Meh, there are types of people that want to score political points and make fun of religious red-staters and their dead kids, and then there are the rest of us.
Glad that's settled, shortbus.
Meh, there are types of people that want to score political points and make fun of religious red-staters and their dead kids, and then there are the rest of us.
let me guess, it's similar to how WC was really critical of Bush's deficit spending during his presidency in spite of the fact there isn't an iota of it on this site?
There are types of people who want to deny Hurricane relief to a state because it's an evil atheist blue state, and then there are the rest of us.
Really? I think you know you are full of .
Are you trying to call foul here?
Rings hollow tbh.
See you later, shortbus.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post6165712
Did the citizens of the state of Oklahoma pay federal taxes?
You mean how would Christie view $58.8 million for forest restoration on private land, being put in disaster relief for Oklahoma? Hmm
The citizens of NJ did as well.
$150 million for Alaskan fisheries
I'm not understanding the point.
I'm not surprised.
I'm for federal disaster relief in both cases. 36 Republican senators are already on record as not being for it in both cases. Let's see what they think this time around.
I'm sure their view on this is evolving.![]()
Didn't think you could explain the nonsense.
Inhofe: Tornado aid ‘totally different’ from Hurricane Sandy aid
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...rricane-sandy/
I don't think Tom "Dr No" Coburn is the kind of knee jerk politician. I imagine he would vote no, if the bill was filled with pork like the original Sandy Relief
The pork isue is irrelevant to Coburn. The No vote is a default unless the aid is "paid for" by a corresponding cut somewhere else.
That's a poor way to manage disaster relief.
politicizing disaster relief is ing re ed.
He'll vote yes because he is precisely not a knee jerk politician.
He's just a politician.
Pork is re ed. Propose a disaster relief bill that is not a blank check for wasteful spending somewhere else. That is the only reason it failed. The biggest talking point of the election at the time was the economy and the more wasteful spending than any administration in history. Of course the lib media is going to cry foul because there is an election for their man to win a month later.
Um, it didn't fail.
I stand corrected. Why GOP was initially against it.
Where in there are you critical of Republican senators who voted against Sandy relief?
I was defending Obama's actions. Since there was little in that thread pertaining to Republican senators. Lrn2contextualize, shortbus.
Oh, the humanity! fixing roads in a less developed area and putting roofs on houses THAT WERE DAMAGED BY THE ING HURRICANE.That was a “totally different” situation, Inhofe told MSNBC, arguing that the Sandy aid was filled with pork. There were “things in the Virgin Islands. They were fixing roads there and putting roofs on houses in Washington, D.C.”
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)