Debate on Cheney impeachment averted

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

idol land. .....passed by congress ...... I want to blame environmentists. go figure.

go figure

Really, go figure

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

idol land. .....pushed more by ...... environmentists. go figure.

go figure

opss, go firure

Funny how a Rush concession turns into a blame for the left.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Exactly. this type of program was first set up to boost prices of corn and beans. They had another program that went with it to offer loans against "target" prices. If the crop price was below the target price the farmer could take a "loan" out against the crop and seal the bin. When the crop hit or went above the target price the farmer had to sell and repay the loan.

Today, the CRP program pays the farmer to [idle] the land. This land is supposed to be at the lower end of productivity but is not always the case. CRP programs were to take land out of production to boost the price. Today however, this program is pushed more by sports groups and environmentists. go figure.

Hmmm … according to this, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) [I had to look up the acronym … to me “CRP” stands for the “Critical Reagents Program” ] accounted for ~8% of the farm bill on FY05. It sounds like the CRP is different from what you describe in the first paragraph.

The stated goal of the CRP seems to be to facilitate the planting of native vegetation in order to proactively minimize or reverse soil erosion, facilitate nitrate filtration before reaching drinking supplies, and minimize degradation of natural weather breakers.

Considering the real costs associated with landslides on the west coast, loss of barrier islands to lessen hurricane impacts in places like New Orleans, soil erosion, the Dust Bowl, this doesn’t sound like a poor investment. But, as we all know, goals do not always resemble the final implementation and execution of programs (government or otherwise). What are the criticisms? Is this program just an easy target?

VR/Marg

You are correct as that is what the program has turned into today. It is what it is but, that is not how or why the program started out. Intentions are good and in most cases (not all) it works as designed. I can show you land under that program that is was never intended to cover.

Again, initially this was a price control type program as well as an environmental one. The program name has changed some over the years

Can you dance around and roll with the punches any more? Remember, the issue? Government pork and private pork being completely seperate? Agreed, thy are intertwined.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Talk about whining

I'm a poor soul. I need to have the corps get theirs


wwwwhhhhhaaaa wwwhahhhaaa mommy, mmommmmyyy

I reitterate:

I've read so many of your enlightening posts that I think I need some education to get back to where I was . Try posting some data and other reference if you want to teach, you know, how I do when I post.

why?? all you do is bitch about what other people have. I posted the tax data, you know, who pays the most of the taxes? You did not even respond!!!!

Data? what a joke. You are too damed emotional to even try and debate.

Fact is, you want to take from those that work and give it to those that do not Socialism is what you support.

And do not go into the ingore the poor and homless and hungry and children bull shit. It does not fly.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

idol land. .....pushed more by ...... environmentists. go figure.

go figure

opss, go firure

Funny how a Rush concession turns into a blame for the left.

funny how you take a mistake, twist and ignore the context to take a shot.

Your are on a roll

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

You make a good point. When something completely counter-intuitive or stupid happens like farms being paid not to produce, you can bet your ass the government has intruded on the free market in some way.

Exactly. this type of program was first set up to boost prices of corn and beans. They had another program that went with it to offer loans against "target" prices. If the crop price was below the target price the farmer could take a "loan" out against the crop and seal the bin. When the crop hit or went above the target price the farmer had to sell and repay the loan.

Today, the CRP program pays the farmer to idle the land. This land is supposed to be at the lower end of productivity but is not always the case. CRP programs were to take land out of production to boost the price. Today however, this program is pushed more by sports groups and environmentists. go figure.

When you say, pushed by, you are tyring to blame these groups. These groups may aplaude it, but it takes, well, an act of Congress to pass it, as well as a presiedential sig.

Can't you concede without blaming the left?

Another mindless emotional response. I am not blraming anybody. I simply point out what it is and why.

For someone that complains all the time about goverment funny how you and kallend cherry pick what you like, even if it is in the same game



by the way this is fun

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Exactly. this type of program was first set up to boost prices of corn and beans. They had another program that went with it to offer loans against "target" prices. If the crop price was below the target price the farmer could take a "loan" out against the crop and seal the bin. When the crop hit or went above the target price the farmer had to sell and repay the loan.

Today, the CRP program pays the farmer to [idle] the land. This land is supposed to be at the lower end of productivity but is not always the case. CRP programs were to take land out of production to boost the price. Today however, this program is pushed more by sports groups and environmentists. go figure.

Hmmm … according to this, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) [I had to look up the acronym … to me “CRP” stands for the “Critical Reagents Program” ] accounted for ~8% of the farm bill on FY05. It sounds like the CRP is different from what you describe in the first paragraph.

The stated goal of the CRP seems to be to facilitate the planting of native vegetation in order to proactively minimize or reverse soil erosion, facilitate nitrate filtration before reaching drinking supplies, and minimize degradation of natural weather breakers.

Considering the real costs associated with landslides on the west coast, loss of barrier islands to lessen hurricane impacts in places like New Orleans, soil erosion, the Dust Bowl, this doesn’t sound like a poor investment. But, as we all know, goals do not always resemble the final implementation and execution of programs (government or otherwise). What are the criticisms? Is this program just an easy target?

VR/Marg

You are correct as that is what the program has turned into today. It is what it is but, that is not how or why the program started out. Intentions are good and in most cases (not all) it works as designed. I can show you land under that program that is was never intended to cover.

Again, initially this was a price control type program as well as an environmental one. The program name has changed some over the years

Can you dance around and roll with the punches any more? Remember, the issue? Government pork and private pork being completely seperate? Agreed, thy are intertwined.

What the hell are you talking about?

Pork is pork

Some you like and some you dont. I think it is all bullshit, even farm bills (where I grew up) as I stated before

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Can't you concede without blaming the left?

That's fucking HILARIOUS coming from someone who blames the right for every ill in the world today...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Can't you concede without blaming the left?

That's fucking HILARIOUS coming from someone who blames the right for every ill in the world today...

I had to let that one go at the time. I was laughing so hard I could not type.

(not that I can type anyway)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Pork is pork

Some you like and some you dont. I think it is all bullshit, even farm bills (where I grew up) as I stated before

It's true, pork is pork they way that it's stuffed into bills is damn near criminal. BUT, why your claims and Bush 43's sudden rebirth as fiscally responsible ring hollow is because the bitching was very subdued when the Republican led congress was porking out to the tune of 16,000 earmarks, setting records with each spending bill that they purposefully rammed through without debate. It's also very quiet from the right on their personal pork projects, when defense contractors openly rip off the treasury repeatedly, throw money out of the back of trucks or when $billions simply disappear. But when the left side of the business party wants to curtail defense waste and spend their "pork" at home building/rebuilding infrastructure (and personal pet projects) or trying to fix a porked out and inefficient medical scam they catch shit for being "socialist".
The big difference that I see in all this is that it's the Demoblicans who are trying to figure out a way to pay for their proposals while it's the Republicrats who want to borrow for theirs. I think that's noteworthy and missing from the debate.
As a "liberaltarian" I prefer to have my tax dollars spent at home. I hate wasted tax dollars no matter where they flow but I'd prefer to have them go into the US economy as opposed to an offshore bank.

[mnealtx 0]

Oh, they all have their pet projects, that's for sure!

Here's some info from the "Pig Book" (higher numbers are better, voting against pork projects):

House of Representatives
2004 2005 2006
Democrats 11% 13% 9%
Republicans 63% 73% 46%
All 39% 45% 29%

Blue Dog Democrats 20%
Republican Study Committee 56%

Senate
2004 2005 2006
Democrats 16% 18% 15%
Republicans 63% 68% 68%
All 40% 46% 44%

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Oh, they all have their pet projects, that's for sure!

Here's some info from the "Pig Book" (higher numbers are better, voting against pork projects):

House of Representatives
2004 2005 2006
Democrats 11% 13% 9%
Republicans 63% 73% 46%
All 39% 45% 29%

Blue Dog Democrats 20%
Republican Study Committee 56%

Senate
2004 2005 2006
Democrats 16% 18% 15%
Republicans 63% 68% 68%
All 40% 46% 44%

Numbers tallied like that can be deceiving.
Example, how many people voted against the 2004 ominbus spending bill with its 11,772 earmarks at a cost of $15,780,533,623?
It passed the House 344-51 with 27 R's and 24 D's against it.
The Senate passed it 65-30 with 6 R's and 23 D's voting against it.
Even worse than the vote, I wonder how many Congressmen even read it?

Bush's statement on that pig:
"I commend the Congress for reaching agreement on the fiscal year 2005 Omnibus Appropriations Bill. This legislation is in keeping with my goal to further strengthen the economy by cutting the budget deficit in half over five years. With resources already provided to continue to fight the war on terror and to protect the homeland, we have held to the fiscally responsible limits Congress and I agreed to and still adequately funded our domestic priorities like education, health care, and veterans' programs. This accomplishment would not have been possible without the excellent work of the Leadership and Appropriations Committee chairmen of both the House and Senate. I look forward to signing a final bill into law.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Surely you don't digress. The gov intrudes constantly, making the best system of gov in the world, trash. Capitalism becomes fascism when the gov intrudes to the level they have here.

Careful, your DNC overlords will be very upset with you, especially when you are so good at demanding the government have more control, not less.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Numbers tallied like that can be deceiving.
Example, how many people voted against the 2004 ominbus spending bill with its 11,772 earmarks at a cost of $15,780,533,623?
It passed the House 344-51 with 27 R's and 24 D's against it.
The Senate passed it 65-30 with 6 R's and 23 D's voting against it.

I only provided the information for comparison - I didn't delve deeply enough into the sight to know if there's that amount of granularity.

Quote

Even worse than the vote, I wonder how many Congressmen even read it?

My guess? Maybe 30-40%, tops. The rest had their staffs make a precis and they skimmed that....

I'd *LOVE* to see a bill (or a Executive Order - *SOMETHING*) that would force Congress to make a new bill for each one of those fucking pork projects and submit them for a vote...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

I'd *LOVE* to see a bill (or a Executive Order - *SOMETHING*) that would force Congress to make a new bill for each one of those fucking pork projects and submit them for a vote...

That's got my vote.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

I'd *LOVE* to see a bill (or a Executive Order - *SOMETHING*) that would force Congress to make a new bill for each one of those fucking pork projects and submit them for a vote...

That's got my vote.

3 yeas
0 nays

so far

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Pork is pork

Some you like and some you dont. I think it is all bullshit, even farm bills (where I grew up) as I stated before

It's true, pork is pork they way that it's stuffed into bills is damn near criminal. BUT, why your claims and Bush 43's sudden rebirth as fiscally responsible ring hollow is because the bitching was very subdued when the Republican led congress was porking out to the tune of 16,000 earmarks, setting records with each spending bill that they purposefully rammed through without debate. It's also very quiet from the right on their personal pork projects, when defense contractors openly rip off the treasury repeatedly, throw money out of the back of trucks or when $billions simply disappear. But when the left side of the business party wants to curtail defense waste and spend their "pork" at home building/rebuilding infrastructure (and personal pet projects) or trying to fix a porked out and inefficient medical scam they catch shit for being "socialist".
The big difference that I see in all this is that it's the Demoblicans who are trying to figure out a way to pay for their proposals while it's the Republicrats who want to borrow for theirs. I think that's noteworthy and missing from the debate.
As a "liberaltarian" I prefer to have my tax dollars spent at home. I hate wasted tax dollars no matter where they flow but I'd prefer to have them go into the US economy as opposed to an offshore bank.

With what is happening right now you are correct in that fact there is enough blame to go around. As for paying for proposals, well, 500 billion in campain proposals, rasing taxes shit. If they raise taxes they will have less money and then they will have to borrow and the dollar will go down more

Ron Paul is looking better all the time

As for the off shore comment, fix the tax laws and they will not have to

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Why would they sacrifice their bonuses when they can just pass the cost of increased taxes on to the consumer? Next question: why should they?

Why would they/ should they sacrifice their bonuses, which is essentially the same question. Right, this is America, the land of the so-called free market, shouldn't the CEO's get their bonuses even in light of of corporate or American disasters? You and Rush advocate CEO's getting paid before anyone else, even if it bankrupts the company/corp. Astonishing.

Does that answer your question the way you want, US corps are garbage and this lovely country defends them, so they won't / shouldn't do the ethical thing; they should continue to exploit.

If your party had the guts they would demand ethical behavior from corps or at least intervien into theCEO side the way they do the worker side by threatening to void contracts if workers excercize their rights. But your party is for class seperation and defends the CEO's and corps in general. So thy should be as sleezy as a sleezy country allows them to be.

Let us rewrite this to make the same point:.

Why would the government sacrifice their programs when they can just increas taxes on the consumer? Next question: why should they?

Why would they/ should they sacrifice their programs, which is essentially the same question. Right, this is America, the land of the so-called free market, shouldn't the bureaucrats get their programs even in light of their history of disaster? You and Franken advocate the recipients of aid getting paid before anyone else, even if it bankrupts the country. Astonishing.

Does that answer your question the way you want, US government is garbage and this lovely country defends them, so they won't / shouldn't do the ethical thing; they should continue to exploit.

If your party had the guts it would demand ethical behavior from the government or at least intervene into the bureacratic side the way they do the taxpayer side by threatening to slash programs if they are ineffective. But your party is for class seperation and defends the pork and ineffective welfare programs in general. So thy should be as sleezy as a sleezy country allows them to be.

Quote

Corporations and the government have merged in many ways.

Did you know that governments ARE corporations? Legal Entities distinct from the people who operate them. When you view the government as a corporation - exactly what it is - then you'll see what a bad corporation can REALLY be.

The Executive Branch are the Officers - the President/CEO/CFO/etc. The Congress is kinda like the board of directors. We the people are the shareholders.

But a corporation is in business to make money and increase its market share. It's why they raise taxes. The government is actually interesting because, as a business, it need not worry about supplying a good product. It supplies what it wants to supply, and has the funding source to get money to pay for it.

National Health Care is the effort to increase the customer base of the federal corporation. And they use tactics that would make a mafia don proud!

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

It's true, pork is pork they way that it's stuffed into bills is damn near criminal. BUT, why your claims and Bush 43's sudden rebirth as fiscally responsible ring hollow is because the bitching was very subdued when the Republican led congress was porking out to the tune of 16,000 earmarks, setting records with each spending bill that they purposefully rammed through without debate

You have to ask just how many VETOES did the Incompetent in Chief use before the 2006 elections, of bills brought forward by the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

National Health Care is the effort to increase the customer base of the federal corporation. And they use tactics that would make a mafia don proud!

And wars are used to manipulate that customer base. Of course USA corp is just actually just a subsidiary of Conglomerate Corp.
We've got the best government money can buy.
Case in point:
http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=116&pid=0&sid=1291158&page=1

[mnealtx 0]

Here's a tissue.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

You have to ask just how many VETOES did the Incompetent in Chief use before the 2006 elections, of bills brought forward by the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress

One - for the Stem Cell bill in July, 2006.

He vetoed it again in June, 2007. Hsi other vetoes were of an Iraq bill in May, 2007, and then Congress took out what Bush didn't like. Then the so called "children's health insurance" bill in October. he vetoed the water bill, which was overriden. And then just minutes ago vetoed a health and education bill.

This is comparable to Clinton, who never used a veto in his "rubber stamp" Congress. He did not use his veto power until June, 1995, and then used his veto power 36 more times.

Again, Jeanne, it's usually not the business of a POTUS to veto bills from his own party.

Incidentally - we see an interesting pattern developing. When a POTUS is from the same party that controls Congress, a midterm election will usually get rid of the Congressmen from the party in control. then the POTUS starts to veto stuff because a different party is propounding it - a different party with a different philosophy!

It's why I think it is ALWAYS better to have Congress from a different party than the POTUS.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

It's true, pork is pork they way that it's stuffed into bills is damn near criminal ... the bitching was very subdued when the Republican led congress was porking out to the tune of 16,000 earmarks, setting records with each spending bill .... It's also very quiet from the right on their personal pork projects, when defense contractors openly rip off the treasury repeatedly, throw money out of the back of trucks or when $billions simply disappear. But when the left side of the business party wants to curtail defense waste and spend their "pork" at home building/rebuilding infrastructure (and personal pet projects) or trying to fix a porked out and inefficient medical scam they catch shit for being "socialist".

One of the great ironies is that the Executive Agencies *really* do not like earmarks --> they don’t fit into planned programs, they take time (time =’s $) to administer, and they distract from the what they're supposed to be doing. Some earmark recipients (pure ‘guestimate’ ~40%) are interested in working with the agencies; others just want their $$$.

You're right - Congressional Additions (“earmarks”) have skyrocketed over the last 6-7 years.

Some programs, e.g., some DoD RDTE (research, development, testing & engineering) programs are now btw 30-40% (!), in terms of actual $, from Congressional additions.

We’ve had previous situations in which the Executive Branch and Congress were controlled by the same party (either party) in which this massive increase was not observed. That may be a necessary but not sufficient alone condition. Did the Republicans invent earmarks? Of course not - just look to Senator Byrd of West Virginia. Was there some factor with the Republican-controlled at the turn of the century, which in combination with a Republican-controlled Executive Branch, was necessary but not sufficient to get this skyrocketing of earmarks? Perhaps, yes. Has this now evolved as a status quo norm that Democrats are complicit? Yes.

Something else happened in the Appropriations process, where the penultimate responsibility lies. Speculatively, I would look for a change in some law (perhaps creation of a ‘loophole’) that has been exploited.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Amazon 7]

Quote

You're right - Congressional Additions (“earmarks”) have skyrocketed over the last 6-7 years.

Oh oh.. now you went and did it........

a right wing CDIF will be forthcoming at any minute.

[1969912 0]

Quote

Quote
As a lawyer you have great potential, but still claiming to be impoverished (rolls eyes).

No, I said I WAS impoverished. I have a negative net worth at this time, but I am not impoverished. A few thousand per month in extra taxes, however, would put a couple of people out of a job.

Quote
I'm 6'1", you are likely different, you probably have a hiher than average natural/genetic predisposition to learn/test than others.

I'm 6'1". We seem to have more and more in common.Wink

Actually, I don't consider myself any better than anyone else. I consider myself average, at best. I have higher than average intelligence, but it is balanced out by the ADHD and other issues that I have. I am not smart enough to have an innate understanding of things.................................

Lawrocket,

Beautiful post! I owe you beers for giving me that to read. Excellent.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG