GOP decisive more to end earmarks

I have to hand it to the GOP. In a top secret closed door session, they have decided to push for a "non-binding-two-year moratorium" on earmarks. now THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is true leadership representing the voice of the Majority... Or wait, maybe it's more of the same BS that dems got tossed out of the house for...

BTW... Dick Lugar is a truly a great congressman.

I don't think that's what got the dems tossed out. But we will see if it means anything.

Markwes wrote:I don't think that's what got the dems tossed out. But we will see if it means anything.

Liberalism is what got the dems tossed out.

From the guy who says:

awbinfortwayne wrote:...tax increase must be instituted as long as all the revenue generated from the increases pays down the national debt. Tough choice need to be made....

So you say we increase taxes, then spend it? Is that what got the Democrats out? Tax and um, spend. Got it, I think.

Pez wrote:From the guy who says:

awbinfortwayne wrote:...tax increase must be instituted as long as all the revenue generated from the increases pays down the national debt. Tough choice need to be made....

So you say we increase taxes, then spend it? Is that what got the Democrats out? Tax and um, spend. Got it, I think.

I think we agree about tax increases. It's going to have to happen across the board at some point. But taxes haven't gone up yet so I don't think you get it. Obamacare, bailouts, consistently pointing blame for everything at the previous administration, cap and trade legislation proposals, etc... People get tired of the finger pointing and combined with the Obama agenda booted him out. Obama is a very far left president and his agenda is indicitive of that. People are fed up and that's why the dems lost.

awbinfortwayne wrote:

Pez wrote:From the guy who says:

awbinfortwayne wrote:...tax increase must be instituted as long as all the revenue generated from the increases pays down the national debt. Tough choice need to be made....

So you say we increase taxes, then spend it? Is that what got the Democrats out? Tax and um, spend. Got it, I think.

I think we agree about tax increases. It's going to have to happen across the board at some point. But taxes haven't gone up yet so I don't think you get it. Obamacare, bailouts, consistently pointing blame for everything at the previous administration, cap and trade legislation proposals, etc... People get tired of the finger pointing and combined with the Obama agenda booted him out. Obama is a very far left president and his agenda is indicitive of that. People are fed up and that's why the dems lost.

Cap & trade is long dead, obituaries written, peaceniks have already shed their tears. GM is prpofitbale again, and sold a sizeable chunk of taxpayers stock at a profit in an IPO two days ago. The bank bailout is likely to turn a profit... Many non-partisan economic minds find that Healthcare reform will result in a long term savings.

I blame the previous administration for quite a lot, but I also have been Know to take this administration to task as well. The GOP is full of themselves in this regard. It's nicely convenient that the non-binding earmark moratorium (which is, btw the topic of this thread) ends in two years, just enough time for the dont-tax-but-spend-anyway republicans to spend the next couple years regreasing all the orifices and holes that they think will get them elected again.

I dont know what is more unfortunate, that the GOP thinks the majority of people are stupid, or that they might be right.

You wanted to know what got the dems tossed out so I told you. Don't you think the voters will take care of the repubs too if they don't adhere to the will of the people? SPENDING is what got the dems tossed. Our national debt is what a majority of Americans want to get rid of. So I disagree with your opinion that most people are stupid believing the repubs. The proof is in the polling booth.

Pez wrote:

awbinfortwayne wrote:

Pez wrote:From the guy who says:

awbinfortwayne wrote:...tax increase must be instituted as long as all the revenue generated from the increases pays down the national debt. Tough choice need to be made....

So you say we increase taxes, then spend it? Is that what got the Democrats out? Tax and um, spend. Got it, I think.

I think we agree about tax increases. It's going to have to happen across the board at some point. But taxes haven't gone up yet so I don't think you get it. Obamacare, bailouts, consistently pointing blame for everything at the previous administration, cap and trade legislation proposals, etc... People get tired of the finger pointing and combined with the Obama agenda booted him out. Obama is a very far left president and his agenda is indicitive of that. People are fed up and that's why the dems lost.

Cap & trade is long dead, obituaries written, peaceniks have already shed their tears. GM is prpofitbale again, and sold a sizeable chunk of taxpayers stock at a profit in an IPO two days ago. The bank bailout is likely to turn a profit... Many non-partisan economic minds find that Healthcare reform will result in a long term savings.

I blame the previous administration for quite a lot, but I also have been Know to take this administration to task as well. The GOP is full of themselves in this regard. It's nicely convenient that the non-binding earmark moratorium (which is, btw the topic of this thread) ends in two years, just enough time for the dont-tax-but-spend-anyway republicans to spend the next couple years regreasing all the orifices and holes that they think will get them elected again.

I dont know what is more unfortunate, that the GOP thinks the majority of people are stupid, or that they might be right.

Cap & trade passed in the house. Only reason it hasn't passed in the Senate is due to Republicans holding it up; it was not as dead as you want to make it sound until after the November election. Now it has no chance.

GM majority is still own by 3 entities, 33% federal gov't, 9% Canadian gov't, 15% union. You really think the stock is going to increase. Bet by Jan. it is under $30. Sold at a profit, I don't think so the stock had to have an IPO of over $100 to come close of paying back the federal gov't.

Bailout was set up to be a profit for the federal gov't. However, it has stopped Pelosi and company from handing it back out with no payoff.

The healthcare reform that was enacted was not what the American people wanted. What passed was shoved down there throats as the people were smarter than the legislature to realize in the end it was going to cost the working Americans more money than the present system. By the way now over 130 companies have been granted an exemption by the Obama people.

You can blame the previous administration for only so long. The Bush's economy wasn't that bad and didn't start to turn bad until the Rep lost the house in 2006.

The only good thing about the earmark moratorium is it might slow some of the stupid projects. Doubt it will make much of a difference. Now cutting the budget back to 2008 levels will save money. A balance budget amendment will save money.

Scooby01_98 wrote:
Cap & trade passed in the house. Only reason it hasn't passed in the Senate is due to Republicans holding it up; it was not as dead as you want to make it sound until after the November election. Now it has no chance.

ok, so you are saying cap and trade is dead? Which is the same as what I said. It was indeed dead before the November election... right or wrong...

Scooby01_98 wrote:
GM majority is still own by 3 entities, 33% federal gov't, 9% Canadian gov't, 15% union. You really think the stock is going to increase. Bet by Jan. it is under $30. Sold at a profit, I don't think so the stock had to have an IPO of over $100 to come close of paying back the federal gov't.

The shares sold were sold at a profit...

Scooby01_98 wrote:
Bailout was set up to be a profit for the federal gov't. However, it has stopped Pelosi and company from handing it back out with no payoff.

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say here.

Scooby01_98 wrote:
The healthcare reform that was enacted was not what the American people wanted. What passed was shoved down there throats as the people were smarter than the legislature to realize in the end it was going to cost the working Americans more money than the present system. By the way now over 130 companies have been granted an exemption by the Obama people.

Wasnt it you that said the dems were thrown out because the majority of the American people had spoken? By the same logic the majority of the American people elected Obama, and four years ago the majority of the american people voted for a democratic congress, so they American people had spoken, yes? Lets see if the GOP does anything about it once they realize that insurance companies are going to end up making more money.

Scooby01_98 wrote:
You can blame the previous administration for only so long. The Bush's economy wasn't that bad and didn't start to turn bad until the Rep lost the house in 2006.

I didn't blame the previous administration. You Know as well as I do that I have called out the Obama administration as well. I was only responding to awbinladen's assertion that I was blaming the previous administration... for what I don't know... In general there is plenty of blame to go around... the previous administration and the republican congress before it that decided to lower taxes and keep spending is a fair issue. The current administration is doing a poor job as well.

Scooby01_98 wrote:
The only good thing about the earmark moratorium is it might slow some of the stupid projects. Doubt it will make much of a difference. Now cutting the budget back to 2008 levels will save money. A balance budget amendment will save money.

The earmark moratorium is a smoke screen. It's non binding and lasts for only two years. They want to cut spending and the come up with their "pledge to America" that says they will cut spending on all but 80% of the budget (woohoo), and ban earmarks for two years unless they really want to use them. It's the same as you and others (rightly) criticizing the Obama administration for not allowing bills to be reviewed for two days prior to voting etc...

Honestly though, you are a smart guy, aren't you a bit disappointed by the GOP's approach (so far) to cut spending?

Lugar is right, earmarks should not be banned, but they should be subject to an up or down vote, just as any other bill's amendments.

Pez, you need to take a board break.

Pez wrote:

Scooby01_98 wrote:
Cap & trade passed in the house. Only reason it hasn't passed in the Senate is due to Republicans holding it up; it was not as dead as you want to make it sound until after the November election. Now it has no chance.

ok, so you are saying cap and trade is dead? Which is the same as what I said. It was indeed dead before the November election... right or wrong...

Scooby01_98 wrote:
GM majority is still own by 3 entities, 33% federal gov't, 9% Canadian gov't, 15% union. You really think the stock is going to increase. Bet by Jan. it is under $30. Sold at a profit, I don't think so the stock had to have an IPO of over $100 to come close of paying back the federal gov't.

The shares sold were sold at a profit...

Scooby01_98 wrote:
Bailout was set up to be a profit for the federal gov't. However, it has stopped Pelosi and company from handing it back out with no payoff.

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say here.

Scooby01_98 wrote:
The healthcare reform that was enacted was not what the American people wanted. What passed was shoved down there throats as the people were smarter than the legislature to realize in the end it was going to cost the working Americans more money than the present system. By the way now over 130 companies have been granted an exemption by the Obama people.

Wasnt it you that said the dems were thrown out because the majority of the American people had spoken? By the same logic the majority of the American people elected Obama, and four years ago the majority of the american people voted for a democratic congress, so they American people had spoken, yes? Lets see if the GOP does anything about it once they realize that insurance companies are going to end up making more money.

Scooby01_98 wrote:
You can blame the previous administration for only so long. The Bush's economy wasn't that bad and didn't start to turn bad until the Rep lost the house in 2006.

I didn't blame the previous administration. You Know as well as I do that I have called out the Obama administration as well. I was only responding to awbinladen's assertion that I was blaming the previous administration... for what I don't know... In general there is plenty of blame to go around... the previous administration and the republican congress before it that decided to lower taxes and keep spending is a fair issue. The current administration is doing a poor job as well.

Scooby01_98 wrote:
The only good thing about the earmark moratorium is it might slow some of the stupid projects. Doubt it will make much of a difference. Now cutting the budget back to 2008 levels will save money. A balance budget amendment will save money.

The earmark moratorium is a smoke screen. It's non binding and lasts for only two years. They want to cut spending and the come up with their "pledge to America" that says they will cut spending on all but 80% of the budget (woohoo), and ban earmarks for two years unless they really want to use them. It's the same as you and others (rightly) criticizing the Obama administration for not allowing bills to be reviewed for two days prior to voting etc...

Honestly though, you are a smart guy, aren't you a bit disappointed by the GOP's approach (so far) to cut spending?

Lugar is right, earmarks should not be banned, but they should be subject to an up or down vote, just as any other bill's amendments.

You said cap & trade was dead a long time ago. It wasn't dead until November 3rd. 17 days isn't a long time ago.

IPO at $33 dollars is a profit but not enough to pay back the taxpayer in full. Actual if it sold for a penny it would be a profit just not a good one.

Barney Frank and Pelosi were trying to find a way divert the tarp funds for other liberal causes. The house committee put a stop to it even though it was held by the Dems.

Yep the American people put in Obama and that Dem congress in power. You see a lot of Dems, & independents having buyers (voters) remorse and it showed up in the polls on November 2nd.

How can I be disappointed the people elected having even been sworn in yet. They haven't had a chance to do anything.

Lugar needs to go, his time has passed.

awbinfortwayne wrote:Pez, you need to take a board break.

Wow... you managed to spell 'board.' Happy Thanksgiving week to you and yours.

Pez wrote:

awbinfortwayne wrote:Pez, you need to take a board break.

Wow... you managed to spell 'board.' Happy Thanksgiving week to you and yours.

I had a great Thanksgiving. It was liberal free!

awbinfortwayne wrote:

Pez wrote:

awbinfortwayne wrote:Pez, you need to take a board break.

Wow... you managed to spell 'board.' Happy Thanksgiving week to you and yours.

I had a great Thanksgiving. It was liberal free!

Thats impossible. Liberals ALWAYS cost you money.