RACK Senator Coburn

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:12 pm

Guy intro'd a spending amendment in the Senate to take spending appropriated to the so-called "Bridge-to-Nowhere" in Alaska to pay for replacing twin bridges in NOLA.

But Democrat Patty Murray has now threatened any Senator who votes with this spending amendment will have all spending in their districts scrutinized.

RACK Coburn.
UnWar petty Democrat Senators from Washington State.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:20 pm

Have Stevens or Murkowski chimed in yet?

The Republicans would have a lot more pork at stake than the Dems if "all spending in their districts" was scrutinized.

What's wrong with a little more scrutiny, hmmm? Isn't it supposed to be scrutinized in the first place (obviously there isn't nearly as much scrutiny as there should be)? This could be a good thing.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:22 pm

DrDetroit wrote:Guy intro'd a spending amendment in the Senate to take spending appropriated to the so-called "Bridge-to-Nowhere" in Alaska to pay for replacing twin bridges in NOLA.

But Democrat Patty Murray has now threatened any Senator who votes with this spending amendment will have all spending in their districts scrutinized.

RACK Coburn.
UnWar petty Democrat Senators from Washington State.

Why would Patty Murray care what happens to a pork project in a Republican state?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:41 pm

mvscal wrote:Questions?

And here I thought this was a one sided thing. Nice to see that a bipartisan atmosphere can still exist in Washington. :wink:

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:57 pm

Mikey wrote:Have Stevens or Murkowski chimed in yet?

The Republicans would have a lot more pork at stake than the Dems if "all spending in their districts" was scrutinized.

What's wrong with a little more scrutiny, hmmm? Isn't it supposed to be scrutinized in the first place (obviously there isn't nearly as much scrutiny as there should be)? This could be a good thing.

Nothing wrong with good faith scrutiny. What Patty Murray is doing is punative, though, entirely bad faith to punish those who would intend to actually scrutinize spending and reduce or eliminate pork spending.

Murray's only in it to reduce the likelihood pork spending will be reduced.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:58 pm

BSmack wrote:
DrDetroit wrote:Guy intro'd a spending amendment in the Senate to take spending appropriated to the so-called "Bridge-to-Nowhere" in Alaska to pay for replacing twin bridges in NOLA.

But Democrat Patty Murray has now threatened any Senator who votes with this spending amendment will have all spending in their districts scrutinized.

RACK Coburn.
UnWar petty Democrat Senators from Washington State.
Why would Patty Murray care what happens to a pork project in a Republican state?

Ask her, dumbshit.

It's obvious what she's doing. She's hoping to undermine any effort to reign in pork spending by threatening other Senators. She certainly is not interested in reigning in pork.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:15 pm

DrDetroit wrote:Ask her, dumbshit. It's obvious what she's doing. She's hoping to undermine any effort to reign in pork spending by threatening other Senators. She certainly is not interested in reigning in pork.

Nor am I.

sin

Ted Stevens.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:26 pm

I don't believe that I said Stevens was or not.

Who was the Alaska representative to Congress who called the idea of eliminating the pork in the recent transportation bill the dumbest thing he ever heard and told advocates to kiss his ear?

I think I even highlighted Steven's honor as "Porker of the Month" as selected by CAGW...

Nonetheless, I take it that you agree that Murray's threat is not at all indicative of any intent to reduce pork, but rather to punish those who seek to reduce pork.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:42 pm

DrDetroit wrote:I don't believe that I said Stevens was or not.

Who was the Alaska representative to Congress who called the idea of eliminating the pork in the recent transportation bill the dumbest thing he ever heard and told advocates to kiss his ear?

I think I even highlighted Steven's honor as "Porker of the Month" as selected by CAGW...

Nonetheless, I take it that you agree that Murray's threat is not at all indicative of any intent to reduce pork, but rather to punish those who seek to reduce pork.

There are very few true anti-pork reps in Congress. Most of them are guys who never GET any pork.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:52 pm

RACK Coburn for this, Mike Pence from Indiana, too.

Bill Frist better gets his shit together and get on board...

This is why slashing taxes is so important. We have to starve Congress as they will never forego additional servings.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:55 pm

DrDetroit wrote:RACK Coburn for this, Mike Pence from Indiana, too.

Bill Frist better gets his shit together and get on board...

This is why slashing taxes is so important. We have to starve Congress as they will never forego additional servings.

Yea, like the Senate Majority Leader is going to give up pork.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:55 pm

I was referring more to that nimrod's bullshit that there was no more cutting that could be done. :roll:

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:33 pm

DrDetroit wrote:I was referring more to that nimrod's bullshit that there was no more cutting that could be done. :roll:

Wasn't it inmate #1500753D (former Majority Leader) who made that statement?

T1B

RACK Senator Coburn

RACK Senator Coburn

Re: RACK Senator Coburn

Re: RACK Senator Coburn

Re: RACK Senator Coburn

Re: RACK Senator Coburn