Term limits for all!

I was so upset I called both Nancy P and my local reps office, who voted with her, to tell them how upset I was with their pork and run bill. What a load of crap while at war. Imagine if this had happened during WWII.

The Dems new slogan: "No Money for the Troops, only for Pork!"

"Shrimp Farmers or Troops? Only Shrimp Farmers Deserve our Support!"

Now people, Popeye Peeeloshi needed the spinish really bad. Hope it's still poisoned.

The comedy by the hypocrites continues. Can we stand two more years of the comedy or will we all die at the hands of the democrats friendly terrorist or starve to death because they used all the money for pork and some of us can't eat (don't get) any pork barrel money?

ROFL at the fools and especially the fools that are trying to make excuses for all the lies they told before the election. Everyone send they're congress critter the dictonary definition of 'ethical'. Copy the page from websters.

Well I think whatever the dhimmis do is just super-dooper. Just wait until we get the White House back.

Wow, CNN decrying pork...look at the pigs flying by!

First, the pork was to insure that Bush vetoed the bill. That way it's Bush who won't support the troops. Hell, that's a known fact he doesn't support the troops, but this really proves it.

Second, our elected people are just going to add more pork to it. Just as bad as cutting taxes while we are at war, right. Either way, more money not coming in. But who cares, none of us will have to pay for it, just our children and grandchildren.

Steve has the right idea about term limits, but let's take it a step further, 1 senator, 1 representative from each state, making the minimum wage from that state, no perks, etc. Each serve for two years, then all new ones elected at the same time. The savings alone from that would pay the war debt off. Just think about it.

After watching John Stossel's Enough! 20/20 program tonight, we need more Senators like Tom Coburn.

Mike: "First, the pork was to insure that Bush vetoed the bill."

Patently false. The pork was a payoff to help offset the political hit some members will absorb in going against their campaign persona.

This is not, to my mind, that big of a deal however. Many votes on principle are larded up with extras. It's often simply the going price for fully securing the votes you need.

Be honest, how many of you actually think that the Blue Dogs had "No Intention" whatsoever of supporting this kind of an effort? I'll bet some of them knew they would, but held out for an extra payoff. Not shocking. It's called politics.

Mike: "That way it's Bush who won't support the troops."

Since Mike's first premise was wrong, it's not surprising that this laughable lefty talking point is wrong as well. (this is akin to the lefts new-found "pride" in having "helped defeat the Soviet Union" that the lefties touted from the '90's on, after spending 30 years undermining every challenge to the Soviets that the Conservatives engineered.)

Mike: "Hell, that's a known fact he doesn't support the troops, but this really proves it."

More of the same. The "troops" by and large know exactly who "supports" them and who doesn't.

Mike: "Just as bad as cutting taxes while we are at war, right."

Well, wrong actually. Since cutting taxes leads to stronger economic performance and activity, which lead to greater tax receipts, which leads to greater ability to fund efforts.

For the reverse of this scenario, see "Western Europe".

Mike: "Either way, more money not coming in. But who cares, none of us will have to pay for it, just our children and grandchildren."

Of course, "more money" is coming in, but why let that stop a good rant.

Where are all the rejects from kos kiddies? Oh I know what it is, they like pork better then "crow". snicker snicker

The comedy by the hypocrites continues.
...
Everyone send they're congress critter the dictonary definition of 'ethical'.

But if the Dems are "hypocrites", that must mean they're doing what they complained about Republicans doing. So not only do you admit the Republicans were doing it, but you also claim it's "unethical". Is that your position now, Scrappy? That when the Republicans were in power they engaged in unethical pork spending?

It's so amusing watching you contradict yourself. That's where the real "comedy" is! Keep it coming!

CNN is not nearly as bad as most Republicans make it out to be.

Yes, they have their left leaning analysts, but when it comes to actually reporting the news, CNN isn't so bad.

FOX is not nearly as bad as most Democrats make it out to be.

Yes, they have their right leaning analysts, but when it comes to actually reporting the news, FOX isn't so bad.

Yes CNN is as bad as Repubs say it is. I watch it along with FOX and MSNBC and FOX is the only one that doesnt make we scream at the TV. Way too biased on the other two.

CNN critical of Democrats? But I thought they were part of the liberal media?

Publicus, they are. Just because they (CNN) criticise the ethics of the democrats does not make them conservative or even balanced in their approach to new reporting. But then you are too bias to understand that. Persons such as your self make me wish dueling was not illegal.

Dissecting CNN's second string infotainment product because it seems to agree with the RNC. Lookin' for love in all the wrong places, indeed.

Pork for Surrender. Obviously after the thinking person's vote.
===========================================

FRANKEN, (voice over): "That was the rallying cry from the newly in-charge Democrats, the wheeling and dealing and hidden pork barrel spending would be no more. Fast forward just 10 weeks. Democratic leaders face their biggest challenge so far. The legislation providing $124 billion in war funding, combined with a troop pullout from Iraq next year. And they're using every tool at their command. The same tools they criticized the Republicans for using -- good, old fashioned pork."

You can see from the above the dimmers and the MSM made a big deal about how open and honest this "New Leadership" was going to be. Well, 10 weeks later and they are back to very old form. ww

Isn't it interesting that both the Hebrew and Islamic systems eschew pork? I guess our kind of legislative system is simply a function of our Christian foundations that encourages porcine mastication.

If CNN wasn't biased, they wouldn't let the Democrats away with calling this a Funding Bill, when in fact it is a Defunding Bill.

I've heard the public health rationale, e, but also one that demonstrates that in a desert environment, pigs competed too closely with us for the same ecological niche.
===============================

I keep hearing about the "New direction for America" This seems to show that I have misunderstood the phrase. It is actually a "Nude erection for America.

Newt's Insurrection?

Condom for America?
==============