Dems cast Rush as spokesman for GOP

[Embar Angylwrath]

Select...

Good to see you're enjoying some Obama cock swallowing too.

Let me ask you this Select. And we'll take these questions one at a time. They are yes or no questions, so even someone like you can't fuck it up unless they try really hard.

Question to Select: Did Obama campaign on a promise to go over spending bills line by line, and eliminate earmarks he thought were not in the interest of taxpayers?

[Select]

I will not answer 'yes' or 'no'. My opinion runs with Lurker and Harlowe and I do think you need to read their opinions again.

And you're damn right I'll suck the cock of anyone hot that treats me the way I want to be.

[Lurker]

Let me ask you a couple of questions, Embar. Even a dumb tool like you can't fuck this one up.

Should Obama have shut the Government down during the worst economic crisis in our lifetime because there might a fraction of a fraction of waste in last years spending bill, or should he make clear what he expects in the first spending bill his Administration works with Congress on? Which would be in the interest of the taxpayer at this juncture?

That's why perspective is important, and why the earmark brigade is a group of morons.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Let me ask you a couple of questions, Embar. Even a dumb tool like you can't fuck this one up.

Should Obama have shut the Government down during the worst economic crisis in our lifetime because there might a fraction of a fraction of waste in last years spending bill, or should he make clear what he expects in the first spending bill his Administration works with Congress on? Which would be in the interest of the taxpayer at this juncture?

That's why perspective is important, and why the earmark brigade is a group of morons.

Obama should not have shut the government down. Are you saying that eliminating the earmarks would have shut the government down?

[Kulaf]

Let me ask you a couple of questions, Embar. Even a dumb tool like you can't fuck this one up.

Should Obama have shut the Government down during the worst economic crisis in our lifetime because there might a fraction of a fraction of waste in last years spending bill, or should he make clear what he expects in the first spending bill his Administration works with Congress on? Which would be in the interest of the taxpayer at this juncture?

That's why perspective is important, and why the earmark brigade is a group of morons.

Are you trying to tell me that Obama was unwilling to "make famous" someone who was adding pork to one of his bills? That he doesn't have the popularity to get it done? That he can't hold Congress' feet to the fire?

If so I totally agree. It's what I was saying all along that he would be unable or unwilling to restrain Congress.

[Lurker]

Obama should not have shut the government down. Are you saying that eliminating the earmarks would have shut the government down?

You don't know much about the legislative process or this current event, do you.

It has nothing to do with the earmarks. The Government has been running on temporary spending bills for months and those expired last Friday. Congress either had to pass another temporary spending bill or send the final Omnibus to the President or the Government would be forced to shut down. That would have been devastating during our current crisis. In the last few weeks of negotiation the Republicans feigned outrage over earmarks in an attempt to embarrass Obama. Their outrage was histrionic. The issue was completely manufactured and I've yet to see a valid example of waste. I'm extremely happy that Obama isn't stupid enough to capitulate to a crowd of morons when they fake a controversy in the final hours.

Now that you have a little knowledge why not take a stab at answering my question.

Are you trying to tell me that Obama was unwilling to "make famous" someone who was adding pork to one of his bills? That he doesn't have the popularity to get it done? That he can't hold Congress' feet to the fire?

See above.

[Embar Angylwrath]

So Obama is just a rubber stamp for Congress? Did Congress hold Obama hostage with the bill?

Is that the leadership we should expect, just a bend over and take it in the ass philosophy? Don't you expect better?

Obama had the opportunity to make a strong stand and live up to his campaign rhetoric. He could have kicked it back to Congress with his line item suggestions... and he.. didn't... even... try. He just signed the bill, and made excuses about it.

Let me ask you this, Lurker.. do you think all of those earmarks were needed to address the jumpstart of the economy? You can't see a better way to DEFICIT spend 8 billion dollars?

[Lurker]

Since you insist on missing the point on the larger issue I have a simple request...

Please list which earmarks were wasteful so we have a baseline for discussion.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Since you insist on missing the point on the larger issue I have a simple request...

Please list which earmarks were wasteful so we have a baseline for discussion.

I've already mentioned a couple. And you have ignored them. Since I was the first to do it, why don't you list the ones you think are absolutely vital to restoring the economy.... You know, the ones that Obama would have signed into law.

Had he bothered reviewing the bill....

And made adjustments...

Like he promised to do...

[Lurker]

Save me the trouble of looking and list them again.

Edit: I did a quick check and you had no examples of waste from the Omnibus bill. Why lie about whether you listed examples or not?

[Partha]

Question to Select: Did Obama campaign on a promise to go over spending bills line by line, and eliminate earmarks he thought were not in the interest of taxpayers?

Sure, I'll answer for her. Obama should have used his Magical Fairy Line-Item Veto That doesn't fucking exist and never will to shut down all the earmarks.

EDIT: And Embar seems to have some issues about sucking black cocks.

[Klast Brell]

So Obama is just a rubber stamp for Congress?

Was Bush a rubber stamp for congress when the Republicans held both houses? Or was it party unity?

[Embar Angylwrath]

So Obama is just a rubber stamp for Congress?

Was Bush a rubber stamp for congress when the Republicans held both houses? Or was it party unity?

Oh, I see Klast. You're going to use Bush as the benchmark for Obama. Gotcha.

[Lurker]

Embar, are you going to respond to anything substantive?

Lets skip over your shocking ignorance of the legislative process and your lie about posting examples of waste...

Please list which earmarks from the Omnibus were wasteful so we have a baseline for discussion. I think that's important information to know since you want a nuclear reaction from Obama instead of the well thought out and reasonable reaction we ended up with. I think outrage over this was manufactured and phony. You think it was justified. So let's see the numbers.

[Baginns Hobbiton]

Hey there,

I'm very pleased with what Obama has done so far. Sure, there have been some mistakes and some faltering, but he is only human. Regarding the spending bill, Obama is doing exactly what I voted him into office to do: make responsible compromises while steering our nation back on the right course.

Sure, he could have acted like petulant child and threatened a veto on this because it had some earmarks in it, thus throwing it back to congress to bicker over the bill while the government runs out of money (If they don't pass temporary spending bills the government shuts down). The republicans would have stalled trying to make the democrats look as bad as possible regardless of the effect it had on the government's ability to do its job. Keep in mind that every republican, except 6 I think, that voted against that bill because of the earmarks actually had earmarks in it. This was a fake controversy from them.

Instead Obama decided to let this one slide and then put up clear guide lines on what he expects for future bills that arrive on his desk. He decided not to pick this battle while the nation is struggling in an economic crisis. The last thing our markets need is more uncertainty or less stability from the government. Sure, he looses some political points for a perceived broken promise, but I think it was the right thing to do.

I have been shocked at how many of his campaign promises he is actually keeping so I think he has earned a little lee-way from me.

Closing down Guantanamo - Check
Reinstate Stem Cell research - Check
Start down path to responsible withdrawal from Iraq - Check
Keep Eye on Afghanistan - Check
Crack down on lobbyist in executive branch - Check
Appoint both Democrats and Republicans to his cabinet - Check
Push for expansion of renewable energy - Check
Push for SCHIP - Check
Release Presidential Records - Check
Middle Class Tax Cut - Check
Let Bush Tax cuts expire - Check

[Embar Angylwrath]

Embar, are you going to respond to anything substantive?

Lets skip over your shocking ignorance of the legislative process and your lie about posting examples of waste...

Please list which earmarks from the Omnibus were wasteful so we have a baseline for discussion. I think that's important information to know since you want a nuclear reaction from Obama instead of the well thought out and reasonable reaction we ended up with. I think outrage over this was manufactured and phony. You think it was justified. So let's see the numbers.

As I said, I already gave you a couple of examples.

Lurker can frame it as "directed spending", but that doesn't mean shit. I can frame it as "unecessary spending". When we are trying to pull the economy out of a tail spin, aren't there better places to put the money other than multi-million dollar studies for pig smells and honeybee warehouses?

And you seem to be missing my point. You've neatly dodged them and try to spin this as "it ain't so bad cause its sucha small percentage". That's bullshit. Trying to argue the earmark process is ok because you might be able to see some benefit in some of the earmarks is ludicrous.

DId Obama promise earmark reform? Yes, he did. And why? Because in his onw words, the earmark process is "broken". Apparently, it sickens Obama too. You obvioulsy don't get that I'm arguing FOR Obama's policy, and you're arguing against it. I'm pissed because Obama had a chance to back up his campaign rhetoric, and passed on the opportunity.

[Lurker]

aren't there better places to put the money other than multi-million dollar studies for pig smells and honeybee warehouses?

Picking out earmarks with funny names is more a sign of your immaturity than proof of wasteful spending. Those two total 3.5 million and you haven't shown why those examples are wasteful. We'd better shut down the government!

You obvioulsy don't get that I'm arguing FOR Obama's policy, and you're arguing against it.

Hardly. You're arguing for a drastic overreaction that would cause much more harm than the issue you want to address. Acurately portraying the size of the issue is not spin; it's essential to good governance.

I fully support Obama's earmark reforms. They are well thought out and will make the process even more transparent. They will help reduce waste and corruption. I'll hold him to that promise as he works with Congress on the first spending bill of his Administration.

What I object to is fake controversy and histrionic overreactions.

[Harlowe]

Embar if this is all you have to nitpick about so early in the game, you aren't being remotely objective nor honest.

[Arathena]

Yeah, I'mma get lambasted for source, but:

Hi, hypocracy!

in just 6 Republican senators, $1.7+ billion in earmarks.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Respectfully, I disagree Harlowe. I don't think expecting Obama to live up to his campaign promises on spending (which all of you know is a big issue with me) is nitpicking. I guess I expected more this time around. Eventually, I suppose I'll get used to his mediocrity and the business as usual in Washington.