tea party caucus requests 1 billion in earmarks

[Truthmatters]

Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual Congressional Pig Book.But others have requested millions of dollars in special projects.

Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the Tea Partier with his name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88 projects, either solely or by co-signing earmarks requests with Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own, Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.

More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29 caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50 million in funding.

remember

Read jarhead and then admitt your mistake

 

[hboats]

Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual Congressional Pig Book. But others have requested millions of dollars in special projects.

Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the Tea Partier with his name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88 projects, either solely or by co-signing earmarks requests with Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own, Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.

More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29 caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50 million in funding.

remember

ALL DONE BEFORE THEY COMMITTED TO NO LONGER PUTTING IN FOR EARMARKS

Why is this so hard for you to comprehend?

Comprehension isn't truthdoesn'tmatter's strong suit.

Making false claims and then sticking to them even after they've been blown to hell and back by FACTS is though.

Rick

 

[G.T.]

Why were they doing them to begin with? If this is how they believe Government should be, why weren't they standing on principle, BEFORE?

 

[Jarhead]

Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual Congressional Pig Book.But others have requested millions of dollars in special projects.

Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the Tea Partier with his name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88 projects, either solely or by co-signing earmarks requests with Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own, Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.

More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29 caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50 million in funding.

remember

Read jarhead and then admitt your mistake

You just dont get it.
No....you dont WANT to get it.

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

 

[G.T.]

remember

Read jarhead and then admitt your mistake

You just dont get it.
No....you dont WANT to get it.

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

That gives them a pass?

 

[Jarhead]

Why were they doing them to begin with? If this is how they believe Government should be, why weren't they standing on principle, BEFORE?

Becuase they deviated from their beliefs....
They recognized the err of their ways....sure, I have my doubts about them...but I admire their willingness to admit they were in the wrong.
Lets see if they really mean it.
So far, so good.

 

[sangha]

remember

Read jarhead and then admitt your mistake

You just dont get it.
No....you dont WANT to get it.

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

WIngnuts believe politicians when they make promises

They think their Nanny State representatives in Congress will take care of them

 

[Jarhead]

Read jarhead and then admitt your mistake

You just dont get it.
No....you dont WANT to get it.

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

That gives them a pass?

A pass?

A politican recognizing the err of his ways and correcting them?

Yes...if he proves to be legit about it.

 

[G.T.]

Why were they doing them to begin with? If this is how they believe Government should be, why weren't they standing on principle, BEFORE?

Becuase they deviated from their beliefs....
They recognized the err of their ways....sure, I have my doubts about them...but I admire their willingness to admit they were in the wrong.
Lets see if they really mean it.
So far, so good.

If you say so man. I'd say you're caught up in the game of right vs. left too much and you are being had. A fiscal conservative who was for earmarks before he was against them....................................should be replaced by your Voting party.

 

[Common Sense]

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

so answer me this. if these "tea party" members believe in being fiscally conservative, shouldnt they have denounced earmarks prior to joining the tea party and sought to eliminate them rather than embracing them? this to me seems like a reversal of policy. thus im assuming they are more than willing to change to their policy on many issues if it is politically correct and helps them stay in office.

i would much rather respect someone who stands on their principles, rather than change them all the time.

 

[sangha]

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

so answer me this. if these "tea party" members believe in being fiscally conservative, shouldnt they have denounced earmarks prior to joining the tea party and sought to eliminate them rather than embracing them? this to me seems like a reversal of policy. thus im assuming they are more than willing to change to their policy on many issues if it is politically correct and helps them stay in office.

i would much rather respect someone who stands on their principles, rather than change them all the time.

Teabaggers haven't changed their principles. That would require that they had principles in the first place.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Why were they doing them to begin with? If this is how they believe Government should be, why weren't they standing on principle, BEFORE?

Simple.

No one on either side in any party has demanded ethics from anyone on thier side.

It's always that other teams fault, they are the bad guys when they do it, but we have pure ideals when we do it.

If you check TMs link it will show you that some in the t's have no marks at all. If you check the link that is the source of the info, you wll see that the entire GOP has no earmarks for 2011

 

[Truthmatters]

House Republicans defend earmarks against Democrat threat to delete them? Hot Air

 

[Jarhead]

Read jarhead and then admitt your mistake

You just dont get it.
No....you dont WANT to get it.

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

WIngnuts believe politicians when they make promises

They think their Nanny State representatives in Congress will take care of them

Really?
Is that what I have been saying?

 

[G.T.]

Why were they doing them to begin with? If this is how they believe Government should be, why weren't they standing on principle, BEFORE?

Simple.

No one on either side in any party has demanded ethics from anyone on thier side.

It's always that other teams fault, they are the bad guys when they do it, but we have pure ideals when we do it.

If you check TMs link it will show you that some in the t's have no marks at all. If you check the link that is the source of the info, you wll see that the entire GOP has no earmarks for 2011

I see it as unprincipled people who should have been booted out of office for their wrong-doing, started sucking voters' asses and changing their OWN OBVIOUS BELIEFS, in order to get re-elected. I'd rather pass on guys like that.

 

[Jarhead]

Why were they doing them to begin with? If this is how they believe Government should be, why weren't they standing on principle, BEFORE?

Simple.

No one on either side in any party has demanded ethics from anyone on thier side.

It's always that other teams fault, they are the bad guys when they do it, but we have pure ideals when we do it.

If you check TMs link it will show you that some in the t's have no marks at all. If you check the link that is the source of the info, you wll see that the entire GOP has no earmarks for 2011

NONE for 2011....

This thread is nothing but a rant for TM....and so many on the left fell rigtht into it as they triued to defend a bogus post.

Yep...TM made you all look silly...

Except GT....at least he was questioning why the change in heart and not the deviation from a commitment.

 

[sangha]

Why were they doing them to begin with? If this is how they believe Government should be, why weren't they standing on principle, BEFORE?

Simple.

No one on either side in any party has demanded ethics from anyone on thier side.

It's always that other teams fault, they are the bad guys when they do it, but we have pure ideals when we do it.

If you check TMs link it will show you that some in the t's have no marks at all. If you check the link that is the source of the info, you wll see that the entire GOP has no earmarks for 2011

Even the wingnuts know the teabaggers won't act ethically unless someone else demands it.

 

[sangha]

You just dont get it.
No....you dont WANT to get it.

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

WIngnuts believe politicians when they make promises

They think their Nanny State representatives in Congress will take care of them

Really?
Is that what I have been saying?

Yes

 

[Truthmatters]

remember

Read jarhead and then admitt your mistake

You just dont get it.
No....you dont WANT to get it.

Those others requested those earmarks BEFORE they commited to not request earmarks.

Oh OK I get what you are saying.

That they will refrain from earmarks now even though they were for them before they were against them.


Hell boehner defended them in the past when it was polically expediant.

 

[Jarhead]

Why were they doing them to begin with? If this is how they believe Government should be, why weren't they standing on principle, BEFORE?

Simple.

No one on either side in any party has demanded ethics from anyone on thier side.

It's always that other teams fault, they are the bad guys when they do it, but we have pure ideals when we do it.

If you check TMs link it will show you that some in the t's have no marks at all. If you check the link that is the source of the info, you wll see that the entire GOP has no earmarks for 2011

I see it as unprincipled people who should have been booted out of office for their wrong-doing, started sucking voters' asses and changing their OWN OBVIOUS BELIEFS, in order to get re-elected. I'd rather pass on guys like that.

I dont disagree...

But lets be real here....how was a politician able to win if the opposition said "vote for me and you get all this stuff but vote for him and all of the OTHER rstates will get all this stuff and not you"