How the "new" GOP plans to cut out earmarks.

[VaYank5150]

The issue has popped up most frequently at the Conservative Opportunity Society, the caucus founded by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) in the early 1980s. During their Wednesday morning meeting last week, caucus members had a long discussion about how the Republican Party could redefine “member-directed spending,” as earmarks are formally called on the Hill.


Read more: GOP gets queasy over earmark ban - Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

The Tea Party folks will absolutely LOVE this....what a crock of shit.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Maybe Michelle Bachman isn't as crazy as she seems; at least she appears to be more hypocrite than psycho - at least on the issue of earmarks.

 

[AmericanFirst]

You act as though the republicans are the only ones who like earmarks? The dimwits love them more. Politicians are politicians, they all like to spend our money.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You act as though the republicans are the only ones who like earmarks? The dimwits love them more. Politicians are politicians, they all like to spend our money.

True. So what. Republicans ran on ending earmarks. And, btw, members of congress are 'hired' to bring support to their district/communities. By allowing the Executive the sole power to direct funds limits the power of The House and shifts it to the President.
From a strictly political perspective The President can shift funds to those states on the bubble (red or blue) and starve the states who won't vote for him in the next election. If I were Obama the solid (Republican) south wouldn't get a dime and the Republican incumbants in the House might find 2012 dreadful.

 

[editec]

You act as though the republicans are the only ones who like earmarks? The dimwits love them more. Politicians are politicians, they all like to spend our money.

True. So what. Republicans ran on ending earmarks. And, btw, members of congress are 'hired' to bring support to their district/communities. By allowing the Executive the sole power to direct funds limits the power of The House and shifts it to the President.
From a strictly political perspective The President can shift funds to those states on the bubble (red or blue) and starve the states who won't vote for him in the next election. If I were Obama the solid (Republican) south wouldn't get a dime and the Republican incumbants in the House might find 2012 dreadful.

Perceptive observation, Wry.

 

[VaYank5150]

You act as though the republicans are the only ones who like earmarks? The dimwits love them more. Politicians are politicians, they all like to spend our money.

So, you are agreeing that the Republicans who ran on ending earmarks were simply giving lying in an attempt to get elected. Got it.

 

[Mad Scientist]

So, you are agreeing that the Republicans who ran on ending earmarks were simply giving lying in an attempt to get elected. Got it.

Obama didn't lie in order to get elected either. Got it.

The only difference is that in January the Democrats will hold us down while the Republicans fuck us.

 

[Sallow]

The issue has popped up most frequently at the Conservative Opportunity Society, the caucus founded by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) in the early 1980s. During their Wednesday morning meeting last week, caucus members had a long discussion about how the Republican Party could redefine “member-directed spending,” as earmarks are formally called on the Hill.


Read more: GOP gets queasy over earmark ban - Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

The Tea Party folks will absolutely LOVE this....what a crock of shit.

Yep.

Essentially they are going Orwellian on it.

Change the name and meaning.

Like torture became "enhanced interrogation".

Removing rights from human beings just involved classifying them as "Unlawful Enemy Combatants."

Nothing new here.

 

[Si modo]

You act as though the republicans are the only ones who like earmarks? The dimwits love them more. Politicians are politicians, they all like to spend our money.

True. So what. Republicans ran on ending earmarks. And, btw, members of congress are 'hired' to bring support to their district/communities. By allowing the Executive the sole power to direct funds limits the power of The House and shifts it to the President.
From a strictly political perspective The President can shift funds to those states on the bubble (red or blue) and starve the states who won't vote for him in the next election. If I were Obama the solid (Republican) south wouldn't get a dime and the Republican incumbants in the House might find 2012 dreadful.

Politicians are hired to bring support to their districts?

Huh. And here I thought that they were elected to represent their constituents at the federal level while still looking out for what's best for the country.

 

[Agit8r]

This is how politics works

Legislator: I can't rightluh see how mah constituents will accept mah votin' yes on this bill

Committee Chairman: How 'bout we throw some bacon in there for the good folks back home

Legislator: I s'pose I could reconsider


Face it, if they stop giving the people candy and trinkets, they won't be able to keep screwing them in the back of their windowless van