AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

After the Democrats were voted into the congressional majority and took office January 3, 2007, Congress has been doing what George Soros wants it to do.

And what are those things that George Soros wanted the democrats to do? And how did he influence the democratic congress? Please provide detailed evidence from any reliable source.

Such "bribes" were instrumental in getting Obamacare passed, wasn't it?

To be accurate, it isn't a really obvious bribe, but it effectively is a bribe if you look at the entire loop of what happens. For example, a congressman exchanges his vote for an earmark in his home state or district, which increases the liklihood that he can gain re-election in the next election for his seat, which enables him to profit personally from his political position in Congress. Not only does he prolong his career, which enables him to draw his salary at the expense of taxpayers, but he increases the retirement benefits awaiting him when he does choose to leave office. And also if you are a congressman or senator like Harry Reid, you can profit in many other ways, by investing in land that can be traded to the federal government or enhanced in value by congressional decisions that may enhance the value of your personal investments. Not only that, Reids relatives and family members can be lobbyists and contractors that profit more directly and immediately as a result of earmark expenditures.

So although it isn't an immediate exchange of bribery cash, the cash finds its way into the congressmens' hands, in exchange for the congressmens' votes, via the many ways I have described in the above.

okie, Your narrow view of politics belongs in the 5th grade. FYI both parties do it.

Did I say only one party did it? I have a question though, which party is now leading the charge to eliminate earmarks? Should be easy to answer, ci, give it a try.

No, but you shot only the liberals - on this issue, and this thread is supposed to be about American Conservatism.

This from the same person that blamed the federal govt for not spending enough money on the levees before Katrina.
And the same person that criticized the federal govt for not spending enough money in the reconstruction of NO?

Which party does Inhofe belong to?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/253159/eliminating-earmarks-phony-issue-james-m-inhofe



The only reason an earmark ban has any chance is because it has bipartisan support as well as bipartisan opposition.


But the GOP is late to the party when it comes to dealing with earmarks. If you bothered to check recent history, the last GOP controlled congress spent more on earmarks than any other Congress in US history.

parados, Now that you mention it about the GOP spending more on earmarks, just goes to show okie again doesn't know what he's talking about. I remember somebody (might have been me) that posted the list where the GOP had more earmarks during the last congress.

I think I may have posted it when someone was whining about how the Dems didn't eliminate earmarks and I pointed out they have cut them in half from the recent GOP congresses.

You get the credit.

Apparently a Republican takes top honors for earmark spending in the Senate this year, but Democrat Daniel Inouye comes in a strong second, and his state Hawaii takes top honors with per capita earmark spending at $251 per capita. Democrat Earl Pomeroy took top honors in the House.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/14/shrimp-research-unwanted-military-projects-b-earmarked-projects/

"And the king of pork is ... Sen. Thad Cochran. The Mississippi Republican ranks at the top this year of the Citizens Against Government Waste's list of congressional earmarkers.
Cochran, the ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, is typically a leading pork-seeker and in 2010 had his name on 240 projects worth $490.2 million The runner-up was Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, with 151 projects worth $387.5 million.
Taken together, earmarked projects in fiscal year 2010 accounted for $16.5 billion of the federal budget. Congress has authority to approve $1.2 trillion in discretionary spending.
Leading the the 50 states was Hawaii, which enjoyed $251 per capita, thanks in large part to the help of Inouye. On the House side, Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., took home the gold with 50 projects worth $148.4 million."

Hey, lookee! okie actually posted something that shows a republican spending more on earmarks! Hurray for okie!

Things have been posted so many times by so many people, you probably posted it before as well.

I don't recall anyone claiming republicans were not just
as guilty a democrats when it came to earmark spending.

The T.E.A. party people are making a name for themselves with
this anti-earmark movement, but it's not going to stop spending.

I say this entire earmark debate is a waste of precious time.

It wouldn't take much time to merely sign a bill to eliminate it. Nor would it take long to eliminate funding to PBS, NPR, and National Endowment for the Arts. An easy savings of a few hundred million without a skip in hearbeat at all, except for a few libs that are making a living on our tax dollars.

I don't think we would see any real savings because the money will end up getting spent anyway.

A better use of this energy would be to do away with the federal department of education.
This one change would save a ton of money and weaken the radical progressive liberal movement.

Ah, yes, eliminate PBS entirely so we can all join you in watching the Kardashians, or whatever their last name is, in their bikinis.

Funding for NPR pays for 4 minutes and 30 seconds each day.

The Federal department of education does not do much, but, it has been around in one form or another since shortly after the Civil War. School boards are local institutions and the local yokels decide how dumb they want the kids to be.

Well, among the sterling citizens elected to Congress is Loy Mauch of Georgia. He is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and thinks the Confederate sign is a symbol of Jesus Christ. Looks like we have to blame all those schlocky paintings of Christ as a man with golden brown hair and a pink complexion, don't we?

To read more about this advocate for "Biblical government," follow this link:

http://www.arktimes.com/arkansas/the-south-shall-rise-again/Content?oid=1380685