Ha ha, remember when the 2009 budget bill passed and every single Republican on the face of the planet was OUTRAGED because of earmarks? (Well, mostly just John McCain.) Now the tables have turned and they love the shit out of earmarks, all of them, which is why they refused to support legislation banning these dumb things!
Frigging Senate, all they ever talk about or vote on is earmarks.
Lawmakers voted 68-29 against an amendment by Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., to impose a one-year moratorium on earmarks. Twenty-four fellow Republicans voted for DeMint’s measure, while 15 GOP senators voted against it.
You see, one year ago, earmarks were terribly corrupt bribes that sullied the Honor of the American budget with porkulous handouts to local Boll Weevil Museums and the like. But today, earmarks are a valuable way for lawmakers to keep money out of President Obama’s (ACORN’s) filthy paws.
And this is why even a one-year suspension of earmarks would spell RUIN for our nation, the end.
One-year freeze on earmarks fails in Senate, splits GOP [McClatchy]
{ 62 comments }
“Chocolate-covered pork sounds kind of good!”??? Are you preggers again?
Sara, I hope this example of referencing a reputable journalistic organizations like McClatchy is not going to become a trend. We Wonketteers will never be able muster sufficient outrage unless you cite suitable sources such as FoxNews or some wingnut/teabagger/Orly Taitz blog. We are, after all, not a bunch of wonks but a War Blog!
As long as it’s the bacon form of pork, yes.
The Republicans are divided on an issue? Could it be that some of them are capable of independent thought? I must ponder this ripple in the force. Where’s my breakfast beer?
What you left out of the story is that it appears a great many dems voted against it too. I guess that was part of the deal; House bans earmarks, senate accepts, house members get $ for writing a note to the appropriate(ing) senator to say, “Dear senator, Mr. Northrop-Grumman’s a super-nice guy, please put in an earmark for him. You know he’s been real nice to both of us.”
Disgusting.
[re=532106]Monsieur Grumpe[/re]: yeah, they’re divided all right: look at RedState, all they do is shout SPLITTER at each other all day long like the Popular People’s Front of Judea.
Oy, I would be all verklempt about agreeing with Jim deurinalMint about something, but I see Russ Feingold voted for it, so that’s all right.
Hard to know how the noise machine will spin this one. Teabagging Walnuts haters await word from their fear-mongering media leaders.
This is just a knee jerk reaction by 68 Senators who know that anything presented by DeMint is DeMented.
That’s surprising, considering how the Republicans eliminated pork back when they controlled the Senate and Congress; it’s not like earmarks are something they hypocritically decided was an issue when they lost control to the Dems, after loving them for years on end before.
[re=532113]One Toke Over The Line[/re]: They knew that if this bill failed it would destroy him, it would be his Waterloo, we can only hopey
One of those lawmakers voting Nay was John Walnuts! NoEarmarks McCain.
Note that DeMint’s not calling for another round of base realignment and closures, or a hard look at agricultural subsidies.
I guess if you need earmarks to funnel all that blue-state tax money back to all those staunch anti-socialists at home, that’s your problem.
Mmmmm, chocolate-covered bacon.
I’m not sure I follow Inhofe’s logic that… oh, wait. “Logic” and “Inhofe” does not compute.
[re=532117]freakishlystrong[/re]: The vote was to table. Walnuts is still stupidly legit.
[re=532117]freakishlystrong[/re]: Well, you could knock me over with a feather. Not really.
[re=532109]bureaucrap[/re]: You know the old expression: Laws and sausage are two things you don’t want to see made. Because both are made by desperate, dirty people in abominable circumstances of filth and corruption, with offal all over the floor and blood on every hand. And the squealing, always the squealing.
Who cares!!! My boyfriend thinks the same with me. He- is eight years older than me, lol. We met online at an age gap dating site- A_g e_m_in_g l e @ c./o./m a nice and free place for Younger- Women and Older Men, or Older Women and Younger Men, to- interact with each other. Maybe you wanna check out or- tell your friends.
Upon realizing that Muslims dislike pork, Republicans naturally became strong supporters of pork.
good
[re=532131]wendykat123[/re]:
You are to this blog as what crabs are to pubic hair.
[re=532131]wendykat123[/re]: You are an earmark on Jim DeMint’s ass.
[re=532131]wendykat123[/re]: LOL! WIN!
[re=532130]V572625694[/re]: That’ll do, pig.
[re=532130]V572625694[/re]: You have made my sausage substantially less delicious with that analogy.
[re=532134]wendykat123[/re]: No, the comments about the Lithuanian using his penis as a First Amendment weapon are on another thread.
The GOP loves socialism.
The GOP understood the unwanted attention this would bring to Trig’s ears, and fell on their swords, for retards.
[re=532130]V572625694[/re]: In the right context, squealing can be a good thing.
[re=532145]Diana Davies[/re]: Is free expression and the right to bear the penis protected the First or Second amendment? And if so, what does this mean for Lithuanians in Scotland? Discuss.
Pork for GOPers, good. Pork for Demrats, bad.
[re=532115]JMP[/re]: The echo chamber will either ignore it or go with the headline “Democrats Defeat Plan to Control Spending”.
[re=532106]Monsieur Grumpe[/re]: No, the funny part was their reasoning behind their respective votes, which DeMint and Inhofe did right out on the Senate floor: DeMint’s all, Just think! If we shut down earmarks we can stop Hopey from being able to spend all this money! And Inhofe says no anyway, because (and he says this part out loud) he’s worried that then Hopey will get to say that he signed a one-year moratorium on earmarks.
Hahaha, these people are not even pretending to give a shit about bipartisanship anymore.
[re=532109]bureaucrap[/re]: Actually, it’s mostly because there *are* such things as actually good earmarks (it’s, y’know, basically how *all* of our highways are funded) and DeMint’s proposal, a moratorium on *all* legislative earmarks, period, was basically a dipshitty political ploy, to say that Demoncraps don’t *really* care about earmark reform, since they’re not willing to hobble their ability to direct federal funding over it.
[re=532125]queeraselvis v 2.0[/re]: Confusingly enough, Inhofe actually has the right of it. No, really. If Congress opts not to legislatively direct the funding that they make available (which is all earmarks actually are: it’s abused for pork, yes, but most earmarks are quite legit), it falls the executive branch to allocate those funds instead. So, more power for Obama. Even a stopped clock, eh?
[re=532131]wendykat123[/re]: Great; gagged and then reregisters and starts spewing the same shit all over again. Robots like this are doing their best to ruin the internet.
What gets me is, what is the point? Do the people who run the sites that hire spambots actually believe that someone’s eventually going to think “boy, that spambot sure is fucking annoying persistent, posting the same thing constantly; that must be a great site it’s advertising, I’ll check it out!” ? Or do they think that comment readers are so incredibly stupid they think the exact same repeated completely irrelevant comment, over and over and over again, that’s stuck a bunch of random shit in the URL to get around spam filters, is actually a real person just sharing info? God, not even Trig is retarded enough to fall for that shit.
Anyway, here’s hoping that someone tracks down Leo Kuvayev ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Kuvayev ) and cuts off his balls & thumbs and pokes out his eyes.
[re=532130]V572625694[/re]: Especially Lithuanian sausage, in Scotland.
[re=532159]donner_froh[/re]: Yep; even though earmarks don’t actually increase spending, just direct this, John McCain and his hardcore fans (AKA the Media) have decided that earmarks=deficit=bad.
But suggest cutting military spending and you hate America; after all, how could we defend ourselves without spending more than the rest of the world combined?
[re=532167]JMP[/re]: Today, we are all wendykat’s 99000 year old boyfriend.
The Demoncrats have to start using reverse psychology here. It’s clear many of the Repubatards won’t vote for certain bills just because they have Demoncrat cooties all over them. Introduce bills like “Be Courteous To Returning Soldiers,” “Help Old Ladies Across the Street,” “No Taxes On U.S. Flags.” Let the Repubatards vote no against them, and then throw it all back in their faces at election time.
[re=532102]Noonan[/re]: Chocolate-covered pork it just in time for Easter.
Chocolate covered pork?
[re=532110]ForTheTurnstiles[/re]: That would be the People’s POPULAR Front of Judea, splitter!
Oklahoma has Inhofe and Coburn. What did it do wrong not to get the third Stooge?
[re=532163]mumblyjoe[/re]: Hey, Congress could always go back to giving block grants to the states and let them decide how to spend it. Of course, that would take away all their fun, as it would push the political leverage down to the state legislatures — and not many government bodies have been known to cede power, even to decentralize it. Even if, as the Republicans always harp, states’ rights is a big issue for them. States’ rights are just fine, as long as the Federal money is still disbursed by your senators and representatives.
[re=532160]Zadig[/re]: They’ve quit pretending to be doing anything for the country, also. All they care about now is stopping that negrokenyanmuslin usurper the dupes and fools of this country were somehow allowed to elect. I guess they thought that since everybody they know is a racist that the voters were all racists and the Dems picking hopey was an opportunity for them to elect sleepy and dopey.
[re=532163]mumblyjoe[/re]: I agree. The federal bureaucracy is so screwed up, cumbersome and basically stupid (after 8 years of W, and its going to take a long time to fix it) that it really is necessary for congress to use earmarks to direct funding to projects that don’t fit into the normal bureaucratic channels.
[re=532202]SayItWithWookies[/re]: Silly Wookie; States’ rights refers only to the right of the states to treat minorities worse than good old white, straight and Christian people; not funding decisions.
[re=532205]Ducksworthy[/re]: Good point, the Repubatards tend to think that their worldview is everyone else’s and really thought McCrazy/Grifter were a shoo-in. I love speaking to the real olds (WW II)–those who were brainwashed the most with racism-and who voted for Obama. It’s great to see how the human spirit can rise above such malice.
I guess the GOP is trying to stuff as much pork down its throat as possible.
Our senators didn’t pass a bill banning pork? Oh my stars and garters! Quelle suprise!
[re=532167]JMP[/re]:
Frankly, if the internet was ruined how could you tell? C.F. “Redstate”, “Politico”, “Big Hollywood” et al.
I hate spambots too, though.
[re=532167]JMP[/re]: I thought it was annoying at first, but after reading the same post a dozen times, I am intrigued and wish to subscribe with my credit card online.
[re=532180]BlueStateLiberal[/re]: You mean like a bill that says “No rapes in cargo containers for billion dollar government contractors serving our troops?”
OK so this guy at NASA gets a piece of spagetti that reaches all the way from the Earth to Mars, and at one end he puts a rabbi, and at the other end, he gets a pork chop.
What? You’ve heard this one already?
I must say, I did find this to be a pleasing juxtaposition:
V572625694 says at 10:00 am, March 17th, 2010 – Reply
bureaucrap: You know the old expression: Laws and sausage are two things you don’t want to see made. Because both are made by desperate, dirty people in abominable circumstances of filth and corruption, with offal all over the floor and blood on every hand. And the squealing, always the squealing.
wendykat123 says at 10:02 am, March 17th, 2010 – Reply
Who cares!!! My boyfriend thinks the same with me. …
Question: Exactly which Republican Congressman(men) is wiggling around in wendykat?
There’s a reason why Wendycat and Rielle Hunter have never been seen at the same time.
[re=532131]wendykat123[/re]: This shit is getting really old….
[re=532202]SayItWithWookies[/re]: Yeah, thanks, but no thanks. I’m from New York, and while I think the US Senate is a bunch of incompetant buffoons, I’d rather have them directing allocation any day, before I’d be willing to give the New York State Senate any more say in the matter.
Sure. Whatever. I’ll take a box.
http://www.vosgeschocolate.com/product/bacon_exotic_candy_bar/exotic_candy_bars
[re=532229]CthuNHu[/re]: Question: Exactly which Republican Congressman(men) is wiggling around in wendykat?
Depends. Which state is this fellow Wendykat123 from, and is he under 18 years of age?
[re=532236]blinky_twinkie[/re]: meh, it’s actually getting funnier for me as it goes on, and I don’t precisely understand why.
Let’s see, they voted against a chocolate-covered pork squeaky toy bought by an older guy for his young girlfriend? Is Harry Reid back in the bulrushes again? Doesn’t Oil of Olay completely remove earmarks? Is Wendykat working one of those “make big money working at home” gigs? Well, now that I’ve asked the four questions, Happy Passover, folks!
Comments on this entry are closed.