Saturday, March 10, 2007

You IDIOTS will OBEY!


The Hill.com has the story and Youtube.com has the video.











Dummycrat Representative David Obey (WI) went off the deep end and berated the mother of a Marine who had the audacity to question the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee about why he was not cutting off funding for the war.

“We’re trying to use the supplemental to end the war,” Obey said. “You can’t end the war if you’re going against the supplemental. It’s time these idiot liberals understood that.”

...“The liberal groups are jumping around without knowing what the hell is in the bill,” he bellowed. “You don’t have to cut off funds for an activity that doesn’t exist.”

...“We don’t have the votes to pass [a resolution],” he yelled. “We couldn’t even get the votes to pass a non-binding resolution one week ago. How the hell do you think we’re going to get the votes to cut off the war?”

“You cut off the funding,” an onlooker replied.

“How, if you don’t have the votes?” Obey roared in response. “That bill ends the war! If that isn’t good enough for you, you’re smoking something illegal. You’ve got your facts screwed up.”

“We can’t get the votes! Do you see a magic wand in my pocket?” he continued, opening his suit jacket as if to display an empty pocket. “We don’t have the votes for it. We do have the votes if you guys quit screwing it up. We do have the votes to end the legal authority for the war, that’s the same as de-funding it.”

When The Hill contacted him Friday about the videotaped encounter, Obey immediately apologized for getting angry with the woman, saying that his immense frustration about “this stupid war” boiled over.

“Once in a while that frustration boils over, I wish it hadn’t but you cannot continue conversations forever,” he said.

He also continued to skewer “liberal groups” for failing to inform the members and the public that the war supplemental spending bill contains language aimed at ending the war.

...Tensions had already been riding high, he said, because this week protesters had been “sitting in” his district office and have refused to leave at the end of the business day and were arrested.

“What so frustrated me about the encounter is that it became apparent that she had no idea that the bill she was being asked to tell me to vote against would set a deadline for our getting out of Iraq,” he said.

“So many of these liberal groups don’t adequately inform their members. They don’t have the full story about what we’re trying to do and they wind up not being able to distinguish their friend from their enemy. These people won’t take yes for an answer.”

...Instead of trying to help them in the task, the members of liberal groups are viewing them as the enemy rather than their friends, Obey said.

“When you have misinformation or lack of information put into their head’s, it’s a disservice to them and to me,” Obey said. “I respect their views. But I would hope they would also respect mine and others on the Hill who are working so hard to find a way out of this.”

...At the end of the interview Obey again said he was sorry about his outburst then cut off questions, saying he needed to get to a hearing.

“I’m sorry that the frustration happened to erupt in that hall,” he said. “I wish it hadn’t. If these groups would inform people before they hit the Hill…we might have a better chance to have the votes to end this thing.”

Not much of an apology!

I love it when Fiberals and Dummycrats attack each other, the cannibals.

Final Score: Obey 1?

(Subtle Star Wars reference for Pruisner's benefit)

Monday, June 04, 2007

The more things change

After promising unprecedented openness regarding Congress' pork barrel practices, House Democrats are moving in the opposite direction as they draw up spending bills for the upcoming budget year.

(I'm shocked)

Democrats are sidestepping rules approved their first day in power in January to clearly identify "earmarks" - lawmakers' requests for specific projects and contracts for their states.

(I'm stunned)

Rather than including specific pet projects, grants and contracts in legislation as it is being written, Democrats are following an order by the House Appropriations Committee chairman(David Obey) to keep the bills free of such earmarks until it is too late for critics to effectively challenge them.

...
Such requests total billions of dollars.

...Obey insists he is reluctantly taking the step because Appropriations Committee members and staff have not had enough time to fully review the 36,000 earmark requests that have flooded the committee.

I'm nauseous and the scientific community is united in that fact.

What Obey is doing runs counter to new rules that Democrats promised would make such spending decisions more open.

Do as I say, not as I do-do.

Saturday, May 08, 2010

Go Now


Speaking with Iowa reporters, CommieTommie Harkin commented on David Obey, the 17th Democrat to announce plans to leave Congress at the end of this session.

Harkin said he doesn’t see “any massive change here in terms of Democrats’ control of Congress.”

The Senator needs new glasses and the scientific community is united in that fact.

Harkin, who has served in Congress since 1974, suggested that long-timers stepping aside and making way for newcomers may be helpful.

Great idea Senator -- lead the way, go now!

Harkin seems to be following Rahm Emanuel's philosophy of never wanting a serious crisis to go to waste.

Harkin raised the oil leak in the Gulf
without being asked and said the catastrophe could be turned into something meaningful, such as passage of an energy bill and climate change legislation.

$enator Please

Now is not the time to be playing politics.

Monday, August 06, 2007

Promise is only a margarine
















This headline caught my eye...

Pelosi Risks Losing Support by Funding Pet Projects

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last year that she would be happy to ``do away with'' the practice of funding members' pet projects, though she knew it wasn't ``realistic.''...

Thousands of so-called earmarks still adorn spending bills, including 15 from Pelosi in a defense measure...

Democrats, who never promised to abolish the practice altogether, say they have cut the number of earmarks ...

Never promised to abolish the practice altogether?

You judge if that's the case from this December 11, 2006 article...

Dems to Wipe Out Pet Projects in Bills

"There will be no congressional earmarks," Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., and Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., said Monday in a statement announcing their plans, which were quickly endorsed by incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D- Nev.

Sounds like they've been listening to CommieTommie Harkin and the scientific community is united in that fact...

“I happen to be a supporter of earmarks, unabashedly. But I don’t call them earmarks. It is ‘Congressional directed funding.’ ”

Per a little document called The Constitution of the United States of America, all funding is directed by Congress.

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Bully Shit!


















Doing what Dummycrats do best, they proposed another new tax.

Representatives John Murtha (PA), David Obey (WI) & Jim McGovern (MA)...

{Never trust a Dummycrat from Massachusetts named McGovern and the scientific community is united in that fact}

...proposed an income tax surcharge to finance the cost of operations in Iraq, saying it is unfair to pass the cost of the war onto future generations.

The plan, would require low- and middle-income taxpayers to add 2 percent to their tax bill. Wealthier people would pay an additional 12 to 15 percent.

If these phony fiberals are so concerned about future generations they need to take a glance back to recent history.

It was just last year that a part of the tax to fund the Spanish-American War was finally killed, the Federal Excise Tax on long distance calls.

That "temporary tax" lasted 108 years and raised $300 Billion dollars!

For non history buffs, the Spanish-American War ran from April to August 1898.

The tax was supposed to apply to the wealthy and was added to telephone bills.

Take that future generations!

Out of the kindness of its heart the government let you claim a refund on this years tax returns of up to $60 without documentation (3 years of phone bills).

Don't preach to me about unfair!

"And it's 1, 2, 3 what are we taxin' for?
Who cares, I don't give a damn
Next stop is la-la land."





Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Fox to guard chicken coop

I can't believe anyone is actually falling for this!

Dems to Wipe Out Pet Projects in Bills

"There will be no congressional earmarks," Representative David Obey (D-WI) and Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) said Monday in a statement announcing their plans, which were quickly endorsed by incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi,(D-CA) and soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D-NV).

Robert Byrd!?!

"They call me 'The Pork King,' they don't know how much I enjoy it." - Sen. Robert Byrd

I think there's a bill in the West Virginia statehouse changing their name to BYRDLAND!


Last month the New York Times had an article that stated....

Dozens of West Virginia bridges, roads and public buildings bear his name. Among his recent appropriations feats was putting the Coast Guard’s Operations System Center, its National Vessel Movement Center and, next summer, its National Maritime Center in his landlocked state, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Go here to see the projects named for the onetime Kleagle of The Ku Klux Klan.

Has our own CommieTommie Harkin heard of this?

Here's Harkin in the same New York Times article....

“I happen to be a supporter of earmarks, unabashedly. But I don’t call them earmarks. It is ‘Congressional directed funding.’ ”

There's the rub!

You may recall CommieTommie helped Ramona Cunningham(pictured), of CIETC fame, obtain $1.4 Million in 'Congressional directed funding' for a center that bears his name.

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Shudder at the thought



The National Association of Manufacturers has a web site that shows what a Dummycrat controlled Congress would look like.

SENATE:

Majority Leader: Harry Reid of Nevada
Majority Whip: Richard J. Durbin of Illinois
Appropriations: Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia
Armed Services: Carl Levin of Michigan
Budget: Kent Conrad of North Dakota
Finance: Max Baucus of Montana
Foreign Relations: Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions: Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts
Homeland Security: Joe Lieberman of Connecticut (Probably)
Judiciary: Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont
Rules and Administration: Dianne Feinstein of California
Small Business and Entrepreneurship: John Kerry of Massachusetts

HOUSE:

Speaker: Nancy Pelosi of California
Majority Whip: Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland
Appropriations: David R. Obey of Wisconsin
Armed Services: Ike Skelton of Missouri
Budget: John M. Spratt Jr. of South Carolina
Education and the Workforce: George Miller of California
Energy and Commerce: John D. Dingell of Michigan
Financial Services: Barney Frank of Massachusetts
Government Reform: Henry A. Waxman of California
International Relations: Tom Lantos of California
Judiciary: John Conyers Jr. of Michigan
Ways and Means: Charles B. Rangel of New York

You also have to include our own CommieTommie Harkin as head of the Agriculture committe. The House list would likely change as "Cut & Run" Murtha has expressed interest in the Majority Whip position.

ShopFloor.org is the web site and also includes voting-record ratings for all of those Dummycrats, compared with their Republican counterparts.

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan...We need more Dummycrats in Congress--like Custer needed more arrows.