That didn't take long... Tea Party Caucus takes 1 Billion in earmarks

[NYSportsGuy210]

Bill Maher had it best. He said Republicans tend to be the type of people who love to blow stuff up, overindulge themselves in materialistic things and trash anything that it isn't big, bad and gaudy.

Think about it....from a human stand point....doesn't this strike you as immature qualities of a selfish human being? Forget parties....I am talking form a HUMAN STAND POINT.

And right now in this country....what we don't need is immaturity and low self confidence people.

We need sacrifice, compassion of those with a lot to give a little to those who don't have much. After all, as the theory on decreasing utility says....if someone gets 8 cheeseburgers a day and yet all he and his family need are 6 to be totally full and satisfied....what benefit does he get from those two extra cheeseburgers he'll never need to use?

But take those two cheeseburgers and redistribute them to your fellow poor Americans who haven't eaten in days....and all of a sudden those cheeseburgers mean a tremendous amount by actually saving starving lives. Best part is, you as the elite in cheeseburgers are now looked at as a hero. Now who wouldn't want to be known for this? (Metaphor for money distribution)


This was the way America saved itself from destruction during the Great Depression. This is what we need to do NOW.

[The Madcap]

Bill Maher had it best. He said Republicans tend to be the type of people who love to blow stuff up, overindulge themselves in materialistic things and trash anything that it isn't big, bad and gaudy.

Think about it....from a human stand point....doesn't this strike you as immature qualities of a selfish human being? Forget parties....I am talking form a HUMAN STAND POINT.

And right now in this country....what we don't need is immaturity and low self confidence people.

We need sacrifice, compassion of those with a lot to give a little to those who don't have much. After all, as the theory on decreasing utility says....if someone gets 8 cheeseburgers a day and yet all he and his family need are 6 to be totally full and satisfied....what benefit does he get from those two extra cheeseburgers he'll never need to use?

But take those two cheeseburgers and redistribute them to your fellow poor Americans who haven't eaten in days....and all of a sudden those cheeseburgers mean a tremendous amount by actually saving starving lives. Best part is, you as the elite in cheeseburgers are now looked at as a hero. Now who wouldn't want to be known for this? (Metaphor for money distribution)


This was the way America saved itself from destruction during the Great Depression. This is what we need to do NOW.

Sorry brother, but you can't tell me the elitist liberals and their desire to be on the cutting edge of fashion, drink the best wines, own the best furniture, always have the newest technologies, support recreational drug use and promote a hedonistic sexual life-style are any less self-indulgent than your average Republican. Doesn't matter if you're a liberal or a conservative, as long as you're an American and you've got money, then you're going to be a bit self-indulgent. That's just the way it is.

[BeatingBaseball]

NY210 - WOW - I thought Karl Marx was dead.

So you're one of the rare ones who openly admits what you are.

[The Madcap]

You repubs "love" america but won't help out poor Americans and start wars that your spoiled children won't fight!!! Let's just take away the cops out of places that want small government so they can see how much they need help!!

I don't know where you're from where Republican children don't fight, but in North Carolina that ain't the damn case. You've served, so certainly your first hand experience carries more weight than mine, but I 've spent a lot of time around Fort Bragg and Camp Lejune with buddies of mine who've served, and the ratio of Repub to Dem was about 6-1. I just talked to a Marine friend of mine about your comment, and he said "yeah, that's bullshit. We hate liberals." So, maybe it's a regional thing. But down here our soldiers are mostly GOP members. Maybe the children of rich Republicans don't fight, but the children of rich people don't do shit period. Palin's kids fight, I know that. There a few more GOP congressmen who's kids are over there, but their names escape me at the moment.

If they took the cops out of places that want small government, I guarantee you crime would go down real quick. Places that want small government have more than enough gun owners willing to put criminals down.

[BeatingBaseball]

ugh politics... isn't the republican party suppose to be a party of the rich and helping their class interests? i don't get why middle class and poor folks who might benefit from the democratic economic policy don't act in their own interest and vote democrat, but instead vote republican who they agree with on social issues (abortion, gay rights, cloning, etc) even though this won't effect their bottom line. Don't the Republicans help the highest one percent of the public the most or something? at the same time i don't understand really wealthy people who vote democrat. Might be the tax shelters so they don't have to pay squat no matter what party comes into power and so they can go with however they feel on the social issues.

CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN THIS TO ME?

What you really need explained to you are the fundamental principles upon which this country was founded and which distinguish us from the shithole banana republics around the world. You have to learn enough to see thru the bullshit the liberals spew in appealing to your envy and youthful naivete. You have to learn enough to realize that guys like the ones who put NY210's ideas in his head are playing you and consider you a "useful idiot."

[King Mayan]

I don't know where you're from where Republican children don't fight, but in North Carolina that ain't the damn case. You've served, so certainly your first hand experience carries more weight than mine, but I 've spent a lot of time around Fort Bragg and Camp Lejune with buddies of mine who've served, and the ratio of Repub to Dem was about 6-1. I just talked to a Marine friend of mine about your comment, and he said "yeah, that's bullshit. We hate liberals." So, maybe it's a regional thing. But down here our soldiers are mostly GOP members. Maybe the children of rich Republicans don't fight, but the children of rich people don't do shit period. Palin's kids fight, I know that. There a few more GOP congressmen who's kids are over there, but their names escape me at the moment.

If they took the cops out of places that want small government, I guarantee you crime would go down real quick. Places that want small government have more than enough gun owners willing to put criminals down.

First I'm not a liberal...second most of the guys from those states are repubs because of their bigot father brainwashing them even though they were poor and collecting food stamps or disability... And trust me when shit hit the fan in Iraq, we loved(crazy?) it but everybody hated repubs that put us there...

[McBa1n]

Very unintelligent at best. At worst - well it's much worse...If the rich pay for the rest of us, everything will be okay???
There needs to be hope, hard work and accountability from the bottom up and The top down. Your words/that kind of thinking reek of envy and jealousy - not to mention a stunted mind ...This will get us no where, and then we will get what we truly deserve.

I expect more from someone who does not watch Fox News.

First of all, respect on your avatar. Jonah, love that show.
You are absolutely correct on accountability. I cannot and will not debate that. I think you're offbase, however, in attacking my position.

Firstly, yes, the rich deserve to pay an incredible share of taxes. If you own 90%+ of the wealth, then you SHOULD be on the hook for 90%+ of the 'tax'. The incredibly wealthy are the ones that keep the working poor on government programs. Look at how many people work at a truely large corporation like say a Walmart or McDonalds and how those people NEED to live on the goverment handouts. If said companies paid a proper living wage, then the debate ends. It's just, said corporations don't care and no one has the muscle to deal with them.

People need to eat. People need to just be. I could give a rats ass if some douche is eating condor eggs off a Panda's scrotum and then goes on to buy the Dallas Cowboys before lunch. We're all going to die. It doesn't matter if I eat ramen or dodo testicles. The thing about 'taste' is in your perception and was created by humans anyway.

I figure my bigger point is that wealth creates wealth. You have 0 upward mobility when you live paycheck to paycheck. That's not always a choice in life. Some people work 2-3 jobs and their net worth is about that of anyone on these forums taint. Do you want that job? Hell no. Do you deserve to pay taxes on the same level as someone that just earned 10 billion dollars using cheap slave labor overseas? That's the issue. Most of the US's wealth was created on slavery. It's not too far offbase today.

The way I see it is, fox snews gets the working dumbass poor to get FIRED UP about how pissed off they are about some black guy or some gay person doing something. Without that anger, the system we currently have dies. Via religion and state, and fox's hard work to use both angles for control via fear, yes, we're all f'd. Their techniques of fear are spot on of that of Pravda or Tass, or any other Soviet state controlled press. An ignorant society that fights over nothing breeds ignorant politicans that fight over nothing.

Realistically, Jonah, I kind of like what you have to say. But that requires more of a utopia than what is really going on. The rich cannot pay for everything. However, the rich have to pay on levels to help offset their bootstomp on their employees. Further, fox snews tends to favor the agenda of the billionaire and not that of the working schlep, yet, for some reason, by fear, they control so many irresponsibly shamelessly.

[McBa1n]

Actually, voting for Democrats if you want to become a millionaire is dumber.

Thank (R) Bill Frist for making sure it only gets harder, at least for punters or card players.

[The Madcap]

First I'm not a liberal...second most of the guys from those states are repubs because of their bigot father brainwashing them even though they were poor and collecting food stamps or disability... And trust me when shit hit the fan in Iraq, we loved(crazy?) it but everybody hated repubs that put us there...

Oh. Is that it? I guess I didn't realize that was the reason seeing that such a large chunk of my service friends are black, Asian, and Hispanic. So I guess they've been brainwashed too?

[DeluxeLiner]

What you really need explained to you are the fundamental principles upon which this country was founded and which distinguish us from the shithole banana republics around the world. You have to learn enough to see thru the bullshit the liberals spew in appealing to your envy and youthful naivete. You have to learn enough to realize that guys like the ones who put NY210's ideas in his head are playing you and consider you a "useful idiot."

You didn't say anything here other than empty rhetoric. I don't have envy, you don't say why you think i have envy. "Fundamental principles"? To what are you referring? Weird attempt to appeal to tradition. Who is playing me? Is it the limo democrats I was talking about or the poor republicans? I was asking about why people are part of a particular party when it doesn't seem to actually be there best option.

[andywend]

King Mayan, you most certainly are a liberal democrat though I understand why you are ashamed to admit it.

Since you refer to yourself as an ex-Marine, it sounds like you were DISHONORABLY discharged as your behavior in this forum would certainly be classified as conduct unbecoming a United States Marine.

Many liberal democrats ask the question as to why the middle classes and the working poor continue to support the republican party over the democrats even though it might be in their best interest to switch:

When you think about it, I'm sure its perplexing to liberals as to why the republicans are ever able to win an election considering that if you make less than $75,000/annually, from a strict financial standpoint, you're probably better off voting democratic.

The only reason why a republican party still exists today is due to the democratic party's stance on ENTITLEMENTS.

The democratic party is EXTREMELY EAGER to pay people money for doing nothing (from welfare assistance to wanting to pay the unemployed benefits for 100+ weeks and beyond). This issue ENRAGES the working class (especially minimum wage workers).

Imagine an individual (we'll call him Tom) who isn't terribly intelligent and has to resort to working at McDonald's 40 hours per week. Tom starts off at minimum wage making $7.25/hour or $290/week for a full 40 hour work week. He lives in an apartment building which he shares with a fellow worker.

Tom starts talking to the tenant to his left and finds out he has collected welfare for the last 10 years. The welfare recepient tells Tom that he gets $250 week tax free along with all sorts of extra subsidies like food stamps, housing assistance, etc. Tom then meets up with the tenant to his right who tells Tom he has been on unemployment for the last 99 weeks and is worried that the republicans are trying to cut him off. He tells Tom that he currently collects $350/week unemployment.

Every day when Tom leaves for work he notices that the tenants to his left and right are lounging by the apartment pool everyday and when Tom gets home from work he sees these 2 guys barbecuing some food and drinking beer relaxing on the couch watching Monday Night Football.

Tom reads about how the democrats want to extend unemployment benefits beyond 99 weeks and how most republicans are against it. Tom also realizes that the democrats are big believers in the welfare state while the republicans want to slash welfare spending.

Here we have Tom who is a minimum wage worker making $290/week (around $15,000/year) and when election time comes around, he runs to the polls to vote republican. When the topic of politics rolls around, Tom tells his 2 deadbeat neighbors that he voted republican and neither one can believe it. They tell Tom how crazy he is to vote republican because republicans only care about the rich.

There are MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of low income working class voters like Tom who vote republican because it sickens them that the democrats want to pay those that REFUSE to work a higher wage than he makes with far better benefits.

If the democratic party stripped away the SOCIAL ENTITLEMENT component of their platform and chose to concentrate on helping out the people who are currently working as opposed to doing so much for those that REFUSE to work, our country would have a 1 party system with 2% unemployment. The republican party would CEASE TO EXIST.

[19th Hole]

Hey...What's the big deal about "earmarks"?

When I was a freshman in college I had been partying
hard on a Friday night. My girlfriend pierced my ear.
Well, after a week it became infected and I had
a terrible "earmark". It was pretty easy to get rid
of the "earmark"...
All that I had to do was take out the earring and
pat alcohol on the infected area. Presto.... the infection
went away... the "earmark" was total gone.... and
you could never tell that my ear had been pierced.

I hope this helps with your "earmark" situation.

[DeluxeLiner]

andywend i feel you...i have heard of the "social entitlement" you are talking about. nobody likes freeloaders. i doubt anyone would be in favor of this other than the freeloaders themselves that are taking advantage of the system. i don't believe that there is a huge population that does this but the small group that do this piss the rest of us off and i believe that republicans play into this (smart politicking). there also seems like there are folks who are legitimately having problems finding work. there needs to be a happy medium.

i do believe that the vast majority of people are being manipulated because the very wealthy is a minority faction yet they seem to reap the most benefits overall. it's gross that the middle and lower class seems to pay while the rich get tax exemptions. Ya think that would piss Tom off too.

also republicans and their association with fundamental Christians as well as their anti-gay speech I find extremely disappointing. This is mostly an economic discussion so I guess that can be fought another day.

[Thor4140]

v
v The reality is that the GOP, on the whole, is fairly unified in banning earmarks. I think that's a positive thing. It's commendable. And yet all you liberal douchebags want to do is focus on the negative and call them hypocrites, like every one of your ideas isn't conflicted with some sort of hypocrisy at some point.

By Reid Wilson
National Journal

Members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus may tout their commitment to cutting government spending now, but they used the 111th Congress to request hundreds of earmarks that, taken cumulatively, added more than $1 billion to the federal budget.

According to a Hotline review of records compiled by Citizens Against Government Waste, the 52 members of the caucus, which pledges to cut spending and reduce the size of government, requested a total of 764 earmarks valued at $1,049,783,150 during Fiscal Year 2010, the last year for which records are available.

"It's disturbing to see the Tea Party Caucus requested that much in earmarks. This is their time to put up or shut up, to be blunt," said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste. "There's going to be a huge backlash if they continue to request earmarks."

In founding the caucus in July, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she was giving voice to Americans who were sick of government overspending.

[How do deficit-cutters sell the U.S. on pain?]

"The American people are speaking out loud and clear. They have had enough of the spending, the bureaucracy, and the government-knows-best mentality running rampant today throughout the halls of Congress," Bachmann said in a July 15 statement. The group, she wrote in a letter to House Administration Committee chairman Bob Brady, "will serve as an informal group of Members dedicated to promote Americans' call for fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited government."

Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual Congressional Pig Book. But others have requested millions of dollars in special projects.

Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.

[With jobs at issue, what is Washington doing?]

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the tea partier with his name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88 projects, either solely or by co-signing earmark requests with Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own, Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.

More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29 caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50 million in funding.

Most offices did not respond right away to a request for comment. Those that did said they supported Republicans' new efforts to ban earmarks.

[Will Obama's winning campaign plan be used against him in 2012?]

Alexander, for one, "stands with his fellow Republicans in the House in supporting the current earmark ban. Since joining the Tea Party Caucus in July, he has not submitted any earmark requests and has withdrawn his outstanding requests that were included in the most recent Water Resources Development Act," said Jamie Hanks, his communications director.

Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.), who requested 25 earmarks in the last Fiscal Year at a total cost of just over $80 million, has agreed to abide by the Republican earmark ban, according to spokesman Adam Buckalew. "He supported the moratorium and the prohibition adopted recently by the Conference on House earmarks for the 112th Congress," Buckalew said of Harper.

"It's easy to be a member of the TEA Party Caucus because, like them, I agree that we're Taxed Enough Already and we've got to balance the budget by cutting spending instead of raising taxes. Deficit spending is not new, but the unprecedented rate of spending in Congress is," Rehberg said in a statement emailed by his office. "Montanans have tightened their belts, and it's way past time for Congress to follow their lead. The TEA Party Caucus is about listening to concerned Americans who want to fundamentally change how Congress spends their tax dollars. On that, we're in total agreement."

[For America's 10 wealthiest Congressional Districts, it will be more happy holidays]

Bachmann's office did not respond to emails or phone calls seeking comment.

Still, some Republicans -- albeit none who belong to the Tea Party Caucus -- have said they will not abide by the voluntary earmark ban. And, said CAGW's Williams, the anti-spending organization isn't waiting with baited breath.

"Seeing is believing. It's going to take a lot more than rhetoric to convince us," he said.

A list of Tea Party Caucus members and their earmark requests in Fiscal Year 2010, courtesy of Citizens Against Government Waste's Pig Book:

NAME EARMARKS AMOUNT

Aderholt (R-AL) 69 $78,263,000

Akin (R-MO) 9 $14,709,000

Alexander (R-LA) 41 $65,395,000

Bachmann (R-MN) 0 0

Barton (R-TX) 14 $12,269,400

Bartlett (R-MD) 19 $43,060,650

Bilirakis (R-FL) 14 $13,600,000

R. Bishop (R-UT) 47 $93,980,000

Burgess (R-TX) 15 $15,804,400

Broun (R-GA) 0 0

Burton (R-IN) 0 0

Carter (R-TX) 26 $42,232,000

Coble (R-NC) 19 $18,755,000

Coffman (R-CO) 0 0

Crenshaw (R-FL) 37 $54,424,000

Culberson (R-TX) 22 $33,792,000

Fleming (R-LA) 10 $31,489,000

Franks (R-AZ) 8 $14,300,000

Gingrey (R-GA) 19 $16,100,000

Gohmert (R-TX) 15 $7,099,000

S. Graves (R-MO) 11 $8,331,000

R. Hall (R-TX) 16 $12,232,000

Harper (R-MS) 25 $80,402,000

Herger (R-CA) 5 $5,946,000

Hoekstra (R-MI) 9 $6,392,000

Jenkins (R-KS) 12 $24,628,000

S. King (R-IA) 13 $6,650,000

Lamborn (R-CO) 6 $16,020,000

Luetkemeyer (R-MO) 0 0

Lummis (R-WY) 0 0

Marchant (R-TX) 0 0

McClintock (R-CA) 0 0

Gary Miller (R-CA) 15 $19,627,500

Jerry Moran (R-KS) 22 $19,400,000

Myrick (R-NC) 0 0

Neugebauer (R-TX) 0 0

Pence (R-IN) 0 0

Poe (R-TX) 12 $7,913,000

T. Price (R-GA) 0 0

Rehberg (R-MT) 88 $100,514,200

Roe (R-TN) 0 0

Royce (R-CA) 7 $6,545,000

Scalise (R-LA) 20 $17,388,000

P. Sessions (R-TX) 0 0

Shadegg (R-AZ) 0 0

Adrian Smith (R-NE) 1 $350,000

L. Smith (R-TX) 18 $14,078,000

Stearns (R-FL) 17 $15,472,000

Tiahrt (R-KS) 39 $63,400,000

Wamp (R-TN) 14 $34,544,000

Westmoreland (R-GA) 0 0

Wilson (R-SC) 15 $23,334,000

TOTAL 764 $1,049,783,150

[itchypickle]

andywend i feel you...i have heard of the "social entitlement" you are talking about. nobody likes freeloaders. i doubt anyone would be in favor of this other than the freeloaders themselves that are taking advantage of the system. i don't believe that there is a huge population that does this but the small group that do this piss the rest of us off and i believe that republicans play into this (smart politicking). there also seems like there are folks who are legitimately having problems finding work. there needs to be a happy medium.

i do believe that the vast majority of people are being manipulated because the very wealthy is a minority faction yet they seem to reap the most benefits overall. it's gross that the middle and lower class seems to pay while the rich get tax exemptions. Ya think that would piss Tom off too.

also republicans and their association with fundamental Christians as well as their anti-gay speech I find extremely disappointing. This is mostly an economic discussion so I guess that can be fought another day.

Regarding the entitlements, it's no wonder why the 'youth vote' and lower earners always go to the Dems especially in 2008. The Dem platform is consistently built on promising a litany of entitlements at hardly any cost to those who want this sort of thing. Outlandish promises of programs with little or no cost to THEM....helluva a deal isn't it. But in reality, one needs to look no further that municipalities where Dems have ran on this for decades and the same people keep falling for it and believing the Dems will actually 'look out for the little guy and help him up'....look at California, Detroit, Atlanta, Chicago, New Orleans.....the education system, crimes rates, employment, and deficits

The look at areas like Texas, Florida panhandle, etc.....

[King Mayan]

King Mayan, you most certainly are a liberal democrat though I understand why you are ashamed to admit it.

Since you refer to yourself as an ex-Marine, it sounds like you were DISHONORABLY discharged as your behavior in this forum would certainly be classified as conduct unbecoming a United States Marine.

Many liberal democrats ask the question as to why the middle classes and the working poor continue to support the republican party over the democrats even though it might be in their best interest to switch:

When you think about it, I'm sure its perplexing to liberals as to why the republicans are ever able to win an election considering that if you make less than $75,000/annually, from a strict financial standpoint, you're probably better off voting democratic.

The only reason why a republican party still exists today is due to the democratic party's stance on ENTITLEMENTS.

The democratic party is EXTREMELY EAGER to pay people money for doing nothing (from welfare assistance to wanting to pay the unemployed benefits for 100+ weeks and beyond). This issue ENRAGES the working class (especially minimum wage workers).

Imagine an individual (we'll call him Tom) who isn't terribly intelligent and has to resort to working at McDonald's 40 hours per week. Tom starts off at minimum wage making $7.25/hour or $290/week for a full 40 hour work week. He lives in an apartment building which he shares with a fellow worker.

Tom starts talking to the tenant to his left and finds out he has collected welfare for the last 10 years. The welfare recepient tells Tom that he gets $250 week tax free along with all sorts of extra subsidies like food stamps, housing assistance, etc. Tom then meets up with the tenant to his right who tells Tom he has been on unemployment for the last 99 weeks and is worried that the republicans are trying to cut him off. He tells Tom that he currently collects $350/week unemployment.

Every day when Tom leaves for work he notices that the tenants to his left and right are lounging by the apartment pool everyday and when Tom gets home from work he sees these 2 guys barbecuing some food and drinking beer relaxing on the couch watching Monday Night Football.

Tom reads about how the democrats want to extend unemployment benefits beyond 99 weeks and how most republicans are against it. Tom also realizes that the democrats are big believers in the welfare state while the republicans want to slash welfare spending.

Here we have Tom who is a minimum wage worker making $290/week (around $15,000/year) and when election time comes around, he runs to the polls to vote republican. When the topic of politics rolls around, Tom tells his 2 deadbeat neighbors that he voted republican and neither one can believe it. They tell Tom how crazy he is to vote republican because republicans only care about the rich.

There are MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of low income working class voters like Tom who vote republican because it sickens them that the democrats want to pay those that REFUSE to work a higher wage than he makes with far better benefits.

If the democratic party stripped away the SOCIAL ENTITLEMENT component of their platform and chose to concentrate on helping out the people who are currently working as opposed to doing so much for those that REFUSE to work, our country would have a 1 party system with 2% unemployment. The republican party would CEASE TO EXIST.

piece of shit f\*g I got my arm shot up(April 4th 05 ramadi) for all you pussies that take money from your dad and want to bash the poor!! I enlisted months after 9/11 while you female ass was scared to see a Muslim!!

[King Mayan]

Oh. Is that it? I guess I didn't realize that was the reason seeing that such a large chunk of my service friends are black, Asian, and Hispanic. So I guess they've been brainwashed too?

Shit I voted for McCain.. Trust me we get proud of our war service and vote for tough guys... But most service men are from poor families and are truly conservitive democrats!!! I also hate people that don't work because they don't want to... But we can punish the rest because of some lowlifes...

[DwightShrute]

Bill Maher had it best. He said Republicans tend to be the type of people who love to blow stuff up, overindulge themselves in materialistic things and trash anything that it isn't big, bad and gaudy.

Think about it....from a human stand point....doesn't this strike you as immature qualities of a selfish human being? Forget parties....I am talking form a HUMAN STAND POINT.

And right now in this country....what we don't need is immaturity and low self confidence people.

We need sacrifice, compassion of those with a lot to give a little to those who don't have much. After all, as the theory on decreasing utility says....if someone gets 8 cheeseburgers a day and yet all he and his family need are 6 to be totally full and satisfied....what benefit does he get from those two extra cheeseburgers he'll never need to use?

But take those two cheeseburgers and redistribute them to your fellow poor Americans who haven't eaten in days....and all of a sudden those cheeseburgers mean a tremendous amount by actually saving starving lives. Best part is, you as the elite in cheeseburgers are now looked at as a hero. Now who wouldn't want to be known for this? (Metaphor for money distribution)


This was the way America saved itself from destruction during the Great Depression. This is what we need to do NOW.

Bill Maher? Really? This guy is a nut job. While he's not stupid he sure ain't close to being fair and definitely is way to the left. Look at the post again and how dare he lump all republicans into one false statement while purposely leaving out the Liberals and the huge wasteful salaries to their union buddies all over the USA. Do you see any unions declining pay increases in California when the state is trillions in debt? Do you the transit workers in NY declining STIMULUS money for a pay raise earlier this year? No you don't and no cheeseburgers will be given to the poor either. Did Pelosi send cheeseburgers to the poor rather spending 16K tax payers money on flowers for her office? Nope.

Hypocrites and Maher is one of the biggest

[The Madcap]

By Reid Wilson
National Journal

Members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus may tout their commitment to cutting government spending now, but they used the 111th Congress to request hundreds of earmarks that, taken cumulatively, added more than $1 billion to the federal budget.

According to a Hotline review of records compiled by Citizens Against Government Waste, the 52 members of the caucus, which pledges to cut spending and reduce the size of government, requested a total of 764 earmarks valued at $1,049,783,150 during Fiscal Year 2010, the last year for which records are available.

"It's disturbing to see the Tea Party Caucus requested that much in earmarks. This is their time to put up or shut up, to be blunt," said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste. "There's going to be a huge backlash if they continue to request earmarks."

In founding the caucus in July, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she was giving voice to Americans who were sick of government overspending.

[How do deficit-cutters sell the U.S. on pain?]

"The American people are speaking out loud and clear. They have had enough of the spending, the bureaucracy, and the government-knows-best mentality running rampant today throughout the halls of Congress," Bachmann said in a July 15 statement. The group, she wrote in a letter to House Administration Committee chairman Bob Brady, "will serve as an informal group of Members dedicated to promote Americans' call for fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited government."

Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual Congressional Pig Book. But others have requested millions of dollars in special projects.

Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.

[With jobs at issue, what is Washington doing?]

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the tea partier with his name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88 projects, either solely or by co-signing earmark requests with Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own, Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.

More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29 caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50 million in funding.

Most offices did not respond right away to a request for comment. Those that did said they supported Republicans' new efforts to ban earmarks.

[Will Obama's winning campaign plan be used against him in 2012?]

Alexander, for one, "stands with his fellow Republicans in the House in supporting the current earmark ban. Since joining the Tea Party Caucus in July, he has not submitted any earmark requests and has withdrawn his outstanding requests that were included in the most recent Water Resources Development Act," said Jamie Hanks, his communications director.

Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.), who requested 25 earmarks in the last Fiscal Year at a total cost of just over $80 million, has agreed to abide by the Republican earmark ban, according to spokesman Adam Buckalew. "He supported the moratorium and the prohibition adopted recently by the Conference on House earmarks for the 112th Congress," Buckalew said of Harper.

"It's easy to be a member of the TEA Party Caucus because, like them, I agree that we're Taxed Enough Already and we've got to balance the budget by cutting spending instead of raising taxes. Deficit spending is not new, but the unprecedented rate of spending in Congress is," Rehberg said in a statement emailed by his office. "Montanans have tightened their belts, and it's way past time for Congress to follow their lead. The TEA Party Caucus is about listening to concerned Americans who want to fundamentally change how Congress spends their tax dollars. On that, we're in total agreement."

[For America's 10 wealthiest Congressional Districts, it will be more happy holidays]

Bachmann's office did not respond to emails or phone calls seeking comment.

Still, some Republicans -- albeit none who belong to the Tea Party Caucus -- have said they will not abide by the voluntary earmark ban. And, said CAGW's Williams, the anti-spending organization isn't waiting with baited breath.

"Seeing is believing. It's going to take a lot more than rhetoric to convince us," he said.

A list of Tea Party Caucus members and their earmark requests in Fiscal Year 2010, courtesy of Citizens Against Government Waste's Pig Book:

NAME EARMARKS AMOUNT

Aderholt (R-AL) 69 $78,263,000

Akin (R-MO) 9 $14,709,000

Alexander (R-LA) 41 $65,395,000

Bachmann (R-MN) 0 0

Barton (R-TX) 14 $12,269,400

Bartlett (R-MD) 19 $43,060,650

Bilirakis (R-FL) 14 $13,600,000

R. Bishop (R-UT) 47 $93,980,000

Burgess (R-TX) 15 $15,804,400

Broun (R-GA) 0 0

Burton (R-IN) 0 0

Carter (R-TX) 26 $42,232,000

Coble (R-NC) 19 $18,755,000

Coffman (R-CO) 0 0

Crenshaw (R-FL) 37 $54,424,000

Culberson (R-TX) 22 $33,792,000

Fleming (R-LA) 10 $31,489,000

Franks (R-AZ) 8 $14,300,000

Gingrey (R-GA) 19 $16,100,000

Gohmert (R-TX) 15 $7,099,000

S. Graves (R-MO) 11 $8,331,000

R. Hall (R-TX) 16 $12,232,000

Harper (R-MS) 25 $80,402,000

Herger (R-CA) 5 $5,946,000

Hoekstra (R-MI) 9 $6,392,000

Jenkins (R-KS) 12 $24,628,000

S. King (R-IA) 13 $6,650,000

Lamborn (R-CO) 6 $16,020,000

Luetkemeyer (R-MO) 0 0

Lummis (R-WY) 0 0

Marchant (R-TX) 0 0

McClintock (R-CA) 0 0

Gary Miller (R-CA) 15 $19,627,500

Jerry Moran (R-KS) 22 $19,400,000

Myrick (R-NC) 0 0

Neugebauer (R-TX) 0 0

Pence (R-IN) 0 0

Poe (R-TX) 12 $7,913,000

T. Price (R-GA) 0 0

Rehberg (R-MT) 88 $100,514,200

Roe (R-TN) 0 0

Royce (R-CA) 7 $6,545,000

Scalise (R-LA) 20 $17,388,000

P. Sessions (R-TX) 0 0

Shadegg (R-AZ) 0 0

Adrian Smith (R-NE) 1 $350,000

L. Smith (R-TX) 18 $14,078,000

Stearns (R-FL) 17 $15,472,000

Tiahrt (R-KS) 39 $63,400,000

Wamp (R-TN) 14 $34,544,000

Westmoreland (R-GA) 0 0

Wilson (R-SC) 15 $23,334,000

TOTAL 764 $1,049,783,150

Oh, no! I'm busted! You got me with facts! Now I must lower my head in shame and admit I'm wrong!

IDIOT.

Do you even understand the context of these numbers? Are you the least bit insightful enough to figure out how an elected official makes the decisions he does and why?

These numbers are from requests that were made two years ago. Many of these earmarks were sponsored by Democrats. Sometimes government spending IS a good idea, and both sides will agree. Sometimes, 80% of all Americans say, "I'd like to see my tax dollars pay for this," and it doesn't make them hypocrites when many of them also say limit the size of government and lower taxes. Limited government, doesn't mean no government, or no government spending.

This billion dollars that has you laughing equates to roughly 6% of all the earmarks in 2010. SIX PERCENT. Gosh darn.

14 of 52 didn't request any earmarks. That's 27%. That's more than a quarter. That's significant. You don't often find 25% of any political group actually standing up for their principles.

Again, all you want to do is focus on the negative. That's why we hate you negative Nancy liberals. Because there's always a problem. And there always will be a problem. It won't ever be right for you. It won't ever be fair. Which means you won't ever stop bitching and leave the rest of us alone. And that's all we want. To live out our lives in peace and dignity. That too much to ask? I guess so.

[Blacke]

Y'all really don't understand what earmarks are....they do not increase debt...they are sending money to a specific location that has already been spent...and the tea par tiers are not in Congress yet...so it is impossible for them to have earmarks yet.

[statnerds]

What a bunch of hypocrites. Against wasteful spending and big government...then turn around and add 1 billion to the debt with their earmarks.

Man, this statement with absolutely no credible evidence or sourcing and generalities is very persuasive