pBills Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 (edited) Tea Party Caucus Members Were For Earmarks Before They Were Against Them Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/12/02/tea-party-caucus-members-were-for-earmarks-before-they-were-against-them/#ixzz16z298krR Combing through records compiled by the spending watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste, Hotline's Reid Wilson writes that members of the 52-person Congressional Tea Party Caucus requested more than $1 billion in earmarks during the 2010 fiscal year. From Wilson's piece: [...]the 52 members of the caucus, which pledges to cut spending and reduce the size of government, requested a total of 764 earmarks valued at $1,049,783,150 during Fiscal Year 2010, the last year for which records are available. "It's disturbing to see the Tea Party Caucus requested that much in earmarks. This is their time to put up or shut up, to be blunt," said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste. "There's going to be a huge backlash if they continue to request earmarks." In founding the caucus in July, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she was giving voice to Americans who were sick of government over-spending. Wilson notes that 14 caucus members refrained from requesting earmarks in FY 2010, including Bachmann, and all have pledged to abide by the Republican earmark moratorium going forward. But this is one more example of how rhetoric about the importance of fiscal austerity often doesn't align with reality. This week Bachmann has denounced Congress' $1.2 billion settlement with black farmers as "scamming the federal taxpayers." As the Minneapolis Star-Tribune points out, her family farm has received more than $250,000 in federal farm subsidies over the past decade. Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/12/02/tea-party-caucus-members-were-for-earmarks-before-they-were-against-them/#ixzz16z2nklxj Do we really believe that they will change Washington? Cut spending, etc., etc. Edited December 2, 2010 by pBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 (edited) Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/12/02/tea-party-caucus-members-were-for-earmarks-before-they-were-against-them/#ixzz16z298krR Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/12/02/tea-party-caucus-members-were-for-earmarks-before-they-were-against-them/#ixzz16z2nklxj You quoted the whole article, which just makes the embedded read more tags hilarious. Edited December 2, 2010 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted December 2, 2010 Author Share Posted December 2, 2010 You quoted the whole article, which just makes the embedded read more tags hilarious. I actually posted the entire article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 I actually posted the entire article. Exactly, which incidentally is a no-no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Throw the bums out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Yawn If everyone else is taking earmarks and you refuse on principle you !@#$ your constituents in that they still have to pay for the goodie bags but don't get one of their own. That's why you change the system to eliminate them across the board. But you guys aren't retarded, I'm sure you already knew that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Throw the bums out! Hellz yeah! They haven't fixed anything in the month since the election and month before they take office Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Tea Party Caucus Members Were For Earmarks Before They Were Against Them Read more: http://swampland.blo.../#ixzz16z298krR Combing through records compiled by the spending watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste, Hotline's Reid Wilson writes that members of the 52-person Congressional Tea Party Caucus requested more than $1 billion in earmarks during the 2010 fiscal year. From Wilson's piece: [...]the 52 members of the caucus, which pledges to cut spending and reduce the size of government, requested a total of 764 earmarks valued at $1,049,783,150 during Fiscal Year 2010, the last year for which records are available. "It's disturbing to see the Tea Party Caucus requested that much in earmarks. This is their time to put up or shut up, to be blunt," said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste. "There's going to be a huge backlash if they continue to request earmarks." In founding the caucus in July, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she was giving voice to Americans who were sick of government over-spending. Wilson notes that 14 caucus members refrained from requesting earmarks in FY 2010, including Bachmann, and all have pledged to abide by the Republican earmark moratorium going forward. But this is one more example of how rhetoric about the importance of fiscal austerity often doesn't align with reality. This week Bachmann has denounced Congress' $1.2 billion settlement with black farmers as "scamming the federal taxpayers." As the Minneapolis Star-Tribune points out, her family farm has received more than $250,000 in federal farm subsidies over the past decade. Read more: http://swampland.blo.../#ixzz16z2nklxj Do we really believe that they will change Washington? Cut spending, etc., etc. Yeah, but when "we" do it, "its OK." So there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted December 2, 2010 Author Share Posted December 2, 2010 Yawn If everyone else is taking earmarks and you refuse on principle you !@#$ your constituents in that they still have to pay for the goodie bags but don't get one of their own. That's why you change the system to eliminate them across the board. But you guys aren't retarded, I'm sure you already knew that. Come on.... no more earmarks means no more earmarks right? Reduce spending!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Wow!! So they've already began to spend on Earmarks, even though they haven't served a single day in office. Amazing!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Hellz yeah! They haven't fixed anything in the month since the election and month before they take office This is the comedy in all of this. It's almost as hysterical as watching all the HuffPost people literally screaming the day after the election "Where are the jobs, Boehner?" On the other hand, when your party has been getting its ass handed to it for the past two years, they're probably eager to cry about anything they can even before they're out of power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Come on.... no more earmarks means no more earmarks right? Reduce spending!! How do you know that amount spent isn't considerably less than before. See if I spend $12k a month in my household one year but cut it to $10k the following year and I only tell you about the $10k this year and you would probably tell me "hey Chef, you really need to cut your spending!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Come on.... no more earmarks means no more earmarks right? Reduce spending!! Well pBills, now that you mention it, I could have sworn one of the paragraphs read that all the members have agreed to the moratorium which was not in effect when the aforementioned earmarks were put into place. If they do pass future earmarks then you can come back with your sarcastic comments and not come off as a complete dick. In the meantime you can go back to masturbating to footage of Obama talking about hopeful platitudes and rivers of bull ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 More of the same antics and excuses...we'll see what they do in the end - how well they hold to their pledge. Ideological rhetoric during campaign season is one thing, but they're under a microscope now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Earmarks aren't going away, neither is the size of the deficit. The end is nigh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 More of the same antics and excuses...we'll see what they do in the end - how well they hold to their pledge. Ideological rhetoric during campaign season is one thing, but they're under a microscope now. I completely agree. They were elected on a mandate to not spend and keep taxes lower. I will certainly hold their feet to the fire. Rhetoric is one thing, and they have shown that they can talk the talk, now let's see if they can walk the walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 This is the comedy in all of this. It's almost as hysterical as watching all the HuffPost people literally screaming the day after the election "Where are the jobs, Boehner?" On the other hand, when your party has been getting its ass handed to it for the past two years, they're probably eager to cry about anything they can even before they're out of power. Remember when you at least tried to pretend that you weren't just another mindless shill for the Republican/Tea Party? That was awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Remember when you at least tried to pretend that you weren't just another mindless shill for the Republican/Tea Party? That was awesome. Remember when your opinion had any value to anyone here? Me neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Remember when you at least tried to pretend that you weren't just another mindless shill for the Republican/Tea Party? That was awesome. Remember when your opinion had any value to anyone here? Me neither. I give Gene Frenkle the win in quality of posts, board name, avatar, and signature I give LABillzFan credit for having a Z like JayZ and I'm pretty sure his mom loves him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 (edited) I give Gene Frenkle the win in quality of posts, board name, avatar, and signature I give LABillzFan credit for having a Z like JayZ and I'm pretty sure his mom loves him. You giving Frenkle the win is like the ref's saying the Pats* WR whose head hit out of bounds was still in bounds because his feet were still in bounds when his head touched out of bounds You trying to discredit LABillz is like the ref's calling a Roughing the QB because Tom Brady made a little Flag Him gesture towards the refs Edited December 3, 2010 by /dev/null Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts