January 29, 2014
— DrewM Instead of cutting 5% from the ever doubling "food stamp" program it "cuts" 1% but efforts to separate farm subsidies and "food stamp" spending failed when the GOP caved in conference with the Senate.
Members approved the House-Senate agreement on farm policy in a 251-166 vote. A majority of Republicans backed the bill, with 63 GOP "no" votes. But a majority of Democrats opposed it, with 103 voting against....
A majority of the spending in the bill is for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), informally called the food stamp program, and much of the Democratic opposition came from members who opposed the $8 billion cut to the program. The original House proposal would have cut $39 billion from food stamps, while the Senate-passed bill called for a $4 billion cut.
One of the reasons I put "cut" in quotes in the lead to the post is the mechanism that leads to the reductions might not actually happen.
The bill finds $8.6 billion in savings by requiring households to receive at least $20 per year in home heating assistance before they automatically qualify for food stamps, instead of the $1 threshold now in place in some states.
If that report is correct, just because someone isn't "automatically" qualified for food stamps doesn't mean there aren't other ways they qualify. Anyone want to bet these "cuts" never actually happen?
While the bill passed with a majority of the majority (most Republicans are always good with more spending), conservatives aren't happy.
Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., raised the concern Tuesday in a closed-door conference meeting of the conservative Republican Study Committee. The House passed agriculture legislation that split what he called the “unholy alliance” of agriculture and nutrition policy, namely the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly called food stamps.When the bill came back from conference with the Senate, however, the two sections were fused again. Rather than cutting $40 billion from SNAP, it slashes $8 billion, leading some House members to think something similar could happen with an immigration overhaul, even if they pass the piecemeal bills leadership is considering.
“It was something Republicans, not just conservatives, could have hung their hat on. We could have accepted a lot of crap if we preserved that separation,” Mulvaney said after the meeting. “If the new normal is going to be that we pass really good House bills but get killed in conference, I think it does raise legitimate questions about whether or not we should go to conference” on immigration.
The reason conservatives want to separate food stamps and farm subsidies is to make it easier to cut both. Bundling them together was a bi-paristan idea.
Some say if SNAP is separated from the farm bill, the House would still pass the remaining titles, albeit with amendments and spending sacrifices. But former Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman disagrees. The coalitions between farm and food groups developed beginning with the late Sen. George McGovern and former Sen. Bob Dole in the 1970s "have been in large part responsible for the health of both farm and nutrition legislation," Glickman told Agri-Pulse.Dole wrote in a Washington Post editorial on McGovern's passing that "we would both come to understand that our most important commonality the one that would unite us during and after our service on Capitol Hill was our shared desire to eliminate hunger in this country and around the world."
The best conservatives can hope for is there's some good (opposition to immigration reform efforts) to come out this business as usual mess the GOP has once again agreed to.
Posted by: DrewM at
08:33 AM
| Comments (273)
Post contains 623 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 08:35 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 29, 2014 08:36 AM (7FFZz)
Posted by: AMDG at January 29, 2014 08:37 AM (t7OO0)
Posted by: Seems legit at January 29, 2014 08:37 AM (A98Xu)
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at January 29, 2014 08:38 AM (OJn3e)
Posted by: Natasha and Boris at January 29, 2014 08:38 AM (Bps3R)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at January 29, 2014 08:38 AM (659DL)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 08:39 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 29, 2014 08:39 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: America, bleeding at January 29, 2014 08:39 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: rickl at January 29, 2014 08:39 AM (zoehZ)
Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2014 08:40 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2014 08:40 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: naturalfake at January 29, 2014 08:40 AM (0cMkb)
Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at January 29, 2014 08:40 AM (YYJjz)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 08:40 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Votermom at January 29, 2014 08:40 AM (GSIDW)
I mean, if we let the Dems win, we'll get more spending and bigger gov't and that's bad, right? So, we'll vote for the GOP who will give us bigger gov't and more spending?
Am I missing something?
Now comes the chorus - the GOP can't do anything with just the house. Of course, when they held the house, Senate and WH - they increased spending and gov't. So, the next claim will be "we can't do anything without an enormous majority".
then the claim will be "you're just a 'truecon" who doesn't understand the long game". Well - the part of the "long game" is true. I don't understand what possible conservative objective the GOP can claim to have based on its actions.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 08:40 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 08:42 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Votermom at January 29, 2014 12:40 PM (GSIDW)
And Stonies.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at January 29, 2014 08:42 AM (F75MN)
Posted by: alexthechick - Please SMOD. Just for me? at January 29, 2014 08:43 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2014 08:43 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Damiano at January 29, 2014 08:44 AM (j0wOO)
Posted by: Vortex Lovera at January 29, 2014 08:44 AM (wtvvX)
Posted by: Harry at January 29, 2014 08:44 AM (ao2LR)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at January 29, 2014 08:44 AM (659DL)
Posted by: DangerGirl Telecommunications at January 29, 2014 08:44 AM (1EJ2w)
They have your money, sucka. F.U.
Apply above sentiment to politician after being elected except with vote substituting for money.
Posted by: naturalfake at January 29, 2014 12:40 PM (0cMkb)
I get a lot more satisfaction from Wendys than I do from the GOP.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 29, 2014 08:44 AM (7FFZz)
$8 billion in maybe cuts over 10 years in a program that spends $80 billion a year. Austerity, thy name is Fuck You.
Well, there's always the debt ceiling debate, coming soon. Here's how that will go:
TFG -- Raise the limit. No conditions.
Boner -- The House members won't go along with that. Give us a bone.
McConnell -- We won't shut the gubmint down. He wins.
TFG -- Okay, one condition. Boner has to wear this pink tutu as well.
Boner -- Oh fuck. I've seen this Robot Chicken episode already.
McConnell -- I surrender again, in case you didn't hear me the first time.
TFG -- Boner will now have to ride this unicycle before I sign.
Boner -- Someone fetch my scotch; I'll be out on the balcony having a cig and measuring my feet for the clown shoes.
McConnell -- At least he didn't make me wear a Hillary 2016 shirt. Hahahaha.
Posted by: GnuBreed at January 29, 2014 08:45 AM (wNF3N)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 08:45 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: AMDG at January 29, 2014 08:45 AM (t7OO0)
Maybe a truck stuck in Atlanta.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at January 29, 2014 08:45 AM (F75MN)
They said if I voted democrat, spending would go up.
They said if I voted republican, spending would go up.
They are always right.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 29, 2014 08:45 AM (ZkzmI)
Posted by: Barakhenaten I at January 29, 2014 08:46 AM (OLLJQ)
We need a new party.
They've rigged the game in their favor and against the country. You can almost see how it happens; They start off working for the country and then one of the old hands tells them how they can make out personally in the game while still doing good for the country. After a while, they start saying to themselves that if it's good for them, it's good for the country. Eventually it's automatic - if it's good for them - who knows - it might be good for the country, and so what if it isn't, it's still good for them.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 29, 2014 08:46 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: joncelli at January 29, 2014 08:46 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: naturalfake at January 29, 2014 08:46 AM (0cMkb)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 29, 2014 08:47 AM (C3Wjb)
'"it does raise legitimate questions about whether or not we should go to conference” on immigration'
(facepalm X 1,000)
The fiscal situation is catastrophic. The constitutional situation has arguably only been more grave during the Civil War. Powerful elements of the federal govt. have been weaponized against the citizenry on political lines. The international situation is - almost all avoidably - drifting towards great peril for our interests.
And the "opposition" party is even thinking of doing anything WRT "immigration"? A topic that polls below 10% on national surveys of priority issues.
Politically, substantively, morally, philosophically ridiculous and indefensible. Anyone want to enlighten me here?
Posted by: non-purist at January 29, 2014 08:47 AM (afQnV)
Posted by: Huge Fat Lady, eating a ham sammich at January 29, 2014 08:47 AM (GdalM)
Posted by: runningrn at January 29, 2014 08:47 AM (o6g4X)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 08:48 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 08:48 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2014 08:48 AM (fWAjv)
22 -
I know somebody else who will be along shortly to remind us that the R party doesn't have 60 Senators or the White House, so it's not like they could do anything anyway.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 29, 2014 08:50 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Jinx the Cat at January 29, 2014 08:50 AM (l3vZN)
Posted by: DangerGirl Telecommunications at January 29, 2014 08:51 AM (1EJ2w)
Posted by: soothsayer, they chanted at January 29, 2014 08:51 AM (4/cQ8)
Posted by: IrishEd at January 29, 2014 08:52 AM (bfm04)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 29, 2014 08:52 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 08:52 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 29, 2014 08:53 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 08:53 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: votermom at January 29, 2014 08:53 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at January 29, 2014 08:54 AM (olDqf)
But calling it "absurd" to believe that legalization of illegal aliens would inevitably lead to citizenship is somehow out of bounds.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 12:45 PM (PYAXX
If that is your position now then you are really slow on the uptake because the facts had not changed when you were partially onboard with the legalization / no citizenship proposal. What else will you support and then call other people absurd down the road for supporting the same thing?
Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2014 08:54 AM (m2CN7)
The staffers braved the falling snow and ice and Chick-fil-A refused to take a single penny for their sandwiches.
==================
h8trzzzz
Posted by: grammie winger at January 29, 2014 08:55 AM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 08:55 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: soothsayer, they chanted at January 29, 2014 08:56 AM (4/cQ8)
44: "Now witness the awesome power of this fully operational FSA."
As true as it is funny.
They have the votes. Unless we undergo a great calamity , such as a natural disaster, disease, or war, where reality and consequences can not be avoided, there is no changing course.
This train will not stop. It will not be steered onto a different path. It can only be derailed.
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at January 29, 2014 08:56 AM (LJpVo)
Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2014 08:56 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 29, 2014 08:56 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at January 29, 2014 08:56 AM (GjPnA)
Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 29, 2014 08:56 AM (bCEmE)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 08:57 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Harry at January 29, 2014 12:44 PM (ao2LR)
I hate the Republicans more--with the exception of the few Conservatives left. The Republicans have lost me by doing the following:
* Abandoning the rule of law and the Constitution because fighting is hard or something
* Allowing Dim dirty tricks to always succeed--don't the bastards ever want to win one
* Telling me they know what is best for me with regards to Taxes and Immigation--they have proved conclusively that they don't know best.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, think mink. at January 29, 2014 08:57 AM (kXoT0)
Posted by: soothsayer, they chanted at January 29, 2014 08:57 AM (4/cQ8)
The staffers braved the falling snow and ice and Chick-fil-A refused to take a single penny for their sandwiches.
======================
OMG, they forced total strangers to consume Hate Chicken? Oh, the humanity!
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, think mink. at January 29, 2014 08:58 AM (kXoT0)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 29, 2014 08:58 AM (lUXJH)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at January 29, 2014 08:58 AM (olDqf)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at January 29, 2014 08:59 AM (oFCZn)
Posted by: GOP starring in Thelma and Louise at January 29, 2014 08:59 AM (nsOJa)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 08:59 AM (PYAXX)
Slash ag subsidies and watch how many "conservative" Republican voters in the ag industry come out of the woodwork with torches and pitchforks.
Ditto with Social Security or Medicare.
Yes, it sucks. No, it's not going to change anytime soon. The Left knew what it was doing when they got the public addicted to federal spending programs.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 29, 2014 09:00 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Boomslang Joe at January 29, 2014 09:00 AM (nsg2T)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 29, 2014 12:53 PM (LSJmV)
I like my Frosh Tea Party Republican as well--Bridenstine--his first vote was against confirming Boner as Speaker.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, think mink. at January 29, 2014 09:01 AM (kXoT0)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:01 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Boomslang Joe at January 29, 2014 01:00 PM (nsg2T)
==============
Life becomes much easier once you learn to expect it.
Posted by: grammie winger at January 29, 2014 09:02 AM (P6QsQ)
@ 67 - "The Republican grassroots are not the problem.
The R leadership and it's minions are the problem."
Only partially true. The Republican grassroots ARE part of the problem since they consistently refuse to make substantive efforts to hold the party leadership accountable. All they do is show up at county and state level GOP meetings, get out-manuevered by the politicos, and then go home and grumble. Repeat every two years.
If they wanted to be part of the solution, they would give the GOP the ol' heave-ho en masse and go third party. Make the GOP into the third party and attract a lot of disaffected moderate Ds and Indies who have dropped out of the game altogether.
Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at January 29, 2014 09:02 AM (YYJjz)
Is the weather nice in that alternate universe you're commenting from?
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 29, 2014 09:02 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 29, 2014 09:03 AM (lUXJH)
Posted by: Boomslang Joe at January 29, 2014 01:00 PM (nsg2T)
A little higher, to the right, and in between the shoulder blades, Thanks!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 29, 2014 09:03 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:03 AM (45N4D)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 12:59 PM (PYAXX)
You held the opposite position less than a month ago but now feel you can scold others by telling them that same position is absurd is my only issue.
Actually its not my issue. Whatever you can live with.
Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2014 09:04 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: garrett at January 29, 2014 09:04 AM (OLLJQ)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 09:04 AM (1Y+hH)
The goal of democrats is to have the republicans sign off on a bill that cuts expenditures by a nominal amount, meaning virtually no actual cut. That way, their dependent voters don't see a reduction in their free stuff, but the democrats can run on 'The GOP cuts your program'.
And, the GOP falls for it every time. If they had any brains, they would realize that their base doesn't want to see just any cuts, but only meaningful cuts. If you are actually willing to cut a program, you need to make it count.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 29, 2014 09:05 AM (ZkzmI)
Posted by: votermom at January 29, 2014 09:05 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 29, 2014 09:05 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humantiarian at January 29, 2014 09:06 AM (HVff2)
But swearsies, the cuts will happen in the out years (after at least four House elections).
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 29, 2014 09:07 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: red speck at January 29, 2014 09:07 AM (9/Ug/)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:07 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: mugiwara at January 29, 2014 09:07 AM (3d63f)
Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2014 09:07 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: soothsayer, they chanted at January 29, 2014 09:07 AM (4/cQ8)
“We cooked several hundred sandwiches and stood out on both sides of 280 and handed out the sandwiches to anyone we could get to – as long as we had food to give out.”
The staffers braved the falling snow and ice and Chick-fil-A refused to take a single penny for their sandwiches.
Man I wish we had them up here.
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 29, 2014 12:52 PM (C3Wjb)
How many people did GLAAD feed or for that matter ever help unless they are some Commiewood douche?
Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 29, 2014 09:08 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 01:07 PM (PYAXX
Whatever Corkey.
Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2014 09:08 AM (m2CN7)
RINOs acting like RINOs isn't news.
Posted by: redc1c4 at January 29, 2014 09:08 AM (q+fqH)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:08 AM (45N4D)
Isn't that the constant bellowing whenever term limits are discussed? "We'll lose our committee chairmanships!" Well, with representation like this, I don't see a downside.
-
That, plus things like charimanships are merely based on house and senate rules. If the filibuster can be ignored or changed at will, so can seniority rules.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 29, 2014 09:09 AM (ZkzmI)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at January 29, 2014 09:10 AM (oFCZn)
What i want to see if we retake the Senate is spending bills broken into hundreds to small bills. If we can't do a line item veto, let's pass line item bills. One bill, one spending authorization.
No burying the bad spending in a bill along with legitimate spending.
Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 29, 2014 09:10 AM (SO2Q8)
Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2014 09:11 AM (fWAjv)
think we, as conservatives, need to sit out the next election.
The GOP believes two things:
1) conservatives will always vote for them regardless of what they do; and
2) even if #1 isnÂ’t correct, they can win without conservatives.
Both of those notions must be disabused before the GOP will move right.
And, if the GOP doesn’t move right – then the GOP must be terminated.
I urge everyone who considers themselves a conservative to sit out the next election.
Yes, I know, we “have a good chance to win the Senate”. So what? What, exactly, do you believe that will get us?
I’m not offering “sit an election out” lightly. I’m offering it because it is the only way we will move the GOP right quickly enough to do any good (and I’m not talking about moving them to be as conservative as I am, I’m talking reasonably conservative here – which they currently are not).
Energy spent being loyal team players and electing who our betters tell us to has accomplished exactly what conservative goal?
When the GOP held the WH, Senate and House – did they reduce spending? No, they increased it. Did they reduce the size or scope of gov’t? No, they increased it. Did they get rid of any stupid federal agencies, programs, or statutes? No, they added to them.
And, since then, what has the GOP actually done? Capitulate. Say they will capitulate (McConnell and Boehner both stated he did not intend to repeal Obamacare – only “fix” it). Say they will do really, really stupid things (amnesty). And “compromise” away any potential for cutting spending or fixing entitlements (see Paul Ryan’s newest crowning achievement).
The GOP wants to be a Center-left party, just to the right of the DNC. Anyone who doesn’t believe this is naive at best. Actions count – not words. In elections, they tell us they are conservative. But they never act that way in office.
I challenge anyone to explain the conservative “victories” that blind loyalty to the GOP has produced. Pointing to some nominees to a court or to an agency not getting through does not suffice. Because one liberal nominee is stopped, doesn’t mean another liberal nominee – not as vocal – is not confirmed. These are illusory victories, with little meaning. They feel good but accomplish nothing.
Yes, if in control, the GOP will be slightly less liberal than the DNC. That is not the same thing, even remotely, as furthering any conservative goals. It is the opposite.
I am arguing to change the entire GOP’s thinking. Those who argue we shouldn’t sit out, but instead support a “conservative” challenger in a primary or support a “conservative” candidate in the general election are talking about making insignificant changes – rearranging deck chairs.
The GOP establishment (by which I mean incumbents, their staffs, the people working for the GOP, professional campaign people, and big money donors) easily works around the few true conservatives in its midst. Adding a few more here or there won’t change anything. We would have to replace at least 51% of GOP incumbents to change the GOP’s behavior. That is simply not possible. If we change 2 or 3 an election cycle, by the time we get near the 51% mark, the first 1/2 we put worked to elect will have been co-opted by the establishment, making us start all over. Incumbency is powerful, making challenges hard to begin with. Add to that most decent candidates don’t want to piss the party off – so don’t want to challenge, leaving us with a limited pool of potential challengers. Then add the power and organization of the GOP against independent challengers in multiple states, and we can never effect the change we need.
We thought challenging incumbents would change other GOP incumbent behavior. It didn’t. We’ve been working on changing the GOP for over 30 years. Where has it gotten us? Here. Exactly here. Everything wrong with the U.S. – the GOP had a hand in. Everything except Obamacare. Remember that.
The problem is that the party controls things.
As voting for a conservative democrat is counterproductive – because in reality that allegedly conservative democrat merely allows the liberal democrats to run things and push its agenda, voting for a “conservative” GOP candidate (and they all CLAIM to be conservative at election time) is counterproductive because it allows the GOP – which is not at all conservative – run the show.
So, we vote for a “conservative” GOP candidate. Someone who promises to be anti-amnesty, for cutting spending, for cutting the size and scope of gov’t, etc.
And let’s assume they stick to those guns and vote that way (very rare). But, they help the GOP form a majority. The GOP leadership than pushes a budget that increases spending, increases the size and scope of gov’t, and pushes amnesty and instead of repeal of Obamacare – pushes a “fix” of Obamacare.
And all of those things pass with majority republican votes.
What has your vote for a “conservative” GOP candidate accomplished?
And, even if we had, say, 40% of the incumbent GOP as true conservatives, the remainder would work with democrats to pass stuff – as they already do. For instance, this Ryan compromise will likely pass with more D votes than R votes – (so that R’s can go back and claim to be against it to their constituents and in primaries). That is the kind of party shenanigans I am talking about.
The reality is, the primary system doesnÂ’t work. A) incumbency has too much power, b) the ones who win get co-opted 90% of the time by the establishment and c) for the most party, the establishment ignores, works around conservatives. Why do you think Mitch McConell and Jim DeMint hate each so much? Why do you think the GOP establishment people hate Cruz and call him names publicly? Why do you think Mitch McConnell and Boehner are publicly calling for the defeat of conservatives.
We have made some progress. . But it is very slow progress and we won’t shift the GOP right for over 50 years at this rate. In that 50 years, we will see the collapse of SS, collapse of various state and local pension systems, exploding debt, exploding Medicare, and Obamacare costs. And the GOP will do nothing about it – instead we will get the same B.S. we have received til now – more spending, more gimmicks, more entitlements and more gov’t.
Yes, in 75 years, if we work hard at it and challenge GOP incumbents here and there, etc., we will move the GOP right. But in 75 years itÂ’ll probably be too late to do much good.
In the meantime, voting for the people who will pass amnesty, agree to Ryan’s ridiculous “compromise”, increase spending, increase the size and scope of gov’t, and have stated, repeatedly that they have no intention of actually repealing Obamacare (both Boehner and McConell have publicly stated this). Voting for these people will not “reform” the GOP, but empower it to continue behaving in this way.
Not voting and letting republicans lose will mean that the party must look at what it does and decide whether it will move right.
Think of it as “primarying” the entire party.
The reality is we have a 2 party system – that is unlikely to change. And none of the various third parties will win any time soon. So, voting for some third party will not do anything.
And, voting the “conservative” line won’t really do anything because 97% of the time, it’s just the GOP candidate.
And, in case you haven’t noticed, the party itself is fighting conservatives. The establishment is not conservative – never was (the GOP was not founded as and has never been a conservative party – it is merely a party with some conservatives in it and that is to the right of the DNC – that does not make the party conservative) and the current establishment people are unlikely to ever be ideologically conservative.
They donÂ’t want to be conservative because they like govÂ’t and believe in govÂ’t and the big-money donors make lots of money off big govÂ’t. So they fight against conservatives and conservative influence on the party.
The only way to get them to toe the conservative line at all puts the fear of losing their jobs and their influence into them. The only way to do that shows them our voting power and that we WILL IN FACT use it by NOT voting for them.
They currently believe we (conservatives) will ultimately vote for them no matter what they do. And, the reality is, they have been right about this because we have done just that.
To change the dynamic, we have to prove they are not right about this – that conservatives are willing to sit out if they cross us.
As someone else said in a comment:
It demonstrates that the GOP *must* take the conservative base seriously, and behave more conservatively – even if it means they get walloped in an election – then it could be worth it.
Otherwise, going the route we’ve been going down for decades now – just reinforces to the GOP they *can* continue to be ‘liberal lite’, take conservatives for granted, and there is *no* reason for them to behave conservatively because they *can* continue to be squishes, giving the Dems what they want, and there will be *no* penalty for doing so.
Anyone who disagrees with this needs to explain how continuing to vote for the GOP – as we’ve done for decades – will suddenly result in something *different*, I’m afraid.
The only way to win the fight is to change the party. We will not change the party through constant support of the party despite its actions.
Voting for the GOP despite its behavior will not change the GOP. As an example – if a child does something wrong – do you reward the child for that behavior? If you do, you are fool because you are guarantying that behavior will continue. Well, the same is true with the GOP. If you reward the GOP by voting for it – you are incentivizing that same behavior in the future.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Voting for the GOP when the GOP is not remotely conservative and expecting them to act conservative fits well within the definition of insanity.
IÂ’m seriously asking you to look at the GOPÂ’s actions over the last 20 years and think rationally.
I realize that it goes against the grain to sit out and potentially allow the DNC to win. But, in reality, this is the only way we will change the GOP in our lifetimes. We have been trying to change the GOP through action, primaries, involvement, etc. for 30 years. And it has not happened.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 09:11 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 29, 2014 09:11 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 09:11 AM (1Y+hH)
Not to insert myself into some squabble I was part of, but solely on the substance of the issue, if not absurd it is not very realistic to expect that some second-class/special status for semi-legalized illegal aliens would not led to citizenship.
Let's face it - even to those of us with a rational and sensible concept of "fair", it would not be American or fair to have some gastarbeiter class among us. And while our reasonable consciences would not embrace it, rely on the fact that the judiciary (now essentially an unaccountable super-legislature any time is feels the urge or whim) will easily find it unconstitutional and over-turn it in a nanosecond.
Folks - we have had open, explicit, in-writing lawlessness in place for years ("sanctuary cities" and all the other state/municipal-level lawlessness). Two thirds of the 1986 act were simply ignored, for the most part. The fence-building legislation (2004?) was almost completely ignored. The DOJ issues unbelievable orders that have the effect of gutting basic existing law.
Any suggestion/proposal other than that existing law be enforced, and that the lawlessness now rampant at the federal and state level be completely erased, is either naive, unserious, or stupid (use "absurd" if you prefer).
Posted by: non-purist at January 29, 2014 09:11 AM (afQnV)
If we can't do a line item veto, let's pass line item bills. One bill, one spending authorization.
-
The same people who pass a spending 'cut' that isn't actually a cut will get right on that if they take the senate...........................
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 29, 2014 09:11 AM (ZkzmI)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:12 AM (45N4D)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:12 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2014 09:12 AM (fT3qO)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 29, 2014 09:12 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humantiarian at January 29, 2014 09:12 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 29, 2014 09:12 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:12 AM (PYAXX)
Re 122: Is there a barrell big enough for that?
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at January 29, 2014 09:13 AM (Kh+vp)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:13 AM (45N4D)
Posted by: rickl at January 29, 2014 09:13 AM (zoehZ)
When you are searching for something to give you hope, do not look to politicians or the Republican Party or to the government. That is not where hope comes from.
It's been said that government is a necessary evil. Personally, I think the balance has tipped mightily from "necessary" to "evil".
When confronted by evil, do not look to the source of that evil to bring about good. Turn to the One who is good to vanquish the evil. That is where true hope lies.
Thus endeth grammie's socon lesson for today.
Posted by: grammie winger at January 29, 2014 09:13 AM (P6QsQ)
The Free Shit Army needs more free shit? No sweat, we'll just cut a little more from the worthless vets.
Posted by: Paul "Fucktard" Ryan at January 29, 2014 09:14 AM (r5sZy)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b] at January 29, 2014 09:14 AM (0HooB)
124: "One wonders how the Founding Fathers and there followers reached the point that led them to risk all."
They were made of sterner stuff than we. To my shame and regret.
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at January 29, 2014 09:14 AM (LJpVo)
If we can't do a line item veto, let's pass line item bills. One bill, one spending authorization.
-
The same people who pass a spending 'cut' that isn't actually a cut will get right on that if they take the senate...........................
----
You know, my expectations are so low that i think i've blow my load if i heard anyone in office just advocate the idea.
Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 29, 2014 09:15 AM (SO2Q8)
A free ride where you get to write "laws" that exempt you from their consequences and give you pretty much unfettered access to campaign donor cash is a sweet spot in the life of an ugly stupid person, so you can hardly blame your "representatives" from lining up to screw the taxpayers to insure that they stay in power no matter the consequences to the country.
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 29, 2014 09:15 AM (o3MSL)
You don't just come here for the barrel fishing, do you?
Posted by: large bear in the barrel[/i] [/b] at January 29, 2014 09:15 AM (cxs6V)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 29, 2014 09:15 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/i][/u][/b] at January 29, 2014 09:15 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:16 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 09:16 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2014 09:17 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 09:17 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:17 AM (IoTdl)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 29, 2014 09:18 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Carol at January 29, 2014 09:18 AM (z4WKX)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:19 AM (IoTdl)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 29, 2014 09:19 AM (LSJmV)
Colette de Montpelier: "I'm enthralled by combine harvesters. In fact, I yearn to have one as a pet."
Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2014 01:07 PM (u2a4R)
How about the combines in "Prime Cut"?
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at January 29, 2014 09:19 AM (F75MN)
Posted by: ManWithNoParty at January 29, 2014 09:20 AM (ojnk6)
-
That, plus things like charimanships are merely based on house and senate rules. If the filibuster can be ignored or changed at will, so can seniority rules.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 29, 2014 01:09 PM (ZkzmI)
I'm not pro or anti term limits. I just don't think it will solve the problem of the GOP being a left of center party. The problem is structural - the big-money donors, the aides, advisers, staffers, and campaign pros who make up the "professional" GOP - the people behind the elected officials, are not conservative - they are instead broken down into different categories:
- big money donors - these tend to be people donating to achieve some personal benefit to themselves or their companies (and don't confuse big-business with conservative, big business is often very much in favor of big-gov't because they can make money off it).
- people who like to play the game of politics - these are staffers, advisers, etc. who just like the power, influence and fun of the game. They have no real principals and - as we all know - when you don't have actual principals you will always go left because it is easier to give away "free" stuff.
- big gov't technocrats who are not socialist. Think Mitt Romney. People who believe that big gov't isn't a problem, just that it is being "managed" badly. they think gov't can (and should) solve everyone's problems, just that the right people need to be in charge.
- people who consider themselves republican because their parents were or that is what is convenient based on their location. They have no right of center beliefs, but consider themselves republican for tribal or convenience reasons (i.e., live in a republican area so easier to be elected as a republican or get a job as an aide to a republican).
The GOP "establishment" has very few (almost no) principled conservatives. Instead it is people from one of the above categories. Term limits won't solve that problem
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 09:20 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: Big Ol Fat Guy at January 29, 2014 09:21 AM (BpQmM)
So far the WX in the Golden Isles is vile but bearable. Drizzle and cold, but at least no wind is blowing. When that happens the heat blows right out of my drafty Victorian. I learned to drive on wet red clay roads so if it snows or ices I'm not worried about it....
Posted by: backhoe at January 29, 2014 09:21 AM (ULH4o)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 29, 2014 09:21 AM (ZshNr)
Posted by: ManWithNoParty at January 29, 2014 01:20 PM (ojnk6)
You are free to skip a comment you are not interested in. And shut your idiot mouth.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 09:21 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 29, 2014 09:21 AM (bCEmE)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 12:39 PM (PYAXX)
and Nebraska...and Illinois...and Indiana...and northern Missouri...all around the midwest, really. More states than Iowa grow corn.
Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at January 29, 2014 09:22 AM (yh0zB)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2014 09:22 AM (fT3qO)
Ummm....how screwed up are we as a society that that phrase can be put in print with a straight face?
Posted by: RedMindBlueState at January 29, 2014 09:22 AM (wjJGE)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 29, 2014 09:22 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:22 AM (IoTdl)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:23 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: dirks strewn at January 29, 2014 09:23 AM (kfcYC)
Posted by: ManWithNoParty at January 29, 2014 09:23 AM (ojnk6)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 29, 2014 09:23 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:23 AM (IoTdl)
Posted by: The Burning Times at January 29, 2014 09:23 AM (Z7toi)
Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 29, 2014 09:23 AM (bCEmE)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 29, 2014 01:14 PM (1Y+hH)
I guess one of the reasons conservatives never learn anything is because they are too damn stupid and lazy to read anything longer than 2 sentences.
I'll just post "I don't like the GOP" from now on and let you little minded lazy idiots continue pretending to have thoughts.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 09:24 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at January 29, 2014 09:25 AM (yh0zB)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:25 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle
"You blocks, you stones,
You less than senseless things!"
Julius Caesar (1.1.36)
Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i] [/b] at January 29, 2014 09:25 AM (cxs6V)
Posted by: Tami at January 29, 2014 01:21 PM (bCEmE)
That is some thoughtful commentary that advances conservatism right there. Good thing you are here on this comment thread.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 09:25 AM (sOx93)
163: "And shut your idiot mouth."
Is there a newsletter where a mug can get more of such witty repartee?
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (/qzu7)
*makes notes*
Posted by: Dale Carnegie at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (RUvjp)
Posted by: backhoe at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (ULH4o)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (IoTdl)
================
I do bite my thumb, sir.
BURN!
Now good day to you, sir.
Posted by: Kensington at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (Z7toi)
Posted by: ManWithNoParty at January 29, 2014 01:25 PM (ojnk6)
Sack up? I'm not the one crying because someone posted something I was too lazy and stupid to read.
You are free to follow your own advice.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (fT3qO)
Be thankful she's not picking her nose!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 29, 2014 09:26 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 29, 2014 09:27 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:27 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 29, 2014 09:27 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at January 29, 2014 01:26 PM (/qzu7)
Sure. It's called Asshole Parade and is edited by your mom while she sucks my cock.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 09:28 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 29, 2014 09:29 AM (RJMhd)
177: "I'll just post "I don't like the GOP" from now on and let you little minded lazy idiots continue pretending to have thoughts."
I must bow to your wit sir.
Or maybe it's a cramp from laughing too hard. Difficult to tell the difference.
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at January 29, 2014 09:29 AM (OJn3e)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2014 09:29 AM (fT3qO)
==============
You're going to need me if you wwant to keep digging!
Posted by: A Shovel at January 29, 2014 09:29 AM (Z7toi)
Posted by: DangerGirl Telecommunications at January 29, 2014 09:29 AM (Ryac4)
Posted by: ManWithNoParty at January 29, 2014 09:29 AM (ojnk6)
Posted by: Dale Carnegie at January 29, 2014 09:29 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:30 AM (PYAXX)
my favorite Shakespeare one is the "do you bite your thumb at me sir?"
I'm a big fan of the reply. "No, sir, I do not bite my thumb at you, sir, but I
bite my thumb, sir."
Posted by: Big Ol Fat Guy at January 29, 2014 09:30 AM (BpQmM)
Posted by: votermom at January 29, 2014 09:30 AM (GSIDW)
You are free to follow your own advice.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 01:26 PM (sOx93)
==============
Monkeytoe - I don't think you are getting it. No one is complaining about the content of your thoughts. The complaint is the mess you make while copying and then pasting those thoughts into the blog.
You do see that it is a mess, right? Lots and lots and lots of blank white space, filled with Word commands and other assorted tomfoolery.
You have to copy and paste from NOTEPAD - not WORD.
Posted by: grammie winger at January 29, 2014 09:30 AM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 29, 2014 09:30 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 29, 2014 09:30 AM (bCEmE)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2014 01:26 PM (fT3qO)
I said here a while back that Rand's response to unindicted criminal Gregory "gotcha" question should be required viewing (preferably an endless loop for 24 hours) for every conservative candidate's MFM pre-interview preparation.
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 29, 2014 09:30 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 29, 2014 09:30 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: mugiwara at January 29, 2014 09:31 AM (3d63f)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at January 29, 2014 09:31 AM (olDqf)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 01:23 PM (PYAXX)
It would help if our idiot politicos would learn the art of short concise answers. Instead they see that camera light blinking and cannot overcome the impulse to run their suckholes, and the media is more than willing to let them talk until they say something that can be used against them.
Every.
Damn.
Time.
Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at January 29, 2014 09:31 AM (yh0zB)
Posted by: soothsayer, they chanted at January 29, 2014 09:32 AM (4Br8g)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 29, 2014 09:32 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Wash - playing with dinosaurs on a space ship [/i] [/b] at January 29, 2014 09:32 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:32 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at January 29, 2014 09:32 AM (olDqf)
bite my thumb, sir."Posted by: Big Ol Fat Guy at January 29, 2014 01:30 PM (BpQmM)
But first you will bite my thumb.
Posted by: Billiam Shakespoon at January 29, 2014 09:32 AM (F75MN)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:32 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 01:27 PM (PYAXX)
Not really, if you look at the comment there is some formatting problem up front - easily skimmed over and at the end - easily skimmed over. The body is mostly fine. I have mentioned before that Ace's comments are the worst of any blog-site out there in terms of being user friendly. I often admit to not being that technically savvy when it comes to this stuff. But this is the only site with these problems.
I don't really care though. I'm just having fun at this point. Jumping in and getting people pissy. Which I find enjoyable as people cry and complain - like it's the end of the world. Makes me laugh.
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 09:32 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: JL at January 29, 2014 09:33 AM (m+BIj)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 29, 2014 09:33 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 29, 2014 09:33 AM (RZ8pf)
197: "Sure. It's called Asshole Parade and is edited by your mom while she sucks my cock."
Oh shit! Oh damn! But my was that a good one! Prose for the ages.
Biff would be proud.
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at January 29, 2014 09:33 AM (OJn3e)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 29, 2014 09:33 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2014 09:33 AM (fT3qO)
Posted by: votermom at January 29, 2014 09:34 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 29, 2014 09:34 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:34 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at January 29, 2014 09:34 AM (olDqf)
Posted by: logprof at January 29, 2014 09:34 AM (X3GkB)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 29, 2014 09:35 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 29, 2014 09:35 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 09:35 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: garrett at January 29, 2014 09:35 AM (59naz)
Posted by: Adam at January 29, 2014 09:35 AM (Aif/5)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 29, 2014 09:35 AM (RJMhd)
The economy's still middling and food stamps are the hill you wanna die on? And other Republicans are the dumb ones. OK then
-
Cut one program at a time until the federal government is no longer so large that it prevents the economy from growing. Oh, and BTW, when you cut a program, it is generally advisable to actually spend less in the future than today.
I can assure you that the economy will not recover until the bureaucracy is reduced.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 29, 2014 09:35 AM (ZkzmI)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2014 09:36 AM (fT3qO)
Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 29, 2014 09:36 AM (bCEmE)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 29, 2014 09:36 AM (RJMhd)
“'You are drunk Sir Winston, you are disgustingly drunk. 'Yes, Mrs. Braddock, I am drunk. But you, Mrs. Braddock are ugly, and disgustingly fat. But, tomorrow morning, I, Winston Churchill will be sober.”
Posted by: Big Ol Fat Guy at January 29, 2014 09:36 AM (BpQmM)
Posted by: Country Singer at January 29, 2014 09:37 AM (CWquH)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 29, 2014 09:37 AM (ZkzmI)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 29, 2014 09:37 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Country Singer at January 29, 2014 09:37 AM (CWquH)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 29, 2014 09:38 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 29, 2014 09:38 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 01:34 PM (PYAXX)
Channeling the premise of the question, and challenging the language of the question itself can be powerful tools. I wish some conservative candidates would use them every now and again.
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 29, 2014 09:39 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 29, 2014 01:25 PM (PYAXX)
Not many purely corn farmers in Texas, most corn goes to feed livestock IIRC. But talk to Texas corn farmers (the ones who ONLY grow corn, not the ones who grow a couple of acres of corn to feed their cattle) about cutting corn subsidies and you will get a different story, I promise you.
And, FWIW, I find it funny how Texans feel qualified to talk about what a "religious issue" something is in Iowa, where most of them have never been. One word. Football. (I've lived in Texas.)
It doesn't have to be corn, though. There are a lot of agricultural products that are subsidized to "save the family farms" and no other reason. We have become so good at growing food that fewer people can do it on fewer acres, and a lot of that has to do with the degree of mechanization that is used to do so.
Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at January 29, 2014 09:39 AM (yh0zB)
Posted by: phoenixgirl @phxazgrl 29 days until spring training at January 29, 2014 09:39 AM (u8GsB)
Posted by: JL at January 29, 2014 09:40 AM (m+BIj)
Posted by: Monkeytoe at January 29, 2014 01:32 PM (sOx93)
Yeah that's exactly what you were doing.
Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2014 09:40 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: The GOP in D.C. at January 29, 2014 09:40 AM (0Fb8c)
Posted by: garrett at January 29, 2014 09:40 AM (59naz)
Posted by: Jinx the Cat at January 29, 2014 09:40 AM (l3vZN)
Posted by: ManWithNoParty at January 29, 2014 09:41 AM (ojnk6)
Posted by: Carol at January 29, 2014 09:42 AM (z4WKX)
Posted by: votermom at January 29, 2014 09:42 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: Country Singer at January 29, 2014 09:43 AM (CWquH)
First off the snap spending cuts are a drop in the bucket (yes even the GOP ones) and don't really save all that much compared to how much we're spending.
Second all that money feed directly into the economy and the redistribution is at a level which helps more people.
They never seem to think that the fair thing to do is across the board cuts. This wouldn't please anybody and more but it would look more fair and the ones affected would range from the rich to the poor.
But for some strange reason they never do that. Do they? Yet they wonder why they don't win any applause for their "fiscal responsibility". (and a lot of folks here reflect this same attitude which makes the GOP just look petty and mean.)
Tom Corbett did the same thing in PA and he's about to have his ass handed to him because it's stupid, it's counter productive when so many are out of work or are underemployed and it looks petty and mean. (which Corbett is. He's a poster boy for the GOP and he's going to lose unless something drastic happens in the next 6 month).
This trying to solve the financial problems and the overspending solely on the backs of those in financial difficulty themselves has always been stupid and mean which I why Monty's Doom Posts always got me so riled up. Never a suggestion of cutting other stuff long with the safety net. No it's all poor people's fault we're bleeding red ink. The bloated safety net is a RESPONSE to the bloated spending on stuff we either don't need or are just high tech make work for the middle class and defense industries.
We should be spending out money exploiting/exploring the solar system. Instead we're building crappy weapons systems for a war we can't win (or don't try to win).
- let the flames begin -
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (13th Level SoCon) at January 29, 2014 09:43 AM (LSDdO)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 29, 2014 09:43 AM (lUXJH)
Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 29, 2014 09:43 AM (bCEmE)
I'm paraphrasing, but one of my favorite Churchill exchanges was along the lines of "If I were your wife, I would poison your coffee." Churchill: "If you were my wife, madam, I would drink it."
Posted by: RedMindBlueState at January 29, 2014 09:44 AM (wjJGE)
Posted by: Country Singer at January 29, 2014 09:44 AM (CWquH)
Posted by: Carol at January 29, 2014 09:45 AM (z4WKX)
Posted by: garrett at January 29, 2014 01:40 PM (59naz)
HAHAHAHAHA!
dick.
Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at January 29, 2014 09:47 AM (yh0zB)
Posted by: Carol at January 29, 2014 09:50 AM (z4WKX)
Posted by: Carol at January 29, 2014 09:57 AM (z4WKX)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2428 seconds, 401 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2014 08:35 AM (fWAjv)