Senate Republicans play Politics with the Defense Budget and Fail

The Senate will soon follow the House in passing a $636.3 billion Fiscal Year 2010 defense appropriations bill, the government’s largest spending bill. The legislation contains 1,720 earmarks worth $4.2 billion, 17 percent less in number and 14 percent less in value from last year (remember that this is only disclosed earmarks: Major additions such as the $2.5 billion for 10 more C-17 Globemaster cargo planes are not included). ( note the US Airforce as indicated on more than one occasion they DO NOT NEED any more C-17's)

The big:

$23 million for the Hawaii Healthcare Network sponsored by Senate Appropriations Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-HI);
$20 million for the National World War II museum in New Orleans from Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and David Vitter (R-LA) plus Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao (R-LA);
$20 million for Humvee maintenance at an Army National Guard installation in Maine sponsored by Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).
1,720 earmarks in final defense spending bill | SmallGovTimes.com


But there was GOP discontent over the Democratic decision to use the bill as the engine to carry several short-term extensions of programs set to expire because of the failure of Congress to deal with them separately.

Those include two-month extensions of unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless, health care subsidies for those out of work, highway and transit funding, three provisions of the anti-terror USA Patriot Act and legislation shielding doctors from a steep cut in Medicare payments.

“The Democratic leadership in both the House and Senate held this bill for the troops captive,” said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. “They knew that at the end of the year, they would stuff unrelated, must-pass legislation, which has nothing to do with the Department of Defense, or the men and women in the military … so they could get it passed.”
Senate to vote on $626 billion spending bill that covers defense, unemployment and more

Perhaps it had less to do with defense needs and more to do with stuffing a defense bill with domestic spending.
 
Perhaps it had less to do with defense needs and more to do with stuffing a defense bill with domestic spending.

Maybe for some, for others it was a way to show their opposition to Healthcare and they were vocal about it.
 
Wonder if the great Obama (aka Liar Man) will veto this bill because of all the additonal ear marks. During his campaign for President he said he would not sign bills laden down with extra pork and ear marks. It will be interesting to see if he follows through with his campaign promises. Oh yeah, wonder if he will post this on the web for 72 hours like he said during the campaigns too? If so, it will be his first. So far all I can say about him is he's lied more than any other President I've ever seen and he's only been in office for 11 months. His popularity is the lowest of any American President at this time in their Presidency. Going to love seeing those number fall some more cause you know they are on the way down... OK. I'm ready to listen to some left wing liberal shit now. Bring it on. I'm in the listening mode.
 
Perhaps it had less to do with defense needs and more to do with stuffing a defense bill with domestic spending.

Maybe for some, for others it was a way to show their opposition to Healthcare and they were vocal about it.

The only problem though Dogbert is the final vote on this issue does not support the argument that the Republcans were somehow not supporting the troops in fact as I have said in more than a few posts, this bill had more bi-partisan support than just about any other. From a procedural standpoint and how the amendments were added to it, that had nothing to do with Defense, it would be more than appropriate to debate those, and to introduce it in the middle of the healthcare debate, knowing that there were these non defense additions that passed anyway , of course someone is going to make mention of it. I do notice that of all the bills , especially massive spending bills this one, has a LOT more bi-partisan support than almost all the others. This cannot be said for many others including the healthcare bill set to pass. with only partisan support.
 
Why are the republicans against our fighting men and women getting paid? I thought they were for the troops....? :eusa_liar:
 
Last edited:
this thread is the same lie as republicans are for rape because they were against a bill that was not solely about rape....if all democrats have are these childish political games, 2010 will be a rude awakening for them....
 
Dog your stats say you avg. 34 posts a day.....your not on line too much?...:lol:....i avg 12-13 and it seems like im here all afternoon.....

It use to be a lot higher. It's gone down in the past year. It was at 45 at one point, went down to like 22 when I didn't post for like 6 months. Now it's at 34. :lol:

You also have to comply that with the fact of how many arguments I get into. :redface:

Look at this thread for example. I've been posting in between the Pats game and racked up 16 posts.

i know its hard sometimes to stop and turn this shit off,you just gotta get in a dig or two....:lol:.....i know what ya mean....
 
Why are the republicans against our fighting men and women getting paid? I thought they were for the troops....? :eusa_liar:

this whole conversation has gone right by you like a fart....hasnt it?...now i will ask you again.....why would any politician be for a so called defense bill when half of it is going for stuff mine and your tax dollars should not be paying for?......why shouldnt this bill be for JUST the Military and nothing else?.....why is all this bullshit attached on to it?.....why cant a military bill stand alone?.....are you going to lambast your Reps for voting for this?....i already E-Mailed mine and said she is an idiot for not saying that this bill should be for the military,and the Military ALONE....nothing else....but my rep is Lorretta Sanchez and she can care less because she has probobly got a few Markers in their for her little pet projects also.....
 
I remember in one of the first threads I posted in I asked you if you were drunk after you blamed the Republicans for all of the world's problems..you said you don't drink(first reason why no one trusts you) and then I asked if you had a girlfriend because you said you were a child of only 18 years, were an expert on Japanese history and you said NOPE that you didn't chase girls....(second reason why no one trusts you).

Now I'm not going looking for that thread...you know exactly what you said as well as me.

Any guy who doesn't drink or chase girls at the age of 18 is 1. Gay, 2. a fat ass loser, 3. The Elephant man.

Maybe where you're from they don't want evidence to back up bullshit, but around here we do.

So I would like some links. And yes, if you are going to make accusations, you're going to back it up or rescind it.

Why do I not drink? Well, I'm 18, I'm not even legally old enough to drink although I could if I wanted. Also, I never said I don't chase girls (not in the literal sense I don't anyway) and I never said I don't have a girlfriend because I'm 18.

Furthermore, I never said I was a expert on Japanese History. Besides the fact I've posted my picture on here proving I'm not fat. Nor am I gay or The Elephant Man, I think that proves that one.

However, you are surely proving with each post that you are truly full of shit.

Notice how some of the truth begins to escape his lips...age has nothing to do with it you no pussy getting MF...and...yes...you DID say you were an expert on Japanese History...you see in LIBTARD world where you live YOU have the burden of proof to refute what I said...it's guilty until proven innocent in your world you jack ass. Now since you admitted what I said was TRUE about your teetotaling ass...tell us why you don't have a girlfriend?
 
Last edited:
Notice how some of the truth begins to escape his lips...age has nothing to do with it you no pussy getting MF...and...yes...you DID say you were an expert on Japanese History...you see in LIBTARD world where you live YOU have the burden of proof to refute what I said...it's guilty until proven innocent in your world you jack ass. Now since you admitted what I said was TRUE about your teetotaling ass...tell us why you don't have a girlfriend?

I never said I was a expert on Japanese history. Spin the wheel and try again, I want links.

You see Patek, it's burden of proof to prove your original point, you haven't.

As for me not having a girlfriend, why should I tell you whether I do or not? You're crazy enough to try and probably harrass her if I do have one you psycho.

By the way, since when does not going out trying to get laid 24/7 at 18 and not drinking make me a bad person? I'd like to know when this was decided. Maybe it's because I'm a lot more mature at my age than you ever have been you think such things.
 
Last edited:
Why are the republicans against our fighting men and women getting paid? I thought they were for the troops....? :eusa_liar:

this whole conversation has gone right by you like a fart....hasnt it?...now i will ask you again.....why would any politician be for a so called defense bill when half of it is going for stuff mine and your tax dollars should not be paying for?......why shouldnt this bill be for JUST the Military and nothing else?.....why is all this bullshit attached on to it?.....why cant a military bill stand alone?.....are you going to lambast your Reps for voting for this?....i already E-Mailed mine and said she is an idiot for not saying that this bill should be for the military,and the Military ALONE....nothing else....but my rep is Lorretta Sanchez and she can care less because she has probobly got a few Markers in their for her little pet projects also.....

Harry...

You're attempting to have an intelligent conversation with an unarmed opponent...

Unless you use the words FoxNews, Glenn Beck, and/or Sarah Palin, Autozona won't know what you're talking about...
 
Why are the republicans against our fighting men and women getting paid? I thought they were for the troops....? :eusa_liar:

this whole conversation has gone right by you like a fart....hasnt it?...now i will ask you again.....why would any politician be for a so called defense bill when half of it is going for stuff mine and your tax dollars should not be paying for?......why shouldnt this bill be for JUST the Military and nothing else?.....why is all this bullshit attached on to it?.....why cant a military bill stand alone?.....are you going to lambast your Reps for voting for this?....i already E-Mailed mine and said she is an idiot for not saying that this bill should be for the military,and the Military ALONE....nothing else....but my rep is Lorretta Sanchez and she can care less because she has probobly got a few Markers in their for her little pet projects also.....

Harry...

You're attempting to have an intelligent conversation with an unarmed opponent...

Unless you use the words FoxNews, Glenn Beck, and/or Sarah Palin, Autozona won't know what you're talking about...

i know im just interested in hearing his reply,i asked his power twin Rdean the same question in the other thread on this,he hasnt answered yet and i dont expect Zona to give me an answer either......sometimes i think Zona and Dean are one and the same....OR the basterd twins of Pelosi......i even get them mixed up....:confused:
 
Notice how some of the truth begins to escape his lips...age has nothing to do with it you no pussy getting MF...and...yes...you DID say you were an expert on Japanese History...you see in LIBTARD world where you live YOU have the burden of proof to refute what I said...it's guilty until proven innocent in your world you jack ass. Now since you admitted what I said was TRUE about your teetotaling ass...tell us why you don't have a girlfriend?

I never said I was a expert on Japanese history. Spin the wheel and try again, I want links.

You see Patek, it's burden of proof to prove your original point, you haven't.

As for me not having a girlfriend, why should I tell you whether I do or not? You're crazy enough to try and probably harrass her if I do have one you psycho.

By the way, since when does not going out trying to get laid 24/7 at 18 and not drinking make me a bad person? I'd like to know when this was decided. Maybe it's because I'm a lot more mature at my age than you ever have been you think such things.

Submitted for the boards perusal....looks like more and more....I was in fact telling the truth. You see Dogbert..you just scuttled your own ship...I knew it wouldn't take long for you to implode...now I never said by you not chasing women or drinking it made you a bad person..what I said was it caused people not to trust you....so go find that post and re-read it..and don't put words in people's mouths that they never said...

I hate having to address an "adult" like a 10 year old.
 
Last edited:
Submitted for the boards perusal....looks like more and more....I was in fact telling the truth. You see Dogbert..you just scuttled your own ship...I knew it wouldn't take long for you to implode...now I never said by you not chasing women or drinking it made you a bad person..what I said was it caused people not to trust you....so go find that post and re-read it..and don't put words in people's mouths that they never said...

You said it yourself: If I'm not out chasing tail 24/7 or drinking I'm either a fat ass, Gay, or the Elephant Man. You make such accusations on baseless assumptions. You do not know me psycho, don't think you do.

Cause people to not trust me? What the fuck do you think we're on? Survivor? Hell, if this was, your ass would of been voted out a long time ago and I would of been the one behind it. :eusa_eh:

You're been putting words in my mouth since your first post about me in this thread and you want to talk about me doing such? Gimme a fucking break hack. May I recommend you going to the Wizard much like the Scarecrow and asking for a brain? Because unlike the Scarecrow, you haven't had one all along.

By the way, between the two of us? You're acting like a immature child in this thread, going directly to and only using personal accusations/attacks to try and discredit me. Instead of addressing my arguments because you are a coward.
 
Last edited:
Submitted for the boards perusal....looks like more and more....I was in fact telling the truth. You see Dogbert..you just scuttled your own ship...I knew it wouldn't take long for you to implode...now I never said by you not chasing women or drinking it made you a bad person..what I said was it caused people not to trust you....so go find that post and re-read it..and don't put words in people's mouths that they never said...

You said it yourself: If I'm not out chasing tail 24/7 or drinking I'm either a fat ass, Gay, or the Elephant Man. You make such accusations on baseless assumptions. You do not know me psycho, don't think you do.

Cause people to not trust me? What the fuck do you think we're on? Survivor? Hell, if this was, your ass would of been voted out a long time ago and I would of been the one behind it. :eusa_eh:

You're been putting words in my mouth since your first post about me in this thread and you want to talk about me doing such? Gimme a fucking break hack. May I recommend you going to the Wizard much like the Scarecrow and asking for a brain? Because unlike the Scarecrow, you haven't had one all along.

By the way, between the two of us? You're acting like a immature child in this thread, going directly to and only using personal accusations/attacks to try and discredit me. Instead of addressing my arguments because you are a coward.

Grow up you little child...grow up.

Your argument is ENTIRELY WITHOUT MERIT and warrants NO REPLY from me or anyone else...it's nothing more than a schoolboys taunt at someone you don't like...
now like I said

GROW UP KID!!!!!
 
Grow up you little child...grow up.

Your argument is ENTIRELY WITHOUT MERIT and warrants NO REPLY from me or anyone else...it's nothing more than a schoolboys taunt at someone you don't like...
now like I said

GROW UP KID!!!!!

In a battle of wits, you sir are unarmed. You can cry and tell me to grow up, but any sane person looking at this thread knows you have more than a few nuts and bolts missing.

May you receive the help you need, hell maybe some of us can chip in here at USMB and pay for it as a Xmas present. You up for it? I'll chip in $20.
 
Grow up you little child...grow up.

Your argument is ENTIRELY WITHOUT MERIT and warrants NO REPLY from me or anyone else...it's nothing more than a schoolboys taunt at someone you don't like...
now like I said

GROW UP KID!!!!!

In a battle of wits, you sir are unarmed. You can cry and tell me to grow up, but any sane person looking at this thread knows you have more than a few nuts and bolts missing.

May you receive the help you need, hell maybe some of us can chip in here at USMB and pay for it as a Xmas present. You up for it? I'll chip in $20.

Pot meet Kettle
 
and notice Dogbert didn't address the fact that his argument in this thread against Republicans is in fact nothing more than a little schoolboy taunt....this thread belongs in the sand box...where children play.
 
and notice Dogbert didn't address the fact that his argument in this thread against Republicans is in fact nothing more than a little schoolboy taunt....this thread belongs in the sand box...where children play.

Where was this argument? And it was a legitimate question. Republicans are acting the same exact way the Democrats may of have in the past. And what did the Republicans do when certain Dems acted this way? Called them unpatriotic, etc I'm sure.

To be honest this thread was to point out that the two parties are really not that much different.

And while I'm glad you can admit you have a problem, don't think I have one. So you still up for my idea? I'll chip in $25.
 

Forum List

Back
Top