Time to put the brakes on the Hillary express

The Bridge to Nowhere is just another in a long line of Alaska pork items, both parties in Alaska have always had a bad history when it comes to pork, just like Lousiana with corruption.

I don't think the Dems really cared about the Bridge to Nowhere, I remember reading an Economist article about it a long time ago and was surprised that I hadn't heard of it, especially because it looked bad for the Repubs in power. Then the 2006 election started getting nearer and all of a sudden the Democrats were yelling about it and stopping pork!

Sort of like the Iraq war, the Dems all were really quite about the war being wrong in the first few months of it in 2003, then when WMD still hadn't turned up, they decided to go with the "This war was a mistake and we were against it all along." BS

So Dems are not only pathetic but oppurtunists too.
 
Superfreak said:
Dano... this is where you have a problem.... The Dems are no worse or better than the Reps... they all suck. Who sucks more simply depends on who is currently in power. But bottom line remains the same. They do not care about raising our national debt every year. They only SAY they do.
Click to expand...

I can't disagree with most of this. I do think there was a genuine commitment in the '90's to bring the costs of gov't down, but it only achieved marginal success, and was essentially abandoned. The tone was better at that time for progress on that front; it doesn't help when Cheney says something like "deficit spending doesn't matter," and there are no serious efforts at all to limit spending.

I was also heartened when Obama said in a recent debate that the first question should not be where we need to raise taxes, but how can we achieve what we want and still find a way to lower the tax burden.

That said, I think just about the only things the GOP had going for it in the past was fiscal responsibility & security; on any other issue - education, health, the environment, etc. - the Dems held the advantage. The GOP has effectively ceded those 2 issues & left them up for grabs. We'll see if the Dems can take advantage...
 
Superfreak said:
Dano... this is where you have a problem.... The Dems are no worse or better than the Reps... they all suck. Who sucks more simply depends on who is currently in power. But bottom line remains the same. They do not care about raising our national debt every year. They only SAY they do.
Click to expand...
Well I think the better thing to do is to judge parties with the individuals inside them, there are 16 Repubs in that list who scored a perfect 50 out of 50 for voting for anti-pork amendments.

I'm sure if you got elected in Colorado, you would get annoyed when you did a good job voting fiscally responsible and then constantly hear people say "Both parties are just as bad" and just judge you as being part of the party.

Perhaps it would be better to say that both parties have issues but a much higher number of Republican congressmen voted against pork then did Democrat congressmen.
 
TheDanold said:
Well I think the better thing to do is to judge parties with the individuals inside them, there are 16 Repubs in that list who scored a perfect 50 out of 50 for voting for anti-pork amendments.

I'm sure if you got elected in Colorado, you would get annoyed when you did a good job voting fiscally responsible and then constantly hear people say "Both parties are just as bad" and just judge you as being part of the party.

Perhaps it would be better to say that both parties have issues but a much higher number of Republican congressmen voted against pork then did Democrat congressmen.
Click to expand...

True, it would be aggrevating if my constituents did not look at my individual record. But I DO look at their individual records.... so while there may be some Reps that are better, on the whole.... both parties suck.
 
Onceler said:
I was also heartened when Obama said in a recent debate that the first question should not be where we need to raise taxes, but how can we achieve what we want and still find a way to lower the tax burden.
Click to expand...
This is fools gold, Obama has had some time in Congress and despite appearing like some sort of new style politician, his record is very far left and very typically like other Dems and more importantly he has cut nothing and voted for spending increases like the rest of them.

The only Dem with any actual creedence on holding the line on taxes is Richardson, again judged by record in power. I think the party bigwigs that pull strings know this and the only thing salvaging him from getting the Lieberman treatment is the fact that he is hispanic and they don't want to alienate the fastest growing vote.
 
"Sort of like the Iraq war, the Dems all were really quite about the war being wrong in the first few months of it in 2003, then when WMD still hadn't turned up, they decided to go with the "This war was a mistake and we were against it all along." BS"

That's so dishonest. Opposition to the war was tremendous in the 1st few months of '03. There were massive protests in NYC & around the world.

When we invaded in March, people DID keep quiet for the most part. As vehemently anti-war as I am (and have been since it was first talked about in '02), even I kept it pretty low-profile at that point, because there is a point that patriotism takes precedence. In the beginning of hostilities, even if you opposed those hostilities, the idea is to just shut up & hope for the best, particularly if you are a politician.
 
Onceler said:
I can't disagree with most of this. I do think there was a genuine commitment in the '90's to bring the costs of gov't down, but it only achieved marginal success, and was essentially abandoned. The tone was better at that time for progress on that front; it doesn't help when Cheney says something like "deficit spending doesn't matter," and there are no serious efforts at all to limit spending.

I was also heartened when Obama said in a recent debate that the first question should not be where we need to raise taxes, but how can we achieve what we want and still find a way to lower the tax burden.

That said, I think just about the only things the GOP had going for it in the past was fiscal responsibility & security; on any other issue - education, health, the environment, etc. - the Dems held the advantage. The GOP has effectively ceded those 2 issues & left them up for grabs. We'll see if the Dems can take advantage...
Click to expand...

I agree that in the late 90's an effort was certainly made and I give credit to Clinton and the Rep Congress for doing so. However, they failed in that they had one of the best economies of record and STILL managed to increase our nations debt each fiscal year.... all because they were afraid to limit increases in the budget. They didn't even have to make cuts... all they had to do was limit the amount of the increases and they could have done it. Like I said, I do give them all credit for trying... but part of me thinks they may have failed us even worse than any of their predecessors simply due to the environment they were a part of.
 
TheDanold said:
The Dems are more pathetic than Repubs, I don't care which or how many items you managed to cherry pick to lyingly plead a case that Repubs are worse.

One more time you illterate shit:

"Sixteen congressmen scored a perfect 100%, voting for all 50 anti-pork amendments. They are all Republicans.
The average Republican score was 43%. The average Democratic score was 2%.
The average score for appropriators was 4%. The average score for non-appropriators was 25%.
Kudos to Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) who scored an admirable 98%-the only Democrat to score above 20%. "
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/08...owth_repor.php

There were 50 anti-pork amendments and the average Dem voted for 2% of them, the Dems are far more pathetic on pork.
Not sure how you equate posting facts that kick your ass badly as "running" but then again I'm assuming Liberals make any sense...at all...ever
Click to expand...

You proved my point you illiterate shit and you're too dumb to recognize you've proved my point.

Your dumb ass is still running and trying to narrowly frame a "pork" argument and you can't even prove that. It's been pointed out to you by myself and others several times that my comment was not about just pork .. but your scary ass continues to run.

You cite "statistics" from Club for Growth which has a policy goal of making the Bush tax cuts permanent.

How about a little something from the Wall Street Journal and REPUBLICAN John Fund?

Northern Exposure
By JOHN FUND
August 7, 2007

Republicans faced a time for choosing last week, when Senate Democrats brought to the floor an ethics "reform" bill that may make it easier for Congress to dole out pork-barrel spending. In the words of GOP Sen. Tom Coburn, the bill "not only failed to drain the swamp, but gave the alligators new rights."

Rather than block the legislation and insist on better reforms, image-sensitive Republicans largely backed the bill.

Have they learned anything? They lost control of Congress last year in no small measure because the GOP had become identified with the culture of pork-barrel spending, frittering away the American people's former confidence in them on fiscal issues.

If 34 Senate Republicans had united and voted against the bill, Democrats would have been forced to draw up more meaningful reforms. They might even have forced Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to accept the very "sunshine" provisions the Senate unanimously adopted in January -- so at least the public would know who is doling out pork. But when it came down to it, only 17 voted for prolonging debate on the bill.

The bill the rest voted for had been gutted: Disclosing an earmark is now voluntary (not mandatory), protecting an earmark requires only 41 votes (instead of 67), and the power to determine whether a spending provision inserted by a senator is officially considered an earmark will now be up to . . . Mr. Reid.

The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll finds Democrats lead Republicans by 16 points on controlling government spending and by nine points on taxes. The Republicans have their work cut out for them if they want to win back public confidence; but their behavior on the ethics bill shows they still don't get it.
Click to expand...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118645143529390075.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Neither party has clean hands when it comes to pork spending. Only the stupid fall for that bullshit.

Goldwater conservative? .. How's that working out for ya'? If there was ever a man waiting to get his ass blown out trying to be president, it was Goldwater.

Stupid
 
Last edited:
blackascoal said:
You proved my point you illiterate shit and you're too dumb to recognize you've proved my point.

Your dumb ass is still running and trying to narrowly frame a "pork" argument and you can't even prove that. It's been pointed out to you by myself and others several times that my comment was not about just pork .. but your scary ass continues to run.

You cite "statistics" from Club for Growth which has a policy goal of making the Bush tax cuts permanent.

How about a little something from the Wall Street Journal and REPUBLICAN John Fund?


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118645143529390075.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Neither party has clean hands when it comes to pork spending. Only the stupid fall for that bullshit.
Click to expand...
Once more you are lost without putting anything into context. Dolt, remember that this started when Lorax talked about the great measures the Dems were doing to fight pork since they got to power in 2007, and I responded with 2007 stats showing that the Dems have been terrible at fighting pork and the Repubs have been ok.
My 2007 stats trump your cherrypicked examples from years before. See how that works schmuck? Now run away and go rant on some other thread before you get schmacked some more.

blackascoal said:
Goldwater conservative? .. How's that working out for ya'? If there was ever a man waiting to get his ass blown out trying to be president, it was Goldwater.
Stupid
Click to expand...
Um no, he didn't get his ass blown out, he was the victim of a Democrat sleaze attack over fearmongering accusations of getting into a war with Nam, which the Dems did anyway.

"They told me if I voted for Goldwater, he would get us into a war in Vietnam. Well, I voted for Goldwater and that's what happened." – William F. Buckley, Jr. (founder of National Review)

Also he changed the party to being into less government which paved the way to Reagan and the reemergence of America as a strong individual minded country again. So I don't regret his running for prez as much as you think.

Served. Your pal,
White-as-snow
 
Why is it that no matter what board you may be on, it's always the dumbest motherfuckers there that are first to call other posters names and claim they "owned", "served", and "claimed" other posters because they think their perspective is the only correct perspective?

You know what other trait seems true about these dumb people who believe they are always correct? They're all right-wingers. Don't take my word for it .. look at the threads. See who is the first to engage in name-calling. See who are essentially the only ones to claim they "own" you.

You know what other trait these dumb people, who believe that they're always correct, who all happen to be right-wingers have in common? These are the same dumb people that told you Saddam had WMD and you were a "moron" if you didn't believe them. Then they told you they "served" you.

Same dummies who told you Saddam was connected to 9/11. Then said they "claimed" you.

Same dummies who cheered "Mission Accomplished".

Same dummies who cheered that idiot Colin Powell who did what he is best known for, lying to the American people and the world. Don't believe that .. See: MyLai

Same dummies who cheered the stage production of Jesica Lynch and the toppling of Saddam's statue. They thought that shit was real.

Pat Tillman

WMD

Depleted Uranium is safe

Electronic voting

Coalition of the Willing

American fries

North Korea

cakewalk

Rumsfeld great leader

Cheney great VP

THE WORLD STANDS WITH US .. "cuz' you're either with us or agin' us" .. guess what?

I could go on and on and on. All the shit they were just so damn sure about turned out to be stupid as hell. .. only dumb people would believe that bullshit .. and we told you so, but were nice about it.

Yet here you are again. Same dummy. Speaking with such psuedo-cyber-authority.

.. only dumb people would believe that bullshit you're saying.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top