GOP poised to name "Prince of Pork" head of appropriations committee.

[zsdersw]

I support a ∞-yr. ban on earmarks.

 

[chucky2]

LOL, Democrats are not perfect by any stretch, but about are governing about as well as to be expected the reality of the economic disaster they inherited from GOP and continuing GOP sabotage of any economic recovery for political gain using the filibuster. You are already seeing the fruits of the gridlock you so much desire. Gridlock means we are going to stay in this mess longer than we need to. Any power in the hands of GOP, including power to obstruct has been a clearly demonstrated unmitigated disaster for the US, and will continue to be so. But continue dreaming that they are going to lead us out of the mess they themselves created.

Governing as well as to be expected?!?!?!?

Inherited economic disaster?!?!?

BUWWWWHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!

breath breath

BUWAUAUAAUAUAUAUAAHHAHAHAHAHWTFBBQ!!!!

You are a young Craig, seriously, I think you're so far beyond hope it's only amuzing, and sad, to watch at this point.

I don't prefer gridlock btw, however, in light of the Dem's super duper super majority performance, or the Rep's 6 years of majority, it is abundantly clear that having one party in charge is not a desirable - in any stretch of the imagination - solution to our country's problem.

It's stunning that after 3 years of Dem Congress, 1+ of it with a Dem Congress, you still have any faith in them.

Your masters are thankful, very thankful.... :thumbsup:

Chuck

 

[chucky2]

No one on "the Right" was critical of him, either.

Do they need to be? Isn't it just common sense that no one is in favor of earmarks? Does someone need to be in favor of not being punched in the nuts?

Chuck

 

[zsdersw]

Do they need to be? Isn't it just common sense that no one is in favor of earmarks? Does someone need to be in favor of not being punched in the nuts?

Chuck

Well, when they criticize Democrats for supporting earmarks yet don't do the same to "their own", they just look like partisan hacks instead of true supporters of banning/restricting earmarks.

 

[xj0hnx]

Well, when they criticize Democrats for supporting earmarks yet don't do the same to "their own", they just look like partisan hacks instead of true supporters of banning/restricting earmarks.

To quote myself ...

lol. You said self-discipline while talking about our government ...lol

I didn't say democrat, or republican. They are all irresponsible louts, malfeasance runs amok when no one is truly accountable.

 

[zsdersw]

To quote myself ...



I didn't say democrat, or republican. They are all irresponsible louts, malfeasance runs amok when no one is truly accountable.

That's nice, but you weren't critical of the specific person that is the subject of this thread.

 

[theeedude]

Governing as well as to be expected?!?!?!?

Inherited economic disaster?!?!?

BUWWWWHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!

breath breath

BUWAUAUAAUAUAUAUAAHHAHAHAHAHWTFBBQ!!!!

Are you an Egyptian diver? Because you are completely in de Nile.

 

[xj0hnx]

That's nice, but you weren't critical of the specific person that is the subject of this thread.

So what? I hate child rapist too, but because I'm not critical of a particular one, in your mind somehow I like them? That's just stupid.

 

[chucky2]

Are you an Egyptian diver? Because you are completely in de Nile.

I'm completely in "de Nile" about expecting Congress, which means the crop of politicians that make up that body, from doing What's Right for the country as a whole, growing balls, and coming up with a solid plan to get the US - long term - out of the hole it's in.

You are in total and complete "de Nile" if you think the Dem's, in any way shape or form, have any semblence of being able to do that. How can I even say that you ask? Just look at the past 3 years of their performance. Does any more need to be said?

Keep deluding yourself though, it's very fun to watch as "Rome burns"...governing as well as to be expected, omfg, that insanely funny...

 

[zsdersw]

So what? I hate child rapist too, but because I'm not critical of a particular one, in your mind somehow I like them? That's just stupid.

No, but aside from your general comment about politicians everything you've said in this thread has been a diversion from the topic.

If the topic of a thread were a specific child rapist I have no doubt that you would, in addition to generalized criticisms of rape, criticize the specific rapist.

 

[chucky2]

Well, when they criticize Democrats for supporting earmarks yet don't do the same to "their own", they just look like partisan hacks instead of true supporters of banning/restricting earmarks.

But they didn't start this thread, senseamp did. We just pointed out that what senseamp is all up in arms about, is exactly what he and his masters want/do, so, why the outcry?

I mean, even if this particular politician has gone on record as saying 'Earmarks are bad, earmarks should be ended' (and I'm not saying he has, I'm saying "if", as no one has posted in this thread they've confirmed this guy has done that), why make a thread about being hypo when it's the behavior you want?

That'd be like a Rep making a thread bitching about Obama not bowing to a leader of another country. Or a Rep making a thread bitching about Obama not attending a racist church. Etc.

Basically, this thread has no point.

Chuck

 

[zsdersw]

But they didn't start this thread, senseamp did. We just pointed out that what senseamp is all up in arms about, is exactly what he and his masters want/do, so, why the outcry?

I mean, even if this particular politician has gone on record as saying 'Earmarks are bad, earmarks should be ended' (and I'm not saying he has, I'm saying "if", as no one has posted in this thread they've confirmed this guy has done that), why make a thread about being hypo when it's the behavior you want?

That'd be like a Rep making a thread bitching about Obama not bowing to a leader of another country. Or a Rep making a thread bitching about Obama not attending a racist church. Etc.

Basically, this thread has no point.

Chuck

Hypocrisy is hypocrisy, no matter who points it out. senseamp's desire for earmarks doesn't in any way make the GOP's apparent hypocrisy and/or do-nothing 2yr moratorium any less significant or exempt it from criticism.

 

[chucky2]

You keep saying GOP like that's some group that's not made up of politicians: It is!

Are you seriously surprised, shocked, that a politician - be it Dem or Rep - does something hypocritical????

That's worthy of a thread??

If I made a thread in P&N about the shocking truth that if someone jumps in a lake, they'll be wet, would that be some profound thread needing discussion?

How much worse would it be if I was a massive proponent, along with the folks I vote for, that everyone should jump in lakes to be wet?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Which is more hypocritical...to do nothing to stop earmarks or to criticize those that that do?

 

[zsdersw]

You keep saying GOP like that's some group that's not made up of politicians: It is!

Are you seriously surprised, shocked, that a politicians - be it Dem or Rep - does something hypocritical????

That's worthy of a thread??

If I made a thread in P&N about the shocking truth that if someone jumps in a lake, they'll be wet, would that be some profound thread needing discussion?

How much worse would it be if I was a massive proponent, along with the folks I vote for, that everyone should jump in lakes to be wet?

No, I fully expect the GOP to act like Democrats on spending and I'm fully aware that the GOP is a group of politicians.

But that's not the issue.

The issue is GOP hypocrisy, not senseamp's love of earmarks/government spending. I applaud your late in the game post critical of politicians in general, and if it would've come earlier in the thread than before I started talking about hypocrisy, there wouldn't have been a problem.

 

[zsdersw]

Which is more hypocritical...to do nothing to stop earmarks or to criticize those that that do?

Your choice depends on there being people in power that are trying to stop earmarks. Unfortunately, there are none.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Your choice depends on there being people in power that are trying to stop earmarks. Unfortunately, there are none.

Some are at least doing something (2 year moratorium) which is a hell of a lot better than nothing...no?

 

[zsdersw]

Some are at least doing something which is a hell of a lot better than nothing...no?

What are they doing, exactly? How long are their efforts going to be in effect? What is the true motivation behind them; convictions or political expediency?

 

[chucky2]

It's "late in the game" because it's a given. Why would I, or anyone else, even have to mention it?

If I fart in your face, do I need to ask you if it stinks? If you wait 3 minutes before telling me, F'ing Christ, that stank!, does it mean you didn't think it stank when I first did it?

My 'late in the game' slam on politicians in general was here a year or two ago, many times...I just figured that by now, Everyone (Rep's from their 6 years, Dem's from the past 3, and Everyone Else who's been watching on), would instinctively realize, understand, and agree that our current Congress is a cesspool better sarin gassed than allowed to "function" as they currently do. Oops, can't leave out the Executive either, although somewhat less guilty there...

Chuck

 

[IBMer]

I am wondering when I'll see a Spidey post about how "We The People" didn't vote for this? We won't because "We the People" voted for the same old shit with a different tag. He keeps claiming Obama didn't get the message sent in Nov, apparently the GOP didn't get it either... which is worse?

 

[zsdersw]

It's "late in the game" because it's a given. Why would I, or anyone else, even have to mention it?

Many things are "a given", yet that doesn't stop them from being posted repeatedly.

If I fart in your face, do I need to ask you if it stinks? If you wait 3 minutes before telling me, F'ing Christ, that stank!, does it mean you didn't think it stank when I first did it?

Not all farts have an odor.

My 'late in the game' slam on politicians in general was here a year or two ago, many times...I just figured that by now, Everyone (Rep's from their 6 years, Dem's from the past 3, and Everyone Else who's been watching on), would instinctively realize, understand, and agree that our current Congress is a cesspool better sarin gassed than allowed to "function" as they currently do. Oops, can't leave out the Executive either, although somewhat less guilty there...

Chuck

Your criticisms of politicians are found in many threads, repeatedly.. yet you left them out of this one until "late in the game", and that's what's curious to me.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

What are they doing, exactly?

Seriously?!? Am I missing something here?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2010/11/17/131382317/senate-gop-ok-2-yr-earmarks-moratorium

How long are their efforts going to be in effect?

Currently...2 years.

What is the true motivation behind them; convictions or political expediency?

Probably the exact opposite of the true motivations, convictions and political expediencies of those who support them.

 

[zsdersw]

Seriously?!? Am I missing something here?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2010/11/17/131382317/senate-gop-ok-2-yr-earmarks-moratorium


Currently...2 years.

Yes, I know that. I don't consider that "trying to do something about earmarks", though. A 2yr earmark hiatus is no more significant than a single grain of sand on the beach. It's lip service, fueled by nothing but political expediency.

 

[chucky2]

Many things are "a given", yet that doesn't stop them from being posted repeatedly.

Yes, OK, and?

Not all farts have an odor.

Okey dokey, moving on...

Your criticisms of politicians are found in many threads, repeatedly.. yet you left them out of this one until "late in the game", and that's what's curious to me.

Nothing curious about it. I felt it was a much more better use of my time having fun pointing out the hypocrisy of someone that's for Big Spending pointing out the hypocrisy of someone engaging in big spending. Why was it a better use than pointing out that this is what politicians do? Because everyone already knows this is what politicians do.

So why waste time pointing out the obvious?

Are you telling me that now, in every other thread you post on in P&N, you will make one initial post detailing out everything you have to say that could possibly pertain to the thread at hand, and then just leave it at that?

 

[zsdersw]

Nothing curious about it. I felt it was a much more better use of my time having fun pointing out the hypocrisy of someone that's for Big Spending pointing out the hypocrisy of someone engaging in big spending. Why was it a better use than pointing out that this is what politicians do? Because everyone already knows this is what politicians do.

So why waste time pointing out the obvious?

Show me a regular in P&N who doesn't already know about senseamp's preferences.

Are you telling me that now, in every other thread you post on in P&N, you will make one initial post detailing out everything you have to say that could possibly pertain to the thread at hand, and then just leave it at that?

No, I'm not telling you that.. nor am I asking you to do the same.