Hell freezes over

[rwarn17588]

Sen. Tom Coburn, Mr. Anti-Earmarks and Mr. We Gotta Cut Spending, voted yes on the $700 billion bailout proposal tonight.

I guess his days as Mr. Fiscal Conservative are over.

Inhofe, who never met a highway bill he didn't like, voted no.

This has been a weird year.

[Jonette]

Hell hath frozeth over!!!



LOL

[Conan71]

I'm still trying to assess all the tax cuts in this proposal and figure out their relevance.

Michelle Malkin got this wrong when she called it a "crap sandwich".

It's a double **** burger with sleaze.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I'm still trying to assess all the tax cuts in this proposal and figure out their relevance.

Michelle Malkin got this wrong when she called it a "crap sandwich".

It's a double **** burger with sleaze.

She parroted that from Boehner I thought.  I'm pretty sure it was Boehner that called it a crap sandwich.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I'm still trying to assess all the tax cuts in this proposal and figure out their relevance.

Michelle Malkin got this wrong when she called it a "crap sandwich".

It's a double **** burger with sleaze.

She parroted that from Boehner I thought.  I'm pretty sure it was Boehner that called it a crap sandwich.

Well, then, they both got it wrong.

[Gaspar]

From 3 pages to over 400.  $101 billion dollars in earmarks added.

There's a little something for ACORN. . .
a tax exemption on the import of wooden arrows (pancakes). . .
a little something for Puerto Rican run distilleries. . .
a little something for buffalo seamen research. . .
a little something for the litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident. . .
a little something for wool research. . .
a little something for auto racing. . .
a little something for miners. . .
a little something for American Samoa. . .
a little something for the railroads. . .
a little something for film and television production houses. . .
so putting the bill through the senate filter produced 398 additional pages and 15% pork.

Does that make it 85% lean turkey?



Can't wait until the whole thing is published and we can examine the details of the pet projects and oust those responsible!

[Gaspar]

Ohh!  I'm excited.  They are getting ready to post the text of the legislation.
. . . . . .

[rwarn17588]

^^ Please explain to me why anyone should take Coburn seriously, ever again.

[Hometown]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

^^ Please explain to me why anyone should take Coburn seriously, ever again.

Because he is ambitious and dangerous and doesn't take care of the needs of his constituents and because he is still in office.

[jamesrage]

 It will be interesting to see who changed their minds based on the bribes/pork that was added to the bail out bill.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

^^ Please explain to me why anyone should take Coburn seriously, ever again.

Here's the thing, I think Coburn was only planning on a six year hitch.  He's got no other aspirations I'm aware of so his should have been an honest vote, free from special interest conflict or political ambition.  I was looking to him to be a bull**** barometer on this legislation.  

All the new spending coupled with tax cuts, flies in the face of his predictable fiscal conservative positions.  The only thing I gather from it is this must be a desperate enough of a situation that he's willing to throw caution to the wind.  Or maybe he's just reached a lame duck "f-it" attitude if he's not running in '10.

[MDepr2007]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

^^ Please explain to me why anyone should take Coburn seriously, ever again.

Why do they take Inhofe seriously still? Inhofe would have voted yes if he wasn't trying to be elected again.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

^^ Please explain to me why anyone should take Coburn seriously, ever again.

Here's the thing, I think Coburn was only planning on a six year hitch.  He's got no other aspirations I'm aware of so his should have been an honest vote, free from special interest conflict or political ambition.  I was looking to him to be a bull**** barometer on this legislation.  

All the new spending coupled with tax cuts, flies in the face of his predictable fiscal conservative positions.  The only thing I gather from it is this must be a desperate enough of a situation that he's willing to throw caution to the wind.  Or maybe he's just reached a lame duck "f-it" attitude if he's not running in '10.

Maybe Dr. Hypocrite needs to get a loan to make payroll for his private practice and Mr. Fiscal Conservatism's credit sucks so bad he can't get one without the bailout "rescue"?