The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Redistribution on Steroids!!!!

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by road kill View Post
    Yeah, Rog, I guess since the Republicans do it....it's OK.


    RK
    The guy did not submit a $48 billion earmark. It is just a figment of the right wing media's imagination and you bought it. Just like the $200 million a day for the trip to go to Asia the rumor Michele Bachmann spread and the wacko's here fell for it hook line and sinker.

    $200 million a day?
    Nov 6th 2010, 18:17 by N.B. | WASHINGTON, DC

    • SOME people just can't estimate travel costs. President Barack Obama is visiting Asia this week. Conservative bloggers and talk-radio hosts (Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and so on) and tea party darling Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) claim that his trip is costing taxpayers a staggering $200 million a day. (Some also claim that the Navy is dispatching 34 ships and an aircraft carrier to support the mission. More on that later.) The White House says that's not true. Who's right? Google powers, activate! Here are some excerpts from a PolitiFact article debunking the claim:

    We think Bachmann and others have a responsibility to back up statistics they cite. And in this case, the backing appears to be one news story, relying on an anonymous state government official in India. People familiar with presidential travel say that estimate is way off, and they question how a government official in India would know anyway. And a report by the independent [Government Accountability Office] backs that up: A trip to India by Clinton, regarded at the time as perhaps the most expensive in history, was estimated to cost $50 million, or $10 million per day. That alone should cause someone to question the $200 million a day figure. In short, we don't see any evidence to back up this statistic. And we rate Bachmann's claim False.
    FactCheck.org weighs in, too:
    This story has spread rapidly among the president’s critics, but there is simply no evidence to support it. And common sense should lead anyone to doubt it. For example, the entire U.S. war effort in Afghanistan currently costs less than that — about $5.7 billion per month, according to the Congressional Research Service, or roughly $190 million per day. How could a peaceful state visit cost more than a war?

    And here's Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell on the "34 ships and an aircraft carrier" claim:
    Morrell told reporters he was making an exception to the practice of not discussing Presidential security details to shoot down the reports. "I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd this notion that somehow we were deploying 10 percent of the Navy—some 34 ships and an aircraft carrier—in support of the president's trip to Asia," said Morrell at today's Pentagon briefing. "That's just comical. Nothing close to that is being done."
    It's sad that someone even has to debunk these ridiculous claims. Any reasonable person who heard the $200 million a day number should realise that it's off by at least an order of magnitude. Even Bill O'Reilly "knows the figure is nuts." But as New York magazine's perfect headline explains, "Republican Anger Over Cost of Obama’s Trip to India Will Not Be Stopped by Facts." Indeed.
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulli...mas_india_trip
    Last edited by Roger Perry; 12-20-2010 at 01:38 PM.

  2. #12
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    The guy did not submit a $48 billion earmark. It is just a figment of the right wing media's imagination and you bought it. Just like the $200 million a day for the trip to go to Asia the rumor Michele Bachmann spread and the wacko's here fell for it hook line and sinker.

    $200 million a day?
    Nov 6th 2010, 18:17 by N.B. | WASHINGTON, DC

    • SOME people just can't estimate travel costs. President Barack Obama is visiting Asia this week. Conservative bloggers and talk-radio hosts (Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and so on) and tea party darling Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) claim that his trip is costing taxpayers a staggering $200 million a day. (Some also claim that the Navy is dispatching 34 ships and an aircraft carrier to support the mission. More on that later.) The White House says that's not true. Who's right? Google powers, activate! Here are some excerpts from a PolitiFact article debunking the claim:

    We think Bachmann and others have a responsibility to back up statistics they cite. And in this case, the backing appears to be one news story, relying on an anonymous state government official in India. People familiar with presidential travel say that estimate is way off, and they question how a government official in India would know anyway. And a report by the independent [Government Accountability Office] backs that up: A trip to India by Clinton, regarded at the time as perhaps the most expensive in history, was estimated to cost $50 million, or $10 million per day. That alone should cause someone to question the $200 million a day figure. In short, we don't see any evidence to back up this statistic. And we rate Bachmann's claim False.
    FactCheck.org weighs in, too:
    This story has spread rapidly among the president’s critics, but there is simply no evidence to support it. And common sense should lead anyone to doubt it. For example, the entire U.S. war effort in Afghanistan currently costs less than that — about $5.7 billion per month, according to the Congressional Research Service, or roughly $190 million per day. How could a peaceful state visit cost more than a war?

    And here's Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell on the "34 ships and an aircraft carrier" claim:
    Morrell told reporters he was making an exception to the practice of not discussing Presidential security details to shoot down the reports. "I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd this notion that somehow we were deploying 10 percent of the Navy—some 34 ships and an aircraft carrier—in support of the president's trip to Asia," said Morrell at today's Pentagon briefing. "That's just comical. Nothing close to that is being done."
    It's sad that someone even has to debunk these ridiculous claims. Any reasonable person who heard the $200 million a day number should realise that it's off by at least an order of magnitude. Even Bill O'Reilly "knows the figure is nuts." But as New York magazine's perfect headline explains, "Republican Anger Over Cost of Obama’s Trip to India Will Not Be Stopped by Facts." Indeed.
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulli...mas_india_trip

    He threw it out there.
    It got a negative response and he pulled it back, laughingly saying it was all a misunderstanding, he was just being polite.

    You buy it, because your judgemnent is clouded with hatred and ideology (though you don't know what yours is).

    And you call people stupid?

    RK
    Stan b & Elvis

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by road kill View Post
    He threw it out there.
    It got a negative response and he pulled it back, laughingly saying it was all a misunderstanding, he was just being polite.

    You buy it, because your judgemnent is clouded with hatred and ideology (though you don't know what yours is).

    And you call people stupid?

    RK
    Well, here is more for you. Maybe you can comment on this:

    So to avoid their wrath, congressional Republicans have made some really big shows of swearing off earmarks for the next two years. House Republicans did it first, and then a bit more reluctantly, Senate Republicans followed suit, even though their leader, Mitch McConnell, has brought a lot of federal bacon back to his home state of Kentucky over the years.
    BLOCK: So David, help us understand, though. How is it that Republicans who are railing against these earmarks at the same time are loading the spending bill with earmarks for their home states?
    WELNA: Well, yeah, right. Republicans have requested about 5,600 earmarks this year, and they got a lot of them approved. GOP leader McConnell, for example, has $86 million worth of earmarks in this big omnibus package. South Dakota Republican Senator John Thune got more than $38 million worth approved.
    And when I asked him why he hasn't requested that they be removed from the omnibus, he said he's voting against the whole package. But of course, that omnibus might pass, and since there are some Republicans who will vote for it, that way McConnell and Thune and 31 other Republican senators who all requested earmarks this year could get them despite their public stance of being against them.

    http://www.npr.org/2010/12/16/132115...ks?ft=1&f=1014

    So R Senator John Thune submitted earmarks but said he would vote against it, unbelievable

  4. #14
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,894

    Default

    Breakdown by Party

    Value Number
    Democrats* $2,602,298,868----- 4,025
    Republicans $1,884,456,428----- 2,510
    Independents $6,352,725--------- 17
    Mixed/Blank $3,181,199,206---- 2,261
    Unknown $1,900,000 1

    *This includes earmarks sponsored jointly by Democrats and Independents


    RK
    Stan b & Elvis

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by road kill View Post
    Breakdown by Party

    Value Number
    Democrats* $2,602,298,868----- 4,025
    Republicans $1,884,456,428----- 2,510
    Independents $6,352,725--------- 17
    Mixed/Blank $3,181,199,206---- 2,261
    Unknown $1,900,000 1

    *This includes earmarks sponsored jointly by Democrats and Independents


    RK

    There are currently no Independents serving in the U.S. House of Representatives.
    There are two Independents currently serving in the U.S. Senate. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, and Joesph Lieberman of Connecticut. Both Senator Sanders and Senator Lieberman caucus as Democrats. Ryan P. Christiano.


    Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_i...#ixzz18gDD7eYZ

    WOW!!!!!!!!!!!! These two Senators sure must have compiled whopping big earmarks

    Of the top ten Senators requesting the highest amount of $ in solo earmarks 6 are Republicans.
    They are:
    #2 Shelby – 64 individual earmarks total $114,484,250
    #3 Bond – 54 individual earmarks total $95,691,491
    #5 Cochran – 65 individual earmarks total $75,908,475
    #6 Murkowski – 71 individual earmarks total $74,000,750
    #8 Inhofe – 34 individual earmarks total $53,133,500
    #9 McConnell – 36 individual earmarks total $51,133,500
    Of the top ten Senators requesting highest # of solo earmarks 5 of them are Republicans, four of whom top the list:
    #1 Specter – 134 individual earmarks = $25,320,000
    #2 Murkowski – 71 individual earmarks = $74,000,750
    #3 Chochran – 65 individual earmarks = $75,908,475
    #4 Shelby – 64 individual earmarks = $114,484,250
    #8 Bond – 54 individual earmarks = $85,691,491
    ONLY Republican Senators Coburn, DeMint & McCain are free of earmarks with Feingold & McCaskill on Democrat side joining them.

    http://roaringrepublican.com/blog/20...spending-bill/

    Rk--- Did you see where Feingold was free of earmarks????????????? Bet you didn't even vote for him did you???????????????
    Last edited by Roger Perry; 12-20-2010 at 02:53 PM.

  6. #16
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    The guy did not submit a $48 billion earmark. It is just a figment of the right wing media's imagination and you bought it. Just like the $200 million a day for the trip to go to Asia the rumor Michele Bachmann spread and the wacko's here fell for it hook line and sinker.
    Roger, I've concluded that it's a complete waste of time to argue with someone who posts up complete BS from people like that arse hat and arse hats like Breitbart, stuff that is either made up or poorly sourced, and when you call them on it they insult you and call you a know it all.

    This BS isn't funny anymore. The country's future is at stake and we have people people like these arse hats spreading untruths and half truths to support an agenda, and people who base their opinions on complete BS and fiction that these scum bags put out there because it supports or confirms their twisted view of the world.

    As a country, we are truly screwed.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Roger, I've concluded that it's a complete waste of time to argue with someone who posts up complete BS from people like that arse hat and arse hats like Breitbart, stuff that is either made up or poorly sourced, and when you call them on it they insult you and call you a know it all.

    This BS isn't funny anymore. The country's future is at stake and we have people people like these arse hats spreading untruths and half truths to support an agenda, and people who base their opinions on complete BS and fiction that these scum bags put out there because it supports or confirms their twisted view of the world.

    As a country, we are truly screwed.
    Yeah, you call them on it and they resort to name calling. The righties here are pulling for Obama to fail. What I keep reminding them of is if he fails he will be a one term President and the whole mess will fall back in the Republicans lap where it belonged in the first place.

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dnf777 View Post
    "trickle up" economics is sillier than trickle down.
    Actually tickle up economics does have a stronger theoretical argument than trickle down. Poor people always spend their money. Rich folks don't. Give money to the poor and they buy groceries, gasoline, cigarettes, booze, crack, OR whatever. Give money to a rich man, and he puts it into his bank account or blows it on the stock market. Either way, it stimulates nothing. Not saying I think we need to be giving to anybody. Can't we all just agree to stop "trickling" period?

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    Yeah, you call them on it and they resort to name calling. The righties here are pulling for Obama to fail. What I keep reminding them of is if he fails he will be a one term President and the whole mess will fall back in the Republicans lap where it belonged in the first place.
    Obama has failed. And the Republicans do deserve to have a shot at fixing the mess they were so instrumental in creating. Both good arguments for NOT voting for Obama again.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •