So our fine president signs the highway bill...

Brk · Post by **Brk** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 4:49 pm

Article

THIS pissed me THE. FVCK. OFF.

Alaska, the third-least populated state, for instance, got the fourth most money for special projects - $941 million - thanks largely to the work of its lone representative, House Transportation Committee Chairman Don Young. That included $231 million for a bridge near Anchorage to be named "Don Young's Way" in honor of the Republican.

The arrogance of these ELECTED officials has moved beyond "oh those spendthrift politicians" jokes and into the most egregious "yeah, so what? fvck you, taxpayer, what are YOU going to do" impudence.

Spammy · Post by **Spammy** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 4:51 pm

House Transportation Committee Chairman Don Young???

What exactly does this house committee rule.?

Spammy · Post by **Spammy** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:01 pm

^^
Can someone answer this for me because Burke is still acting like im on his Ignore list.

Thanks In advance

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:04 pm

Spammy wrote:House Transportation Committee Chairman Don Young???

What exactly does this house committee rule.?

how about transportation? lol

roads, bridges, maybe public parking?

Spammy · Post by **Spammy** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:05 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:how about transportation? lol

roads, bridges, maybe public parking?

ahhh ok..

Thanks yard.

Jim · Post by **Jim** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:07 pm

http://www.house.gov/transportation/

They have jurisdiction over highways, aviation, railroads, the Coast Guard, and emegrency managment. Basically, they deal with everything from highway construction to FEMA and DHS.

Spammy · Post by **Spammy** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:11 pm

Jim wrote:http://www.house.gov/transportation/

They have jurisdiction over highways, aviation, railroads, the Coast Guard, and emegrency managment. Basically, they deal with everything from highway construction to FEMA and DHS.

Way cool thanks Jim

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Jim again.

DaddyLongLeg · Post by **DaddyLongLeg** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:20 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:how about transportation? lol

roads, bridges, maybe public parking?

LOL...Hey go easy on Spammy, he's got a lot of s**T on his mind

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:09 pm

Yeah the bridge thing is completely off the hook!! I think it serves a combined population of around 4000? It links an island of 50 people to a small town. Maybe this Senator has a lot of land there, that might sell for tourists homes in the future?

Anyway.....more..

The bill funnels upward of $941 million to 119 earmarked projects in Alaska, including $223 million for a mile-long bridge linking an island with 50 residents to the town of Ketchikan on the mainland. Another $231 million is earmarked for a new bridge in Anchorage, to be named -- this is specified in the legislation -- Don Young's Way. There is $3 million for a film ''about infrastructure that demonstrates advancements in Alaska, the last frontier."

Good grief! There's MORE!!

Christmas didn't come early just for Alaska. Meander through the bill's endless line items and you find a remarkable variety of ''highway" projects, many of which have nothing to do with highways: Horse riding facilities in Virginia ($600,000). A snowmobile trail in Vermont ($5.9 million). Parking for New York's Harlem Hospital ($8 million). A bicycle and pedestrian trail in Tennessee ($532,000). A daycare center and park-and-ride facility in Illinois ($1.25 million). Dust control mitigation for rural Arkansas ($3 million). The National Packard Museum in Ohio ($2.75 million). A historical trolley project in Washington ($200,000). And on and on and on.

So how are we going to pay for it? We aren't!! Our grand kids and great grandkids are!

Don't forget that on top of not doing ANYTHING about off shore accounts...they just gave big energy a whopping 14.XX BILLION tax cut!

2006 is looming...throw the bums out that can't think of how to be fiscally responsible.

thepieman · Post by **thepieman** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:18 pm

Thats a lot of Pork. Hey the president signed off on it , so he's just as guilty as they are. I hope another politician comes in and names it Don Youngs Wayste. There is definitly something up with that dealio.

Pie

De Plano · Post by **De Plano** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:21 pm

5.9 million for a snowmobile trail? What are they going to make the snow year round? Seriously how can that cost that much?

I will leave my republican bashing out of this, but this is just an odd way to be fiscally responsible when we have so much other money problems. Iraq isn't exactly a cheap thing to be involved in

On a side note I don't think anyone politician should be allowed to put their name on a project they are a part of. At least remove a little bit of egotism from the pork

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:21 pm

instead of 200+ million for a bridge for 50 people, i'd jsut buy them a ****ign house on the mainland!

Mytflyguy · Post by **Mytflyguy** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:27 pm

Something th think about before BAshing Our "Fine" PResident.

"The House and Senate voted overwhelmingly to pass the six-year highway and mass transit legislation just before heading home for a summer break."

So are you not Bashign the Entire Congress of both Senate and House ?? Those that were Voted in the same way the President was ?

Bush had threatened to veto the bill if the final version was too fat for his liking, and it took nearly two years for Congress to reach a compromise the White House would accept. "There were a number of members of Congress who wanted a $400 billion highway bill," Al Hubbard, director of the National Economic Council at the White House, said Tuesday in defending the president's decision to accept the bill even though it was $30 billion more than Bush recommended.

Sounds to me like he saved us at minimum $100 Bill.

Sure we may not agree with all of the decisions or locations or money spent .... But he was acting on the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY vote.

I agree some of it seem soutlandish ... But I wouldn't take you rSour idea of the president and let hmim stand on this as if he was the writer. He was the final sign off. Everyone else passed it before him.

Point fingers where they are due.

Chris · Post by **Chris** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:30 pm

DaddyLongLeg wrote:LOL...Hey go easy on Spammy, he's got a lot of s**T on his mind

Did you just call Sammy a Chithead?

A little TP on the end of a Q Tip will clean that chit out

Spammy · Post by **Spammy** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:33 pm

Chris wrote:Did you just call Sammy a Chithead?

A little TP on the end of a Q Tip will clean that chit out

DaddyLongLeg · Post by **DaddyLongLeg** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:34 pm

Chris wrote:Did you just call Sammy a Chithead?

A little TP on the end of a Q Tip will clean that chit out

Didn't really realize it, but yea, I guess I did. Qtips on the way Sammy

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:34 pm

Mytflyguy wrote:Something th think about before BAshing Our "Fine" PResident.

So are you not Bashign the Entire Congress of both Senate and House ?? Those that were Voted in the same way the President was ?

Sounds to me like he saved us at minimum $100 Bill.

Sure we may not agree with all of the decisions or locations or money spent .... But he was acting on the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY vote.

I agree some of it seem soutlandish ... But I wouldn't take you rSour idea of the president and let hmim stand on this as if he was the writer. He was the final sign off. Everyone else passed it before him.

Point fingers where they are due.

He's the big man, and he signed it, when headhunting its best to start at the top.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:25 pm

Mytflyguy wrote:Something th think about before BAshing Our "Fine" PResident.

So are you not Bashign the Entire Congress of both Senate and House ?? Those that were Voted in the same way the President was ?

Sounds to me like he saved us at minimum $100 Bill.

Sure we may not agree with all of the decisions or locations or money spent .... But he was acting on the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY vote.

I agree some of it seem soutlandish ... But I wouldn't take you rSour idea of the president and let hmim stand on this as if he was the writer. He was the final sign off. Everyone else passed it before him.

Point fingers where they are due.

If you read my post, you'll see that imho, most of congress needs a wakeup call.

Now on to the President. He could have vetoed it but didn't. In fact I'm not sure if he's ever vetoed anything. That's not a show of resolve but one of no spine.

Jim · Post by **Jim** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:20 pm

John wrote:I have seen a road in Ketchikan, AK being built over the past 8 years every time I go up there. It's the most expensive piece of road ever built per foot, and it's the joke of the town.

I think the joke is on the other 49...

Cypher · Post by **Cypher** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:32 pm

Until we meet these bastards with extreme acts of violence, where it hits home for them this will only get worse. That's the most PG13 way I can express my feelings for this government.
It's to the point where I'm looking to move to another country in a few years. I just hope I can make it that long.

WhoNut · Post by **WhoNut** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:55 pm

It has finally come full circle...Republicans are the new Democrats.

MadDoctor · Post by **MadDoctor** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:02 pm

WhoNut wrote:It has finally come full circle...Republicans are the new Democrats.

Lets see... take "public" from the word republicans and "rats" from Democrats and we have "publicrats"

nepenthe · Post by **nepenthe** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:12 pm

WhoNut wrote:It has finally come full circle...Republicans are the new Democrats.

The "liberal" Democrats were noted for tax and spend, the modern neocon "conservative" Republican have made their way via borrow and spend. A far more dangerous tack when you consider who is footing our loans. It is no wonder this country is no longer owned by the American people.

david

Joel · Post by **Joel** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:47 pm

downhill wrote:That's not a show of resolve but one of no spine.

Surely you can't be serious?

Our president has, despite more than his fair shair of verbal bashing, continued to very actively pursue terrorism, and because he didn't veto a overwhelmingly high vote from the house he has no spine?

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:56 pm

Joel wrote:Surely you can't be serious?

Our president has, despite more than his fair shair of verbal bashing, continued to very actively pursue terrorism, and because he didn't veto a overwhelmingly high vote from the house he has no spine?

More than his share of verbal bashing? I think it's only just started.

I am serious. Joel...your taking my post out of context. Tell me, just what piece of legislation has he vetoed? None that I'm aware of. Name me any other President who's accomplished that? He's pampering to special interests period. That's the way it's been the whole time he's been in office.

By the way, even though this thread isn't about the war on terrorism. In this he gets an F. No Bin Laden, Terrorist cells on the rise. Iraq is a rallying cry to Muslim extremist and they couldn't ask for a better training ground....

Conservative should not be on the new neo con ticket.

Bouncer · Post by **Bouncer** » Thu Aug 11, 2005 3:47 am

Joel wrote:Surely you can't be serious?

Our president has, despite more than his fair shair of verbal bashing, continued to very actively pursue terrorism, and because he didn't veto a overwhelmingly high vote from the house he has no spine?

Well the problem is he promised to be a fiscal conservative moderate. Instead he's turned into a God Squad member who has yet to veto a single, solitary spending bill. Not a single one. Meanwhile, the gov't is spending WAY more money then they are taking in.

To cover their checks, they are *borrowing* money from the Chinese gov't. At 16% Interest. 16% of your taxes this year are going to pay the Chinese gov't INTEREST. Not principal. It is these moneys which the Chinese are using to make bids for strategic facilities like UNOCAL and the oil production they own.

Get it? YOUR TAX DOLLARS ARE PAYING FOR THE CHINESE TO BUY OUR CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.

That's where your Great Leader has led us.

Was Iraq necessary? No. But we are there now so we must finish it. But we should pay the cost of that honestly, by raising taxes, rather than burden our children with our debts. It is wrong. It would be wrong if a Democrat were president and it's wrong with a Republican President. It's just wrong. It is worse though, because the ChickenHawk we have now is not only a coward, he's a bald faced liar.

And you keep sucking his lies down. No wonder he keeps spewing them. You will not stand up for what is right as long as it's "your guy" in the Office. Hell, he could be a member of Al-Queda and you'd still stand by him.

He is very very bad for the country. NOT because he's Republican, but because he cannot see the consequences of his actions. As long as it gets him through today, that's all the future that matters. Eventually, we are all going to get hit by the train coming down that mountain. We could shunt it aside, but as long as the two feet of track in front of him are clear, he will not throw that switch. And because you think he's your chainsaw using, stump clearing buddy, you will not dare question him even as the rumbling turns to thunder.

By the time the two of you decide it's a problem, it will simply be too late. We will be out of time. And out of credit. And we will all get stuck in a 70's style recession for the better part of a decade. At least. Of course we can always find work as a 6 dollar an hour Wal-Mart stocker. Who will sell us American goods made by a Chinese owned company employing Americans at minimum wage... at a discounted price.

Open. Your. Eyes.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

nepenthe · Post by **nepenthe** » Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:39 am

Bouncer wrote:
Was Iraq necessary? No. But we are there now so we must finish it.

What does finishing it entail? Winning a war is easy for the US, but like many others before us, we are learning that occupation and transformation of the conquered is a difficult and ephemeral task (Assuming we do not kill all who live on this land). What might be needed is yet another reframing of this conflict. Yes, we won, but will we meet our goals? Not, if they remain so nebulous and ideological.