handshakes and patriotic nods of approval from me but if it get too bad out there I guess I can just build my own military to keep the peace.
 
2014-08-01 07:49:40 AM  

clkeagle: Zagloba: DrPainMD: Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others.

Your math is not like our Earth math.

What do you mean? Let's imagine some bootstrappy guy making $40,000 a year, and his job has a 45-minute interstate highway commute. He pays, what, $7,500 a year in federal taxes?

Gotcha! That interstate totally wasn't worth $7,500. The government is clearly taking more from him than the free stuff he is getting.


Uh...what he said.
 
2014-08-01 07:57:03 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: First he was like:  "I don't think Washington should be picking winners and losers," Huelskamp said. "I think industry should be able to compete in the marketplace."

But then he was like: Huelskamp said his bill includes provisions that would help the Kansas economy by easing environmental roadblocks for expansion of the Sunflower coal-fired power plant and deterring new regulations on hydraulic fracturing in oil drilling.


This is why I hate that talking point.  Government picks winners and losers all the damn time.  Democrats have their lists of winners and losers and Republicans have their lists of winners and losers.

Just admit it's a "winner and/or loser" that YOU don't like and be done with it.
 
2014-08-01 07:59:16 AM  
If it wasn't for ethanol, we wouldn't need so much corn.
If we didn't need so much corn, we wouldn't need so many farmers.
If we didn't need so many farmers, voters in rural areas wouldn't have jobs or income.
If voters in rural areas don't have jobs or money, they tend to blame their leaders.
Therefore, we have subsidies for ethanol.
Rinse and repeat for any number of other industry subsidies provided by government.

See how this works?
 
2014-08-01 08:01:34 AM  
Farmers have far more boots per capita than any other group of patriots, therefore with far more bootstraps to pull themselves back up. They'll be fine.
 
2014-08-01 08:01:42 AM  

Close2TheEdge: If it wasn't for ethanol, we wouldn't need so much corn.
If we didn't need so much corn, we wouldn't need so many farmers.
If we didn't need so many farmers, voters in rural areas wouldn't have jobs or income.
If voters in rural areas don't have jobs or money, they tend to blame their leaders. Obama
Therefore, we have subsidies for ethanol.
Rinse and repeat for any number of other industry subsidies provided by government.

See how this works?


You made one mistake regarding the GOP voter mindset.  It normally works, but it might not in this case.
 
2014-08-01 08:02:00 AM  

DrPainMD: Everybody wants their free stuff. Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others. People are idiots.


You mean like citizens of illinois that pay for people in Mississippi to get free stuff?

Shrug, I realize it and just remember that I was always told to help those who see me as an enemy; it is easy to help a friend, but much harder to help someone that treats you like an enemy.
 
2014-08-01 08:05:09 AM  

quatchi: Huelskamp said his bill includes provisions that would help the Kansas economy by easing environmental roadblocks for expansion of the Sunflower coal-fired power plant and deterring new regulations on hydraulic fracturing in oil drilling.

So... he co-sponsers a bill that will cut demand for ethanol but he promises to make up for it with an expanded coal-fired power plant and more unregulated fracking?

Such a deal! Who could refuse?


I'll just sit here and hold my breath and wait for  Bill # 2456: Stickin To Da Libs Act brings Kansas fiftyeleven hundreds of high paying free market  jobs that Jesus Reagan will rain down   from above.
 
2014-08-01 08:08:22 AM  
Since others have mentioned wind power and subsidies, The Economist had an interesting article on renewable energy last week (sadly, it did not include ethanol, since it was for electric power rather than the vehicular sort): Sun, wind and drain (note: no Oxford comma).

The graph they had is probably going to kick up a fuss in the letters to the editor this week:
cdn.static-economist.com
 
2014-08-01 08:11:14 AM  
I don't know whose side to take here. One guy talks about cutting subsidies for big ethanol (while helping out big coal and fracking), while the other guy is fighting to keep ethanol subsidies because 'it's the greatest thing for rural America", even though burning food for gas ( when you start counting the fuel and pesticides to make it, is not very environmentally friendly to begin with) is generally a really stupid idea.
 
2014-08-01 08:14:48 AM  
DrPainMD: Everybody wants their free stuff. Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others. People are idiots. My head is occupied by a rabid wombat.

We know already.
 
2014-08-01 08:18:41 AM  
Your congresscritter is doing what you elected him to do, Mr Farmer Guy. So shut up and take your lumps.
 
2014-08-01 08:21:13 AM  
Farmers are some of the biggest hypocrites in this country. I don't know how many times I've heard them raging against welfare for lazy moochers while completely ignoring the fact that most of them would be out of business if it weren't for government subsidies.

The government is too large and can't fix anything... except when it's cutting me a check.
 
2014-08-01 08:21:45 AM  

DrPainMD: Everybody wants their free stuff. Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others. People are idiots.


Most compassionate well adjusted members of our society fully understand how their tax burden relates to what they receive as a benefit along with how their taxes benefit others.  Just because you can't accept that not everyone is as selfish as you doesn't make everyone else an idiot.  Quit projecting your failings on to others.
 
2014-08-01 08:26:56 AM  

Snarfangel: Since others have mentioned wind power and subsidies, The Economist had an interesting article on renewable energy last week (sadly, it did not include ethanol, since it was for electric power rather than the vehicular sort): Sun, wind and drain (note: no Oxford comma).

The graph they had is probably going to kick up a fuss in the letters to the editor this week:
[cdn.static-economist.com image 850x422]


Those bars strike me as very mutable over time.  Like the benefits for solar 20 years ago would have been buried under the red baseline somewhere, and are likely to continue to stretch out to the right as time marches on.  Conversely, gas is not going to get cheaper to use in the future.  And a huge part of the costs associated with installation of alternative energy sources will be mitigated as they come into more common use.  Of *course* it's easier to convert a coal plant to a gas plant than to a solar plant.

Neat analysis, but it's just a snapshot in time.  I'd like to see what a graph of net cost/benefit as a 24 month rolling average looks like.  Cause I suspect that would actually show us what the writing on the wall is, as it were.
 
2014-08-01 08:41:20 AM  
Silly rabbit, the Tea Party supports cutting benefits for other people, not for themselves.  It doesn't hurt when those other people are brown or disadvantaged either.
 
2014-08-01 08:42:49 AM  
I'm usually conservative but I'm a big supporter of these biofuel programs because I own land and these programs enrich me a lot. I wish the government would force citizens to eat pork under the threat of imprisonment like they force citizens to use biofuels or go to prison because my pigs would be worth a fortune just like my biofuel crops.
 
2014-08-01 08:47:51 AM  
I want my free cell phone, abortion, 'fridge, food stamps, and subsidized housing.NOW.
 
2014-08-01 08:49:21 AM  

DrPainMD: Everybody wants their free stuff. Nobody realizes that the government is taking more from them to pay for other peoples' free stuff than they're getting in free stuff from others. People are idiots.


Really.  Tell me more about how the government is taking more from Kansas than Kansas is getting in "free stuff" from other people.

www.commonsensedemocracy.com
 
2014-08-01 08:50:24 AM  
I'm all in favor of renewables and even biofuel development.  But I don't think we should be using food crops like corn to make biofuels.

Seems to be just pork thrown to the existing agribusiness lobby.  There must be better ways.
 
2014-08-01 08:52:59 AM  
Cutting government spending works great if you're cutting services or areas that have no meaningful impact on the US's infrastructure or daily life. If you try to cut in areas that are necessary for the function of the state, you end up farking over the people.

Tea Partiers and those who demand government spending cuts want to cut everything but the elephant in the room: Defense. If there's ever an area with graft, waste, and lack of need, that's it.

/this has been Ric Romero reporting
 
2014-08-01 08:53:57 AM  
Now we see what happens when idealism hits reality.
 
2014-08-01 08:54:27 AM  

Doc Daneeka: I'm all in favor of renewables and even biofuel development.  But I don't think we should be using food crops like corn to make biofuels.

Seems to be just pork thrown to the existing agribusiness lobby.  There must be better ways.


There have been really promising experiments with algae.  Algae is much more efficient in terms of the percentage of its biomass that can be converted to fuel.

Algae, he says, yields about 2,500 gallons of biofuel per acre per year. In contrast, soybeans yield approximately 48 gallons; corn about 18 gallons.
 
2014-08-01 08:54:54 AM  
Let me explain this as someone who spent most of his life in the "Big First" district in question.

Farmers (and ranchers) have farm-bill priorities.  They were not Huelskamp people to start with, and when he got thrown off the House Ag committee for being a intransigent idiot, that pretty much sealed the deal.

This would have mattered 50 years ago.  Farm or farm-connected voters elected Keith Sebelius.

It no longer matters.  Even in the "Big First" (about as rural/ag a district as there is), farmers are a rare minority.  The rise of the 10,000 acre Monsanto corn-n-bean farm saw to that.  And that's usually one farmer, who calls in some temp labor (custom cutters who often aren't even US citizens, aerial applicators, etc).  You're down to 100-150 "real farmers" per county. Leasing land from a bunch of "farmers" who live in Dallas or New York.  Add in some implement dealers, seed dealers, elevator operators, etc.  Still a pretty distinct minority.

Your prototypical First District voter in 2014?  70-something, near-poverty, living in Hutch or Concordia or whatever other small town because it's really really cheap (houses for under $40k, property tax under $500/year).  Add in quite a lot of people on Medicare disability (again, they flock here because it's cheap living).  These are people who don't give a poop about the farm bill.  Or education.  Or much else except keepin it cheap.  That's Huelskamp's demographic.
 
2014-08-01 08:59:13 AM  

Doc Daneeka: I'm all in favor of renewables and even biofuel development.  But I don't think we should be using food crops like corn to make biofuels.

Seems to be just pork thrown to the existing agribusiness lobby.  There must be better ways.


Currently there are several biofuel options. One of them is based on crops high in sugar (sugar cane, sugar beet and sweet sorghum), or starch (corn, maize) and then use yeast fermentation to produce ethyl alcohol (ethanol). Another biofuel option is to grow plants that contain high amounts of vegetable oil, such as oil palm, soybean, algae, jatropha, or pongamia pinnata. When these oils are heated, their viscosity is reduced, and they can be burned directly in a diesel engine, or they can be chemically processed to produce fuels such as biodiesel. Wood and its byproducts can also be converted into biofuels such as woodgas, methanol or ethanol fuel. It is also possible to make cellulosic ethanol from non-edible plant parts, but this can be difficult to accomplish economically.
//I think there are also some sea grasses that can be used (non-food option)
 
2014-08-01 09:00:56 AM  
Why are the fark-libs lining up behind corporate welfare?  Can't support cutting a wasteful government program, because " first they came for . . . "?
 
2014-08-01 09:02:02 AM  

Doc Daneeka: I'm all in favor of renewables and even biofuel development.  But I don't think we should be using food crops like corn to make biofuels.

Seems to be just pork thrown to the existing agribusiness lobby.  There must be better ways.


Corn is a terrible crop in many ways:
- It's harmful to the soil by depleting the soil of needed nutrients and requires a fair bit of chemical use
- Its yield per acre is low and requires a large energy investment to plant and harvest
- Is not a high-nutrient-value crop for food

Without significant subsidies, Corn as a source of fuel is a loss-leader.

Honestly, if Ethanol were to be used as a legitimate source of fuel, hemp is a much better crop. It has a higher energy density per acre, it grows in marginal soils and restores cropland much like soybeans and other crops, and takes far less water and energy to plant and grow.

Plus, Hemp has a many more uses, including a food crop, production of fibers for clothing, paper, and other durable goods, and so on.

However, I would like to see Hemp grown just for its uses in making clothing and such and not for production of Ethanol.  I would like to see Ethanol be phased out in favor of electric or biodiesel or fuel cells.

I'd REALLY like to see diesel-electric hybrids running biodiesel to start, and then eventually go over to fuel cells in the long term.

Sorry for the off-topic rant.
 
2014-08-01 09:02:17 AM  
Tea Party tool versus ethanol tool?

Whoever wins, everyone else loses.
 
2014-08-01 09:02:28 AM  
https://www.google.com/#q=huelskamp+asshole+factor

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/house-leaders-make-examples-of -o bstinate-members-85034.html#ixzz2ExPfOuDG

In a closed-door meeting of the House Republican Study Committee on Wednesday, Amash and Huelskamp argued that they had been unfairly targeted for their conservative voting records, complaining that the leadership used a "secret scorecard" to rate their loyalty.

Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, a conservative who is close to party leaders, told them that "the a-hole factor" came into play in the Steering decision.
"He said that it had nothing to do with their voting record, a scorecard, or their actions across the street [meaning fundraising]," Westmoreland spokeswoman Leslie Shedd told POLITICO. "It had to do with their inability to work with other members, which some people might refer to as the a-hole factor."
 
Displayed 50 of 91 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 »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report