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.

(The Hill)   Senator Corker to oppose bipartisan budget deal over concerns that he does not personally profit   ( thehill.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, United States Department of Defense, United States Senate, two-year budget deal, Republican Party, Washington, D.C., United States, Al-Qaeda, Phillips Corker Pentagon  
•       •       •

2168 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Feb 2018 at 2:05 PM (22 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



35 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2018-02-08 12:33:31 PM  
While I acknowledge that the outcome is unlikely, I will be somewhat amused if Republican defectors ultimately scuttle the budget deal that Senator Schumer (D-Ickless) capitulated to bring about.

I will then watch President Trump, Congressional Republicans and conservative pundits blame Democrats for the failure to keep the government running and then watch their narrative be accepted as fact by the media.
 
2018-02-08 12:39:16 PM  
I opened that article half expecting the headline to be correct.

Dimensio: While I acknowledge that the outcome is unlikely, I will be somewhat amused if Republican defectors ultimately scuttle the budget deal that Senator Schumer (D-Ickless) capitulated to bring about.

I will then watch President Trump, Congressional Republicans and conservative pundits blame Democrats for the failure to keep the government running and then watch their narrative be accepted as fact by the media.


It's the rotating villain.  Last time, the senate scuttled the deal so now it's the house's turn.  If they don't scuttle it, then president big britches will. Someone, somewhere, is going to fark over this deal so...
 
2018-02-08 12:54:52 PM  
Bob: You voted for the tax "reform" bill that is going to balloon the deficit. Kindly fark off.
 
2018-02-08 12:55:11 PM  
They just better make sure they budget not only for the wall, but also for that military parade. First things first.
 
2018-02-08 01:21:53 PM  
I'd like to say I'm shocked, but this sort of base hypocrisy is now the norm.
 
2018-02-08 01:23:21 PM  

Pesky_Humans: They just better make sure they budget not only for the wall, but also for that military parade. First things first.


We don't need to actually fund the military.  Just put on a big show and other countries will be too intimidated to mess with us.  Like the Russian sanctions -- just talking about them is enough.  No need to actually implement them.
 
2018-02-08 01:46:21 PM  

Diogenes: Pesky_Humans: They just better make sure they budget not only for the wall, but also for that military parade. First things first.

We don't need to actually fund the military.  Just put on a big show and other countries will be too intimidated to mess with us.  Like the Russian sanctions -- just talking about them is enough.  No need to actually implement them.


In that vein, we could trot out some F-35s, and by "trot out" I mean pull behind a truck on a flatbed trailer.
 
2018-02-08 02:02:11 PM  

Unobtanium: Bob: You voted for the tax "reform" bill that is going to balloon the deficit. Kindly fark off.


img.fark.netView Full Size


I'd like to add that he only voted or it once he got paid.
 
2018-02-08 02:11:05 PM  
Ryan is counting on Democrats to get it through the House. This should be interesting.
 
2018-02-08 02:12:22 PM  
The Senate is expected to easily pass the bill.  So this is a "look at me, I'm a fiscal conservative" attention whore vote that will have no impact.
 
2018-02-08 02:13:29 PM  
You don't shoot a hole in the hull and then cry about taking on more cargo.
 
2018-02-08 02:13:49 PM  
Dear Chuck Schumer, kindly stop calling this a great "deal" and don't give it a single Dem vote.  Make Republicans either own the fact that they're totally fine with raising the debt ceiling when a Republican is president, or let them fail to prevent a shutdown in spite of the fact that they control every branch of the federal government.  Rand Paul, for instance, loses most of the supposed rationale for his existence if he votes for this thing.  It's going to make me physically ill when a few Republicans get to vote their "conscience" and it passes anyway because Schumer wrangled a few Democratic votes.  Gods, we're bad at politics. And just as an aside, this is yet another clear signal that Corker plans to run for president
 
2018-02-08 02:16:41 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size

"I got mine fk you!, Burn it all down!"
 
2018-02-08 02:21:26 PM  

Cletus C.: Ryan is counting on Democrats to get it through the House. This should be interesting.


That's amusing given that the two biggest policy lifts of this particular Congress, repealing the Affordable Care Act and gutting the tax code, were undertaken with zero effort to get Democratic votes. Why should they help the Republicans when they won't help themselves?
 
2018-02-08 02:23:15 PM  
When will we stop asking these idiots what they think.  Go outside and play hide-and-go-fark-yourself Corker!  We all know what is going on in their minds is "how do I get mine at the expense of everyone whom I represent?"  Having video evidence with a typed notarized transcript and at least 15 witnesses is not enough for the republicant base to acknowledge that their elected officials are picking their pockets and saying one thing while doing the exact opposite.  The Republicans and their 2 Santa Claus Theory are coming to the forefront again with all this nonsense and it makes my head hurt!

Of course, these are the same people who think the lottery system is an "investment" and are waiting for their lucky numbers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) to come up.

/Also their luggage combo
 
2018-02-08 02:25:36 PM  

Serious Black: Why should they help the Republicans when they won't help themselves?


They've been helping themselves to the whole cookie jar, don't think they need more help doing so.
 
2018-02-08 02:27:51 PM  
He voted for the Cut Cut Cut Trump's Taxes act which blows up the deficit as much as it's legally allowed to due to the manner in which the Rumps passed it.

Any "concerns" he raises about the deficit are empty and worthless.

/Empty and worthless
//Just like most Republicans
 
2018-02-08 02:32:59 PM  
Retire now, farkface.  Your little moniker of "fiscal hawk" is no longer applicable.
 
2018-02-08 02:33:05 PM  

Unobtanium: Bob: You voted for the tax "reform" bill that is going to balloon the deficit. Kindly fark off.


Yeah, sure it ran up the debt, but they put in that million dollar property owner exemption for him, so it didn't count. Sure it massively runs up tge debt, but he personally saved millions on his tax bill. So he made money, and what could be more fiscally conservative than making more money.

You think he is just posturing to get another kickback? Somebody honorable like Bob Corker? Stop laughing! He means it this time.
 
2018-02-08 02:36:44 PM  
Eat Shat Bob.
 
2018-02-08 02:46:24 PM  
You mean the same concerns he had and then didn't have about the tax cut.  Corker won't be missed.  He should just put a corker in it.
 
2018-02-08 02:52:23 PM  
The Fark chorus pegged Corker for being a hypocritical jackass months ago. Republicans are of a piece, aren't they?

/Sniff
//Sen. John Sherman Cooper (R-Ky) was once one of the most respected men in the country.
 
2018-02-08 03:08:06 PM  
FTA: Corker, a fiscal hawk, added that the agreement "perpetuates the abuse" of a war account not subjected to the budget restrictions and "tees up" another spending fight in two years.
"It is also only partially offset, and most of those offsets occur years from now, doubling down on the irresponsible mentality in Congress of spend-now-pay-later," he said.

It "Tees up" another spending fight in 2 years... yep, thats a brilliant reason not to support a budget because all it does is make you have to debate and pass another budget after it expires.

Also, I would love to have asked him a follow up question to his "Spend-now-pay-later" bullshiat by asking him if that means he would support tax increases to offset the additional spending?.. whats that? You wouldn't? Then fark you, sit down, shut up you hypocritical piece of shiat. You don't give a shiat about "Pay-As-You-Go" style governing, its just a convenient topic to hide behind when you are upset that you can't cut funding for programs that help the poor and needed to fund your farking military expansion circle jerk & larger tax cuts.
 
2018-02-08 03:24:51 PM  

keldaria: FTA: Corker, a fiscal hawk, added that the agreement "perpetuates the abuse" of a war account not subjected to the budget restrictions and "tees up" another spending fight in two years.
"It is also only partially offset, and most of those offsets occur years from now, doubling down on the irresponsible mentality in Congress of spend-now-pay-later," he said.

It "Tees up" another spending fight in 2 years... yep, thats a brilliant reason not to support a budget because all it does is make you have to debate and pass another budget after it expires.

Also, I would love to have asked him a follow up question to his "Spend-now-pay-later" bullshiat by asking him if that means he would support tax increases to offset the additional spending?.. whats that? You wouldn't? Then fark you, sit down, shut up you hypocritical piece of shiat. You don't give a shiat about "Pay-As-You-Go" style governing, its just a convenient topic to hide behind when you are upset that you can't cut funding for programs that help the poor and needed to fund your farking military expansion circle jerk & larger tax cuts.


One of the stock Republican arguments for cutting Social Security cuts now is so we don't have to cut them in the future.

I wish that weren't true.
 
2018-02-08 03:26:13 PM  

Unobtanium: Bob: You voted for the tax "reform" bill that is going to balloon the deficit. Kindly fark off.


This. Anyone who voted for that POS tax bill is not allowed to mention deficits without a sound mocking. Bob Corker, even cats are mocking you.
i.imgflip.comView Full Size
 
2018-02-08 03:26:26 PM  

Diogenes: Pesky_Humans: They just better make sure they budget not only for the wall, but also for that military parade. First things first.

We don't need to actually fund the military.  Just put on a big show and other countries will be too intimidated to mess with us.  Like the Russian sanctions -- just talking about them is enough.  No need to actually implement them.


Inflatable tanks and rocket launchers, that's what I always say.
 
2018-02-08 03:55:58 PM  

thorpe: Diogenes: Pesky_Humans: They just better make sure they budget not only for the wall, but also for that military parade. First things first.

We don't need to actually fund the military.  Just put on a big show and other countries will be too intimidated to mess with us.  Like the Russian sanctions -- just talking about them is enough.  No need to actually implement them.

Inflatable tanks and rocket launchers, that's what I always say.


It's a great proven method for mass employment of artists.
 
2018-02-08 04:02:19 PM  
Senator Steve Daines (MT) is a no.

Rand Paul is holding up the vote in the Senate right now.
 
2018-02-08 04:05:02 PM  
Gillibrand, Harris, Warren, and Sanders are all voting No.
 
2018-02-08 04:30:33 PM  
"I cannot in good conscience vote for this reckless, irresponsible spending bill. A reckless, irresponsible tax cut on the other hand makes me jerk it hard."

Enjoy your moment of moral strutting, little man. It will soon be over.
 
2018-02-08 04:40:45 PM  
"It is also only partially offset, and most of those offsets occur years from now, doubling down on the irresponsible mentality in Congress of spend-now-pay-later," [Corker] said.

But that $1.5 Trillion tax cut that you passed for you and your buddies is the height of fiscal responsibility and sound econinomic policy, right buddy?
 
2018-02-08 05:35:51 PM  

Ambivalence: It's the rotating villain.  Last time, the senate scuttled the deal so now it's the house's turn.  If they don't scuttle it, then president big britches will. Someone, somewhere, is going to fark over this deal so...


Looks like Rand Paul is going to be the one to screw it up this time, attempting to delay the vote until tomorrow.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/37​2​996-rand-paul-delays-senate-budget-vot​e

Also, Flake is siding with Corker after folding on tax scam himself without even getting a kickback.
 
2018-02-08 07:11:41 PM  
I think part of the support for this bill is that it will remove many potential obstacles to reelection by pushing them past the election.  Since Corker is not running it does not help him.
 
2018-02-08 07:48:51 PM  

Commissar_Murphy: thorpe: Diogenes: Pesky_Humans: They just better make sure they budget not only for the wall, but also for that military parade. First things first.

We don't need to actually fund the military.  Just put on a big show and other countries will be too intimidated to mess with us.  Like the Russian sanctions -- just talking about them is enough.  No need to actually implement them.

Inflatable tanks and rocket launchers, that's what I always say.

It's a great proven method for mass employment of artists.


There are plenty of Government Crisis Actors available.
 
2018-02-08 11:41:10 PM  

Naido: Dear Chuck Schumer, kindly stop calling this a great "deal" and don't give it a single Dem vote.  Make Republicans either own the fact that they're totally fine with raising the debt ceiling when a Republican is president, or let them fail to prevent a shutdown in spite of the fact that they control every branch of the federal government.  Rand Paul, for instance, loses most of the supposed rationale for his existence if he votes for this thing.  It's going to make me physically ill when a few Republicans get to vote their "conscience" and it passes anyway because Schumer wrangled a few Democratic votes.  Gods, we're bad at politics. And just as an aside, this is yet another clear signal that Corker plans to run for president


The problem with that is if every Democrat in the Senate votes no and holds filibuster, the bill fails and it's clearly the Democrats' fault. If the Democrats all vote no and DON'T maintain filibuster, the Republicans can pass their version, send it to the House, pass their version, and then bring a quick compromise to the floor with exclusively Republican amendments. And since cloture was already invoked, Democrats would be powerless to stop it.
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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