"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
...
On Mar 7, 1:36 am, Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 23:41:45 -0500, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:





Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:07:10 -0500, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:

Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:11:35 -0500, Buerste wrote:

"Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:26:47 -0500, Buerste wrote:

"Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message
t... snip
Well, Rush is the issue now rather than 9,000 earmarks after
Obama promised "NO MORE EARMARKS"! I saw the video, who's
zoomin' who?
Got a link to that?

Have you ever heard of...GOOGLE??? I saw the video on the news.
Yes, I've heard of google.com. I've not heard an absolute "NO MORE
EARMARKS" promise from Obama. Your assertion, or paraphrase, your
responsibility to validate.

--
Regards, Curly

He said it, the problem is that the word "earmarks" has been
redefined.
If you see it again post the url here. I haven't seen the specific
promise, only a personal dislike for earmarks and general policy.

quote
He told reporters at his transition office that his package will set a
"new higher standard of accountability, transparency and oversight. We
are going to ban all earmarks, the process by which individual members
insert projects without review."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28525113/end quote

Personally I don't believe anything that MSNBC says but I know
Liberals lap it up...... SO here it is.

OBTW, I've been mistaken many times in my life but,
That's why I asked. I do not remember a specific promise to do away
with earmarks immediately. That's extremely difficult, to do so
would require the president to veto the budget and play high-hands
poker shutting down Federal essential services. That is not an
option in this economy.

But you will have to admit that Obama has *reduced* earmarks
substantially with the rhetoric. A 75% reduction over Bush's last
budget.

I do not lie.
For now I'll take your word for that. The problem is that too many
bushbots here do lie. Often. Transparently and ridiculously.

Thanks, I now agree that Obama promised to end earmarks.

"accountability, transparency" he also said transparent..... so far
it's been in the dark or behind closed doors, so transparency was
irrelevant.

I disagree. Much has been done, an enormous amount of work is left to be
done and it's way too early to be ranting on what will eventually come
about.

I had hoped he was at least honest, even though I didn't agree with his
politics. Turns out he lied about a lot of things and the list is
growing every day. Clinton was a prolific liar too, but he was a
likable liar.

Few politicians are honest, don't put yourself in the position of being
forever broken hearted. Also grow some patience, Obama has been in
office only a month and a half for ****s sake...

--
Regards, Curly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-*---
$8,800,000,000,000.00, Angry Yet?
Arrest Bush
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-*---- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What we see is the bitter grapes of the conservatives.

Obama has been able to do more in the few days he has been in office
than Bush was able to in years.

It eats them alive.

TMT

Yep. And the hate they decried when Bush was president is now starting to
come on line for Obama. You will see lots of right wing hate directed at
Obama in the coming years and it will be much worse than anything Bush ever
got. The right wing makes a big fuss about how hateful Democrats are. What a
joke. Democrats are pikers when it comes to hating a president. Republicans
are the masters at hating Democrats and in destroying a presidency. Luckily,
Obama is smart enough and honest enough that they won't be able to score any
points against him. Except with other right wingers, who will all agree that
Obama is ruining America. They'll be a minority of nuts though.

Hawke