Democrats screw the Vets to protect....

Cancel 2016.2

Cancel 2016.2

The Almighty
Those poor deprived individuals living in Beverly Hills.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/09/feinsteins_4_bn_beverly_hills.html

So much for the Dems claims of cleaning up earmarks. Here is yet ANOTHER example of the Dems reneging on their vow to clean up the corruption. This time the Dems are targeting the VA. Yes, after all of their outcrys about Walter Reed, only one Dem (Russ Feingold) and 24 Reps voted against D Feinstein's earmark to protect her wealthy hollywood consituents.

I can understand the Dems not having the courage to stand up to one of their leaders, but what the hell are the other Reps doing? They should have been unanimous against her and thrown the whole corruption thing back in the face of the Dems. Not to mention the issue of the current state of the VA.

$4 BILLION that could have gone to the vets. But instead will protect a bunch of spoiled hollywood elitists from having their views ruined. Kind of reminiscent of Ted Kennedy's fight against the wind farm.
 
Dungheap said:
What a fucking joke.

Stop reading the Wall Street Journal op-ed page. It'll rot your brain.
Click to expand...
Yeah, finding out about earmarks after they promised not to do them is brain rot!

Don't go reading any stuff about democrats that might be doing something against what they ran on! It must be a lie!

Here, let me take a sip of kool-aid, my mouth is getting dry.

/sarcasm.
 
Dungheap said:
What a fucking joke.

Stop reading the Wall Street Journal op-ed page. It'll rot your brain.
Click to expand...

So, because it was in the Journal, it did not happen? Stop being a complete party hack. Open your eyes to the fact that the Dems have no intention of eliminating the earmarks and ending the corruption.

Or are you truly ignorant enough to expect us to believe that because you don't like the journal that somehow changes the fact that this earmark exists?
 
Imagine that.... put up a bush bashing thread and the dems cannot get there fast enough. Show another example of the hypocricy of the Dems and they are so very very silent.

So very telling.
 
This is bad.

Good thing I don't really trust politicians.

However, I would not say the Democrats have completely "reneged" on the vow to clean up corruption. They have taken more active steps in Congress than we have seen in years, and the jury is still out.
 
Superfreak said:
Imagine that.... put up a bush bashing thread and the dems cannot get there fast enough. Show another example of the hypocricy of the Dems and they are so very very silent.

So very telling.
Click to expand...


That's silly. Bush is infinitely more destructive to our national welfare right now than this rather insignificant example.
 
What strikes me as much more egregious is posters who constantly defend the Iraq War as one which we had "no choice" on continuing to ignore threads about GAO reports & reports on the ground showing that the surge isn't really working, and that this was, in fact, one of our most colossal foreign policy blunders.

Now, THAT is something which really affects our lives...
 
Superfreak said:
Those poor deprived individuals living in Beverly Hills.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/09/feinsteins_4_bn_beverly_hills.html

So much for the Dems claims of cleaning up earmarks. Here is yet ANOTHER example of the Dems reneging on their vow to clean up the corruption. This time the Dems are targeting the VA. Yes, after all of their outcrys about Walter Reed, only one Dem (Russ Feingold) and 24 Reps voted against D Feinstein's earmark to protect her wealthy hollywood consituents.

I can understand the Dems not having the courage to stand up to one of their leaders, but what the hell are the other Reps doing? They should have been unanimous against her and thrown the whole corruption thing back in the face of the Dems. Not to mention the issue of the current state of the VA.

$4 BILLION that could have gone to the vets. But instead will protect a bunch of spoiled hollywood elitists from having their views ruined. Kind of reminiscent of Ted Kennedy's fight against the wind farm.
Click to expand...


Oh, Congress...seems she had the right intent to help the vet, just the wrong facility. At least it isn't a bridge to nowhere!
 
Onceler said:
This is bad.

Good thing I don't really trust politicians.

However, I would not say the Democrats have completely "reneged" on the vow to clean up corruption. They have taken more active steps in Congress than we have seen in years, and the jury is still out.
Click to expand...
One Friedman unit is all you will need, eh?
 
Superfreak said:
So, because it was in the Journal, it did not happen? Stop being a complete party hack. Open your eyes to the fact that the Dems have no intention of eliminating the earmarks and ending the corruption.

Or are you truly ignorant enough to expect us to believe that because you don't like the journal that somehow changes the fact that this earmark exists?
Click to expand...

Until we get rid of the lobbyist, this is the way it will be on both sides of the fence! We need to change the system.
 
Onceler said:
This is bad.

Good thing I don't really trust politicians.

However, I would not say the Democrats have completely "reneged" on the vow to clean up corruption. They have taken more active steps in Congress than we have seen in years, and the jury is still out.
Click to expand...

Talk about silly, they have done little to clean up the corruption. But it is good to see that you are as outraged at this as so many dems were with regards to Walter Reed.
 
Onceler said:
That's silly. Bush is infinitely more destructive to our national welfare right now than this rather insignificant example.
Click to expand...

Good to see that your true colors are showing... fuck the vets... as long as we get to keep bashing Bush for saying "austrian" rather than "austrailian"... to hell with Dems screwing the vets over.... must bash bush... must bash bush....
 
Onceler said:
What strikes me as much more egregious is posters who constantly defend the Iraq War as one which we had "no choice" on continuing to ignore threads about GAO reports & reports on the ground showing that the surge isn't really working, and that this was, in fact, one of our most colossal foreign policy blunders.

Now, THAT is something which really affects our lives...
Click to expand...

Right... you have it down... ignore the bad the dems are doing... try to spin away from it by pointing to something else. Fuck the vets... must bash bush...
 
Superfreak said:
Good to see that your true colors are showing... fuck the vets... as long as we get to keep bashing Bush for saying "austrian" rather than "austrailian"... to hell with Dems screwing the vets over.... must bash bush... must bash bush....
Click to expand...

that is vary true...
 
Superfreak said:
Good to see that your true colors are showing... fuck the vets... as long as we get to keep bashing Bush for saying "austrian" rather than "austrailian"... to hell with Dems screwing the vets over.... must bash bush... must bash bush....
Click to expand...


Who said "fuck the vets?" And I didn't say anything about the Austrian comment.

I'm just saying this is an insignificant example; I said it's bad, but it's nowhere near other, much more pressing issues going on right now.

Also, you sound like you don't know anything about how Democrats have addressed reform on a legislative basis. Why don't you read up on it first?
 
froggie said:
Oh, Congress...seems she had the right intent to help the vet, just the wrong facility. At least it isn't a bridge to nowhere!
Click to expand...

The bridge to nowhere is a joke, no question. But she has no intent to help the vets if she is blocking their ability to do just that.
 
Superfreak said:
Right... you have it down... ignore the bad the dems are doing... try to spin away from it by pointing to something else. Fuck the vets... must bash bush...
Click to expand...


I'm not ignoring it. You said no one was paying attention to your thread, I jumped on & said it was bad behavior, and you're STILL saying I'm ignoring it, because it's what you need to believe.

You're a joke...
 
Onceler said:
Who said "fuck the vets?" And I didn't say anything about the Austrian comment.

I'm just saying this is an insignificant example; I said it's bad, but it's nowhere near other, much more pressing issues going on right now.

Also, you sound like you don't know anything about how Democrats have addressed reform on a legislative basis. Why don't you read up on it first?
Click to expand...

THIS example was how Feinstein blocked the VA (that stands for Veterans Administration.... same ones that run Walter Reed) from using the land near her wealthy hollywood constituents to raise money that can be put to use to help the Vets. So in saying this example is "insignificant" is equivalent to saying fuck the vets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top