100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Thu 02/10/11 10:36 PM
|
|
612
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Thu 02/10/11 10:35 PM
|
|
613
Point at that bug! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
|
|
615
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
|
|
617
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
|
|
618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
|
|
620
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
|
|
621
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
|
|
621
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Thu 02/10/11 10:30 PM
|
|
621
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
|
|
620
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Thu 02/10/11 10:26 PM
|
|
15 Presidential hopefuls.
Have you seen who they are? Bachmann, Pleaseeee!  Barbour, Cain, Chris Christie, Daniels, Gingrich, Huckabee, Jon Huntsman, Gary Johnson, Palin, Paul,  Pawlenty, Romney, Isn't this the Governor with the Obamalike Health-Care Bill? Santorum, and Thune. I can see how this is going to go. OBAMA Wins! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
just logged on, huh Fanta? You can always tell when there's a sudden flurry of postings from one person Someone besides you has to post sense. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
guys vs girls - part 31
|
|
620
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Thu 02/10/11 10:10 PM
|
|
A little leadership in the party couldn't hurt.
 15 Presidential hopefuls in the Party and no leadership.  Maybe they could get Sarah or Rush to help. Come on Pubes, get it together. It's a little harder to show real progress than it is to vote NO all the time. Isn't it? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pressure on spending cuts, surprise floor defeats show fraying party unity
Under pressure to make deeper spending cuts and blindsided by embarrassing floor defeats, House Republican leaders are quickly discovering the limits of control over their ideologically driven and independent-minded new majority. For the second consecutive day, House Republicans on Wednesday lost a floor vote due to a mini-revolt, this time over a plan to demand a repayment from the United Nations. Earlier in the day, members of the party’s conservative bloc used a closed-door party meeting to push the leadership to go well beyond its plans to trim about $40 billion from domestic spending and foreign aid this year, demanding $100 billion or more. The spending rebellion came after the House on Tuesday rejected what was expected to be a routine temporary extension of anti-terrorism Patriot Act provisions when Democrats and about two dozen conservative Republicans balked at a fast-track procedure. Republicans, still searching for their footing after assuming control in January, were also forced to pull a trade assistance bill from the floor after conservatives raised objections. They found themselves mediating other internal fights as well. Speaker John A. Boehner conceded that the fledgling majority was encountering turbulence. “We have been in the majority four weeks,” Mr. Boehner said. “We are not going to be perfect every day.” The image of Republican turmoil was heightened Wednesday when Representative Christopher Lee, a second-term Republican from upstate New York, resigned after a disclosure by a Web site, Gawker.com, that he had sent embarrassing photographs and misrepresented himself to a woman he contacted through Craigslist. His decision came after discussions with the leadership. The fraying of party unity, if not of a scale or intensity that imperils Mr. Boehner’s ability to advance the main elements of his agenda, nonetheless stood in sharp contrast to the record of Republicans in remaining remarkably united against President Obama and the Democrats over the past two years. The infighting foreshadowed potential difficulties for Republicans in holding their troops together for clashes with the White House and the Democratically controlled Senate as well as their ability to corral reluctant Republicans to vote to increase the federal debt limit. The looser party discipline reflected Mr. Boehner’s approach of allowing a more open atmosphere on the House floor and of, in his words, letting the House work its will even if events do not always unfold smoothly. But the leadership was clearly surprised by the resistance to a measure to provide aid to workers displaced by new trade agreements and the Patriot Act renewal, two measures deemed so noncontroversial that they were brought to the floor under an expedited process that requires a two-thirds majority for passage. Republicans said they had not even considered it necessary to aggressively court support. It's 'going to take a while' The willingness to buck the leadership was not unexpected given the size of the Republican freshman class, 87 new members, and the fact that newcomers and many veterans felt empowered by election results they read as a mandate to push spending cuts and shake up Congress. “It is going to take a while for them to find their way,” said Representative John B. Larson of Connecticut, chairman of the Democratic Caucus. “For so many of their new members, discipline within the party and allegiance to a party doesn’t mean an awful lot.” The push for deeper spending cuts could be the most serious issue for Republican leaders at the moment since they have to find a level of savings that can offer some chance of a compromise with the Senate and Mr. Obama, who had House leaders to the White House on Wednesday for what was described as a productive lunch. In advance of a planned release Thursday of the House Republican plan to finance the government through Sept. 30, members of the Appropriations Committee on Wednesday disclosed some of the cuts lawmakers were proposing. Among 60 programs in line for elimination were the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, AmeriCorps and a $298 million Clinton-era program for hiring local police officers. Other planned cutbacks included nearly $900 million in energy conservation and efficiency programs; $1.8 billion from the Environmental Protection Agency; and $75 million from legal-aid programs. In a swipe at the administration, the bill would eliminate $5 billion in high-speed rail money. “Make no mistake, these cuts are not low-hanging fruit,” Representative Hal Rogers, Republican of Kentucky and chairman of the Appropriations Committee, said. “These cuts are real and will impact every district across the country — including my own.” But during the closed party meeting, other Republicans said the cuts were too timid and that the party needed to reach the $100 billion decrease Republicans had pledged before proposing to pro-rate the cuts since the government was nearly halfway through its fiscal year. Representative Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, said Republicans should propose an across-the-board reduction if necessary to meet the $100 billion level. “We said we would do it, and so we should,” Mr. Flake said. But Mr. Rogers and other Republicans warned that doubling the cuts could have substantial consequences for federal agencies, resulting in layoffs and furloughs of federal law enforcement officers and air traffic controllers, steep cuts in education and medical research programs and major changes at the Food and Drug Administration. Democrats also dug in against the proposals. “The Republican plan will cost jobs, undercut American innovation and clean energy, jeopardize our safety by taking cops off the street, and threaten investments in rebuilding America — at a time when our economy can least afford it,” Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader, said. But Republicans have succeeded in shifting the focus to budget cutting so sufficiently that the White House will propose an array of cuts in the budget for next year that Mr. Obama sends to Capitol Hill on Monday. Administration officials confirmed on Wednesday that the budget would propose to cut in half, to nearly $2.6 billion in fiscal year 2012, a federal program that subsidizes energy costs for low-income households. The big reduction for the popular Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program immediately drew protests from lawmakers and antipoverty groups, as have several other cuts the administration has previewed for community service and environmental programs. Despite concerns about cutting too deeply, Republican leaders met Wednesday night in an effort to review ways to produce more savings and mollify conservative critics. But any efforts to do so are likely to make it more difficult to reach agreement with the Senate and White House, increasing chances for a series of temporary stopgap spending bills or an impasse that could lead to a government shutdown. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41506295/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Invictus, I don't understand what your point is. I think he's mad because Bush didn't act before the economy blew up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Focusing on Obama’s faith:
|
|
Who?
O'Reiley? Ah he's just paid to create illusions in the minds of the uninformed Fox Viewers. Don't be mad at him. Be mad at the disillusioned for be so gullible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tea Party Funding Koch Brothers Emerge From Anonymity By Peter Fenn Posted: February 2, 2011 Few in America had heard about the third-richest Americans, brothers David and Charles Koch, until just recently. Aside from David Koch’s gifts to the Lincoln Center in New York and the naming of a theater after him, few outside a small, elite circle would recognize the name or know how to pronounce it. (“Koch” as in “coke”) For decades, they were under the radar. They and their father had amassed an incredible fortune, mainly in the oil business. Their privately held company revenues last year were estimated at $100 billion. Each brother is worth $21.5 billion. That is a very big “B” in both cases. For many years, they have been involved in politics but not terribly open or transparent about it. It is true that David Koch ran as vice president on the 1980 Libertarian ticket, to the right of Ronald Reagan. According to New York Times columnist Frank Rich, “his campaign called for the abolition not just of Social Security, federal regulatory agencies and welfare but also of the FBI, the CIA, and public schools.” Since the Libertarian party’s 1 percent showing in 1980, David Koch has very much been behind the scenes, until now. [See who donates the most to your member of Congress.] Jane Mayer, of The New Yorker, in her 10,000 word piece last August, peeled the cover off the onion of the Koch brothers' empire. And she focused not only on their personal wealth and family, but on their political empire building. It was not, and is not, easy to get the details on the extent of their tentacles. They funnel money through 501c3 tax-exempt foundations, and they give money to other foundations, lobbying organizations, and right wing think tanks. They have PACs; they support candidates. Only a small portion of what they control do they divulge. But it has now come out how involved they have been in funding Tea Party groups, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, and Citizens for a Sound Economy ($12 million). [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on the Tea Party.] We do know, from Mayer’s reporting, that the Koch brothers have personally given over $2 million to candidates over the last 12 years, their PAC has contributed $8 million to candidates, and they have spent $50 million on lobbying. The Charles Koch Foundation has given $48 million, and another foundation they control gave $28 million. David Koch’s foundation gave more than $120 million. According to Mayer, $196 million dollars in total was distributed in the last 10 years to conservative causes and institutions. That all, as they say, is not chicken feed, and it begs the question: How in the heck did they stay under the radar for as long as they did? Part of the reason is that much of what they did was not reportable but, more important, until recently they were not pouring the millions into campaigns through advertising and expenditures allowed due to the Citizens United Supreme Court case. [Read the U.S. News debate: Is the Citizens United decision hurting democracy?] Now, to the paranoia. These folks would make Richard Nixon’s enemies list look tame. This could be a movie akin to George Clooney’s Michael Clayton. This past weekend the Koch brothers hosted a conference in Palm Springs that resembled an armed camp. Private Koch security was everywhere—manning every doorway and stairway within range of the conference. Reporters were confronted by private security guards and told to leave or they would be arrested, and a Common Cause official had his lunch reservation canceled and was told to check out of the hotel by Koch’s security detail. Young environmental activists were slapped with $100,000 law suits for demonstrating and engaging in pranks. A Politico reporter describes being thrown out and threatened with “a night in the Riverside County jail.” All this while hiring an army of lawyers, PR flacks, political consultants, and pollsters to protect their “empire.” Everywhere there were folks spinning. Even reporters, who had been paid by Koch, attended the conference to “report” on what they “learned.” Well, Lord knows they have the money. My guess is that anonymity will not be the Koch brothers’ middle name any longer. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/Peter-Fenn/2011/02/02/tea-party-funding-koch-brothers-emerge-from-anonymity Why was the truth buried here? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Webb is a Marines Marine. He is a CMH holder. A genuine American hero. He's just tired of politics and who can blame him. He's a coward and wasn't even liked by the people who servied with him. Did you read the citation? Ain't no coward in that man! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/02/09/6017144-first-thoughts-tea-party-defiance
First read! This was from yesterday! |
|
|
|
|
Previous
