Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    September 2024
    S M T W T F S
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    2930  

  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

    al qaeda barbarism big government blogging colorado congress corruption culture democrats denver economics economy elections environmentalism firearms freedom global warming gop gun control guns health care human rights humor iraq islam islamofascism israel journalism leftists liberty media bias military moonbats msm music obama politics presidential candidates republicans socialism soldiers spending terrorism war weather

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘pork’

Next Entries »

Defeat Don Young!

Posted by Richard on August 18, 2008

Rep. Don Young of Alaska is one of the House's chief porkmeisters and the poster child for why the Republican Party is no longer trusted as the party of fiscal responsibility. Along with the now-indicted Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, Young pushed through the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" earmark, and that's only one of many pieces of pork he's promoted.

Young doesn't limit himself to pork for Alaska, either. Check out the new Club for Growth PAC ad against Young revealing that he pushed through a $10 million earmark for an interchange in Florida (opposed by local officials) that benefits a Florida developer who raised $40,000 in contributions for Young. 

Young is facing a stiff primary challenge from Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, a solid fiscal conservative who, according to Pat Toomey, "led the fight for lower taxes and spending in the state legislature, and joined Gov. Sarah Palin in pushing for reform in the state."

A recent email from the Club for Growth indicates that Parnell is poised to defeat Young in the Aug. 26 primary, given sufficient funds (emphasis in original):

A new poll done for Sean Parnell in his Alaska Republican primary race against the "Bridge to Nowhere" congressman, Don Young, shows Parnell with a four point lead, but the race is within the margin of error of the poll, so we must leave nothing to chance.
…

Now is the last chance to get rid of Young, who recently voted with Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats to raise income taxes.

Now is the last chance to defeat Young, a three-time winner of Citizens Against Government Waste's "Porker of the Month" award.
…

Read what Don Young said to Republican budget cutters on the House floor last year: "This constant harping on this floor about cutting monies from other areas under the guise of balancing the budget, I say shame on you, too. I say shame on you because we are not doing the legislative process any good. . . . And like I say, those that bite me will be bitten back."

Don Young embodies what's wrong with too many Republicans today. Fortunately, we have an excellent chance to replace him with economic conservative Sean Parnell.
… 

Sean Parnell is a different kind of politician. He is the polar opposite of Don Young in both philosophy and temperament.

Before Sean Parnell became lieutenant governor in 2006, he served two terms in the state House (1993-1996) and two terms in the state Senate (1997-2000), compiling a solid record as a fiscal conservative. During that time, he fought against several attempts to raise taxes and increase spending. Sean supports permanent repeal of the Death Tax, making the tax cuts permanent, curbing government spending and drilling for more oil and gas. Sean has also taken a pledge to oppose tax increases.

Along with Alaska's extremely popular governor, Sarah Palin, Parnell is viewed as a reformer who wants to clean up Alaska's image, making it free of corruption and pork-barrel abuses.

Regardless of your party affiliation (or lack thereof), if you're disgusted by the culture of corruption in Congress, by the fiscal irresponsibility and the endless flood of pork and graft, please join me in contributing to Sean Parnell's campaign today. You can do so quickly and easily on this Club for Growth page. Nothing would send a stronger reform message to Washington than the primary defeat of Don Young.

While you're there, consider contributing to some of the other Club for Growth candidates, the Club for Growth itself, and the Club for Growth PAC (just keep scrolling). 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

SoCal Republicans are revolting

Posted by Richard on July 7, 2008

Republican activists (and big money donors) in Southern California are fed up with their party's Congressional leadership. The Lincoln Club of Orange County is demanding that the current leadership in both houses be replaced. According to Bob Novak, they're now circulating the ultimatum among angry Republicans around the country (emphasis added):

The message: "Come Nov. 5, should the current GOP leadership in either house survive to lead in a new Congress, the Lincoln Club of Orange County will review the financial backing of all congressional Republicans, and we urge others to do likewise. A GOP caucus that would re-elect such leaders is not one we would likely continue to support. Because, simply put, we refuse to support a permanent minority."
…

It deplores refusal by party leaders to support a one-year moratorium on earmarks, whose 285 percent growth when Congress was under Republican control is "the perfect symbol of the GOP-led profligacy that drives us crazy still." Earmarks "epitomize the fiscal recklessness that led to Republicans becoming a minority in 2006. … It's no wonder the Republican leadership continued to fail on … entitlement reform and a reduction in federal spending."
…

"We urge other Republican donor groups to reinforce this important beginning," read the club's ultimatum, adding, "It is not credible to ask the American people to return Republicans to the majority when all we offer them is the same group of leaders and policies they so recently rejected."

About time. I hope this spreads like wildfire.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Congress overrides veto of bloated farm bill

Posted by Richard on May 22, 2008

Yesterday, President Bush vetoed this year's 673-page, $300 billion* farm bill, which is even more of an abomination than most farm bills:

While it continues and, in some cases, expands traditional farm subsidies, the 673-page measure is stuffed with billions of dollars of new money for anti-hunger programs, conservation programs, fruit and vegetable growers and the biofuels industry.
…

"Members are going to have to think about how they will explain these votes back in their districts at a time when prices are on the rise," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. "People are not going to want to see their taxes increase."

She added, "Congress is asking families to pay more in subsidies to wealthy farmers at a time of record farm profits."

Not only that, but Congress is also paying farmers to keep land idle and to devote more of their acreage to corn for ethanol at a time of record commodity prices, rising grocery bills, and international warnings about hunger and famine. 

Nothing better exemplifies the hypocrisy and corruption in Congress than comparing their treatment of Big Oil — they grill energy company CEOs and self-righteously chide them for their record profits and tax breaks — versus their treatment of Big Agriculture — they lavish tens of billions in direct subsidies on ADM and its fellow feeders at the public trough (who are also making record profits).

The House overrode the veto within hours, and the Senate followed suit today. Both did so by lopsided margins — there's no shortage of Republicans eager to join the Democrats in keeping the pork projects and special interest subsidies flowing. 

But hold your horses! The current Congressional leadership is not only extremely liberal, it's also inept. The version of the bill that they sent to the President is different from the one they actually passed:

… Due to a printing glitch, the version that Bush vetoed was missing 34 pages on international food aid and trade _ a mistake that may require Congress to send the White House yet another bill.
…

The printing error turned a triumphant political victory into a vexing embarrassment for Democrats.

The party's leaders in the House decided to pass the bill again, including the missing section in the version that Bush got. That vote was 306-110, again enough to override another veto from Bush should the need arise.

Democratic leadership aides said the Senate will deal with the problem when Congress returns in June from a one-week vacation.

House Republicans used the error to plead Democratic incompetence. They complained that Bush vetoed a different bill from the one Congress passed, raising questions that the eventual law would be unconstitutional.

Well, at least there were some Republicans who actually objected to both the bill and the travesty of a process. Most of them seem to have embraced bipartisanship. You remember what bipartisanship means, don't you? It's when the members of the stupid party and the evil party get together and do something that's both stupid and evil. 

* I've seen price tags ranging from $289 billion to $330 billion, apparently because of some sleight-of-hand and gimmickry in the bill that makes the actual cost hard to determine.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Porkers

Posted by Richard on November 7, 2007

Monday, the Club for Growth released its 2007 Senate RePORK Card, a scorecard of senators' votes on 15 anti-pork amendments (the House RePORK Card was released back in August). Here's all you really need to know about how sorry the Senate is: only 2 of the 15 anti-pork amendments passed, one to kill a spinach-growers' subsidy included in an Iraq war funding bill, and the other to kill Sen. Clinton's $1 million grant for a Woodstock Festival museum.

PorkbustersNonetheless, some of the scores are interesting:

  • Only three senators received a perfect score of 100% (and were present for a majority of the votes): Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jim DeMint (R-SC), and Richard Burr (R-NC).

  • The only senator receiving a 0% was Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) who voted against all 10 anti-pork amendments he was present for.

  • The average Republican score was 59%; the average Democratic score was 12%.

  • The best scoring Democrat was Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) with an impressive 80%, tying with or scoring better than thirty-nine Republican senators.

  • Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) scored a 53%; Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) scored a 7%, voting for only one amendment.

The House, meanwhile, voted last night to override the President's veto of the pork-laden Water Resources Development Act and to approve the conference report of a monstrous omnibus spending bill. The Labor-HHS-Military-VA conference report not only includes earmarks "airdropped" into the bill without a vote by either chamber, it also includes a Democratic amendment to gut an earlier reform that prohibited "backdoor" earmarks. The veto override vote was 361-54, so most Republicans abandoned their President to protect their pork.

In fact, 42 Republicans sided with Pelosi on both votes. The'yre listed here. The Club for Growth will undoubtedly support primary opponents for some of these people; if you value fiscal responsibility, you might consider helping them. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

House passes gradual retreat bill

Posted by Richard on March 23, 2007

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic leadership's Gradual Retreat Caucus prevailed today, passing their $124 billion military spending bill by a vote of 218-212. The bill establishes a timetable for withdrawal of all combat troops from Iraq by September 2008. It was opposed by Republicans and initially by the Democrats' Immediate Surrender Caucus, which wanted to cut off all funding for the Iraq conflict, presumably supposing that the troops there now could hitch rides home.

The Bush administration wanted $100 billion in military spending authorization. The remaining $24 billion is for pork projects added by the Democratic leadership to buy the Immediate Surrender Caucus votes they needed for passage. Yes, these are the same Democrats who owe their 2006 election success largely to voters' disgust with out-of-control pork-barrel spending, influence peddling, vote buying, …

Someone ought to crunch the numbers and compare the average pork per district needed to enforce party discipline on the Democratic side of the aisle versus the Republicans side. My first thought was that the Democrats' votes can probably be bought more cheaply. But then it occurred to me that Democrats spend tax dollars somewhat more freely, so the pork price might be bid up more easily. Clearly, it's a complex dynamic at work. Maybe some academic can get a government grant to look into it.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Next Entries »