The Fierce Urgency of Pork

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

often it seems that anyone who is open about their faith is somehow demonized. i just don't get why that is.

Because it's their faith, and has no place in policy making(involving people who aren't of their faith.) There are plenty of theocracies where they can go live in(this isn't one.) It never is going to be one. Every single time it's gotten close to going over the slope, the people here have corrected it. You can say what you want about OBA, and I actually don't disagree that much with most of it. However, the best part about him being in there is that the Religious Right isn't even gunna be close to having a real friend in there. The Religious Right isn't gunna get another Scalia, or Thomas for a long time.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

i disagree with him from time to time, but i've learned over 20 years of reading him to pay attention to what he says. Personally I feel he's strongest on foreign policy.

"The 9/11 attacks, Krauthammer wrote, made clear the new existential threat and the necessity for a new interventionism. On September 12, 2001 he wrote that, if the suspicion that al Qaeda was behind the attack proved correct, the United States had no choice but to go in to war in Afghanistan. He supported the Iraq war on the “realist" grounds of the strategic threat the Saddam regime posed to the region as UN sanctions were eroding and of his weapons of mass destruction; and on the "idealist" grounds that a self-sustaining democracy in Iraq would be a first step towards changing the poisonous political culture of tyranny, intolerance and religious fanaticism in the Arab world that had incubated the anti-American extremism from which 9/11 emerged."

I don't feel this was an example of strength. I feel it was an example of ignorance, because there is an assumption here that these Moslems (who had no idea what Democracy was) would choose to support Democracy(they didn't, and they won't.) There is a basic lack of understanding amongst American policy makers about the Islamic World. They care about Islam, and destroying Israel. Democracy is not on their radar. So, our best response would of been to keep terrorists out of this country by using the most hi-tech methods money could buy. That would of been a lot smarter than trying to make Moslems embrace Democracy. That's been a waste of American money, and lives.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

i disagree with him from time to time, but i've learned over 20 years of reading him to pay attention to what he says. Personally I feel he's strongest on foreign policy.

i guess i don't see why having an open disdain for the religious right is the right prescription for the Republicans. all too often it seems that anyone who is open about their faith is somehow demonized. i just don't get why that is.

it's not that others have issue with their faith. it's when it impacts policy making that i think some take an issue-stem cell research for example. or teaching evolution in school-we can't teach science in science class, it might confuse junior.
then there's the crackpot comments such as when katrina hit, and some said it was because of the sin down there.
when huck was governor here, he took offense when the tornado hit arkadelphia and did a LOT of damage. why was he offended? he didn't like that being referred to as an act of god. his god you see is one of love, etc. of course, he still doesn't want to include homosexuals as being beloved by their creator....

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

i guess i don't see why having an open disdain for the religious right is the right prescription for the Republicans. all too often it seems that anyone who is open about their faith is somehow demonized. i just don't get why that is.

Yep, that's America alright. Always demonizing people of faith.

We'll have a gay president before we have an atheist president.

[Danzig]

thomas jefferson was accused of being an atheist back when he was a candidate- as tho that should exclude someone. but you're right, it probably won't happen any time soon.

Charles Krauthammer

Its hard to read his stuff when his face
keeps getting into your head.

He looks like an oversized elf.
Bizarre looking fellow. I guess its
my problem though.

[Honu]

I just want the people who are making these decisons to really think about what the country needs and doesnt need . Some of the items that are in this package are just stupid and will have no effect on helping anyone now , which is the desperate plea we are hearing to pass it. I think dolling this money out in portions might be a better solution because how can anyone know what we will need 6 months down the road.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Danzig

this country hasn't exactly been doing well for a few years now. i find it fascinating that some are suddenly taking umbrage at the situation, when just a few months ago, all we saw was a defensive posture at the goings' on. oh, but it's a different party now, isn't it?
this is why i don't follow a party-party above country according to some, which i find to be shameful.

This basically sums it up. For eight years, all these terrible decisions were made, and all the right does is defend their guy. All these decisions lead us to where we are today, and all the sudden, Obama has had just over TWO WEEKS to work on things, and everyone is pissing all over everything because he hasn't fixed it. And of course people like Joey and people like me are defending him, because really, it's been TWO WEEKS.

Seriously, come talk to me in a year about it if you're still mad, then I'll tell you to think what another seven would feel like, and then we'll sort of have an idea of how the last decade has been.

And also, no Republican anywhere gets to complain about spending money for the next four years after what just happened. Not one. Not for anything. I think it's hilarious how after blank-checking everything King George wanted for eight years, all the sudden fiscal conservatism is all the rage again? I call bull$hit.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

and everyone is pissing all over everything

Wow, does this hit a sore spot. I have 4 dogs, and one of them is scared of his own shadow.

[Antitrust32]

Brian is definately correct about spending and now conservatives trying to be fiscal.

Bush sucked at keeping down spending. He kinda ruined it for us all.

Congress needs to be fired. every one of them. bring in some new and intelligent blood who have strict rules, term limits, and harsh penalties for looking out for only their own pocket.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Brian is definately correct about spending and now conservatives trying to be fiscal.

Bush sucked at keeping down spending. He kinda ruined it for us all.

Congress needs to be fired. every one of them. bring in some new and intelligent blood who have strict rules, term limits, and harsh penalties for looking out for only their own pocket.

this is what we need. president has limits, many states limit their reps and governors. the feds need to do the same.

um, yeah. good luck with that.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Brian is definately correct about spending and now conservatives trying to be fiscal.

Bush sucked at keeping down spending. He kinda ruined it for us all.

What ruined it for us all was letting the financial system get taken over by greedy scum. He encouraged very poor regulation. That's what 8 years of that fool resulted in(collapse.) Now, they bitch because we have to try to get out of it, and they want to tell us how to fix what they fkd up(amazing.) Don't you remember that friggin genius wanted people to buy stocks with their social security money? What a damn fool.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

This basically sums it up. For eight years, all these terrible decisions were made, and all the right does is defend their guy. All these decisions lead us to where we are today, and all the sudden, Obama has had just over TWO WEEKS to work on things, and everyone is pissing all over everything because he hasn't fixed it. And of course people like Joey and people like me are defending him, because really, it's been TWO WEEKS.

Seriously, come talk to me in a year about it if you're still mad, then I'll tell you to think what another seven would feel like, and then we'll sort of have an idea of how the last decade has been.

And also, no Republican anywhere gets to complain about spending money for the next four years after what just happened. Not one. Not for anything. I think it's hilarious how after blank-checking everything King George wanted for eight years, all the sudden fiscal conservatism is all the rage again? I call bull$hit.

So Obama is to be singularly measured against Bush? Exactly what package did Bush put through that called for almost a trillion dollars wth the majority of it having very little relation to economic stimulus? This is a disgraceful and spiteful piece of legislaltion that Obama will take the hit on (because no good can possibly come of it and you will only be able to blame Bush for so long) simply because he didn't take the bull by the horns and direct what went into it. He simply let Pelosi and gang take over. You know the people with the approval rating lower that W. What happened to change? So it's ok to spend like crazy because Bush did it? Again, what happened to change?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So Obama is to be singularly measured against Bush? Exactly what package did Bush put through that called for almost a trillion dollars wth the majority of it having very little relation to economic stimulus? This is a disgraceful and spiteful piece of legislaltion that Obama will take the hit on (because no good can possibly come of it and you will only be able to blame Bush for so long) simply because he didn't take the bull by the horns and direct what went into it. He simply let Pelosi and gang take over. You know the people with the approval rating lower that W. What happened to change? So it's ok to spend like crazy because Bush did it? Again, what happened to change?

Everyone on the right wants change until they realize it's change from Bush and maybe not change from Clinton...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Everyone on the right wants change until they realize it's change from Bush and maybe not change from Clinton...

Clinton never pillaged like this. Obama is the one who used the word. Some are just holding him to it. Doesnt seem like much change yet. Lots of politicians are not paying taxes (which explains the desire to raise them for the rest of us), Democrats are determined to outspend Bush, attempting media censorship, throwing more wasted money at social programs that simply do not work, etc...

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Clinton never pillaged like this. Obama is the one who used the word. Some are just holding him to it. Doesnt seem like much change yet. Lots of politicians are not paying taxes (which explains the desire to raise them for the rest of us), Democrats are determined to outspend Bush, attempting media censorship, throwing more wasted money at social programs that simply do not work, etc...

Democrats are determined to outspend Bush,

That...will be hard to do

throwing more wasted money at social programs

To each his own...A liberal was elected and these are liberal based initiaves. Should not be a surprise to anyone. When Bush was elected, I knew that Enron, etc was the price for losing. Now the NEA gets funded and I'm glad it is

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Democrats are determined to outspend Bush,

That...will be hard to do

throwing more wasted money at social programs

To each his own...A liberal was elected and these are liberal based initiaves. Should not be a surprise to anyone. When Bush was elected, I knew that Enron, etc was the price for losing. Now the NEA gets funded and I'm glad it is

NEA is the like .00005% of the issue. No one is complaining about funding arts. It is the other 899 billion that trouble us.

And being liberal based initiaves doesn't make them good or responsible when packaged as a "stimlus" package.

Again what happened to change and moderation and transparency? He said it, not the wacko, neo-con right.

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Clinton never pillaged like this. Obama is the one who used the word. Some are just holding him to it. Doesnt seem like much change yet. Lots of politicians are not paying taxes (which explains the desire to raise them for the rest of us), Democrats are determined to outspend Bush, attempting media censorship, throwing more wasted money at social programs that simply do not work, etc...

Dems don't care how high taxes are
they don't pay them

in order to fund this package Obama is going to nominate all fo the and they will pay their taxes and all our problems will be solved.

again I ask

so tell me why they have to take my money and give it to someone else so they can stimulate the economy?

why not just let me keep it and spend it myself.

he's just stealing from everyone and giving it to? gerbil worming experts?

[Cannon Shell]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123380033980550585.html

Found in the right leaning WSJ

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So Obama is to be singularly measured against Bush? Exactly what package did Bush put through that called for almost a trillion dollars wth the majority of it having very little relation to economic stimulus? This is a disgraceful and spiteful piece of legislaltion that Obama will take the hit on (because no good can possibly come of it and you will only be able to blame Bush for so long) simply because he didn't take the bull by the horns and direct what went into it. He simply let Pelosi and gang take over. You know the people with the approval rating lower that W. What happened to change? So it's ok to spend like crazy because Bush did it? Again, what happened to change?

No, he's not particularly measured singularly against Bush, but all the Congressional posturing from Republicans is nauseating considering that they had zero problem with running up all sorts of spending when it was Bush doing it, but all the sudden they have a problem with spending and want to return to fiscal conservatism.

It's transparent and nobody is falling for it. Republicans don't get to sit back and decide they care about reining in spending now, and talk a big talk, when they've spent the last eight years spending like mad people. Then again, having credibility in any argument at all hasn't exactly been their strong point since the turn of the century, so I shouldn't be all that surprised, really, that they still haven't managed to find any now.