House Passes 1.1 Trillion With 5,000 Earmarks? Say it Ain't So

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Meister, Dec 11, 2009.

  1. Vast LWC
    Offline

    Vast LWC <-Mohammed

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    10,390
    Thanks Received:
    871
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +872
    That is a completely false statement.

    The United States government has specifically stated that there is no suspicion at all that Osama Bin Laden was in any way connected to the 1993 World Trade Center attacks.

    Your link doesn't provide any proof at all to back up that statement.

    Remember just because you read it on the internet doesn't make it true.

    What is true is that some other people, who later became members of Al Qaeda, were in fact vaguely connected to a small amount of the financing of the 1993 WTC bombing, and that some relatives of the perpetrators of WTC 1993 bombing later became members of Al Qaeda.

    But that does not point to any direct connection at all between Osama Bin Laden and the 1993 bombing.
     
  2. Vast LWC
    Offline

    Vast LWC <-Mohammed

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    10,390
    Thanks Received:
    871
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +872
    The only time George Bush had a "lack of veto pen" issue was when the Republicans held congress.

    Once the Democrats took over congress, Bush Vetoed just about every major piece of legislation they sent to his desk. Many other pieces of legislation were put in the "Don't even bother" category due to the fact that the Democrats didn't have enough votes to override the expected veto.

    The only time Republicans "took Bush to the woodshed" was after he had been shown to be a massive failure, and he had begun to be a drag on Republican popularity.

    It was only after Bush was seen as a detriment to winning votes that the Republicans turned on him.

    And 95% of the DEBT that this country has incurred happened UNDER REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATIONS.

    I'm sure you have some spin to try and contradict that fact, but it is a FACT nonetheless.
     
  3. Meister
    Offline

    Meister Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    25,979
    Thanks Received:
    8,114
    Trophy Points:
    493
    Location:
    Conservative part of the Northwest
    Ratings:
    +8,154
    Yet, we all have to believe that your source of wiki is proof positive. :lol:
    You have your sources and I have mine...this is why I say get over it, your not going to change my mind, and I'm not going to change your mind.
     
  4. Ame®icano
    Offline

    Ame®icano Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    12,352
    Thanks Received:
    1,973
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +6,413
    Yeah, what's really 0.35%?

    Next time they should pass annual budget of $4 trillion, it would result in much smaller percentage of pork spending and say... "it's only 0.1%".
     
  5. Vast LWC
    Offline

    Vast LWC <-Mohammed

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    10,390
    Thanks Received:
    871
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +872
    And hey, just go on ignoring the second half of the post, where the point was made.

    Here, I'll post it for you again:

    It is also a much smaller amount than in similar Republican spending bills passed while they held the majority.
     
  6. SFC Ollie
    Offline

    SFC Ollie Still Marching

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    28,752
    Thanks Received:
    4,435
    Trophy Points:
    185
    Location:
    Extreme East Ohio
    Ratings:
    +4,512
    Seems as though people want to ignore the point. The Republicans aren't in power anymore. And when they were we were not in a recession. Now the economy is in the toilet, and it doesn't matter why, the Democrat congress is spending like drunken sailors at a time when we need fiscal responsibility.
    And that is the point.
    Regardless who is in power they all should be smart enough to know that you cannot get out of debt by doubling that debt. But Bush did it just doesn't cut it.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. Vast LWC
    Offline

    Vast LWC <-Mohammed

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    10,390
    Thanks Received:
    871
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +872
    Yeah, but that's not how it works.

    Cutting the budget is a PROCESS. You can't just all funding off at once, it would lead to the collapse of the national infrastructure, you have to cut things gradually.
     
  8. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,072
    Thanks Received:
    5,472
    Trophy Points:
    1,773
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,504
    Is this why the RUSH to get all these Socialist-NAY-Marxist projects done?

    Try again...
     
  9. antagon
    Offline

    antagon The Man

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    3,572
    Thanks Received:
    285
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +286
    Limbaugh??
     
  10. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,072
    Thanks Received:
    5,472
    Trophy Points:
    1,773
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,504
    If *I* had meant LIMBAUGH the word would have been embedded with a link, or a Sourced QUOTE.

    YOU haven't been around here LONG enough to know this, so *I* give you the BENEFIT...of DOUBT...
     

Share This Page