BLUE DOGS OUGHT TO BE RED-FACED

[babylonsister]

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=05&year=2008&base_name=blue_dogs_ought_to_be_redfaced

BLUE DOGS OUGHT TO BE RED-FACED
Tom Schaller

...this story in The Hill about the obstinate-yet-conflicted House “Blue Dog” coalition is exactly the sort of problem that ought to frustrate liberals. Here you have (some) conservative Democrats who have repeatedly voted to fund a war without worrying about how to pay for it, and now all of sudden they show pangs of fiscal responsibility about not coming up with the monies to fund one program in the new war spending bill. Blue Dogs finally getting with the program: Sounds great, right?

Not so fast, because the part they are raising fiscal responsibility objectives about is…wait for it, because it’s really going to infuriate you…education benefits for veterans. Where was this sort of ethic from Blue Dogs when the Bush administration was asking for billions to be handed over to venal, wasteful, no-bid contract-winning war profiteers?

“Some of us oppose creating a new entitlement program in an emergency spending bill, whether it’s butchers, bakers or candlestick-makers,” said Rep. John Tanner (D-Tenn.), a founding member of the Blue Dog Coalition who serves on the House leadership team as a deputy whip. The so-called GI Bill of Rights, authored by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), would give veterans money for college and cost $720 million in its first two years. But critics say that could grow to billions in future years.”

No! Not billions spent without funds to pay for it -- that just never happens in defense spending!

Two comments: First, thank goodness for Webb. Second, I’m going to keep saying this until it starts to sink in: Since Reconstruction, the Blue Dog element within the Democratic Party has gone from dominant majority, to significant minority to what it is today -- a declining coalition of conflicted complainers. Among the blessings of building a non-southern Democratic majority is that there is greater intraparty ideological cohesion, thus marginalizing Blue Dogs and their hand-wringing interference with emerging liberal project.

[SharonAnn]

1. I got an email from Harold Ford, Jr. that he and Al From were going

to make a concerted effort to stop this "budget busting" bill.

I replied that they ought to be ashamed of themselves. Also, that anybody who associates with Al From is lower than pond scum.

[wryter2000]

4. Ye gods

We should confiscate the Ds from behind their names. What an utter disgrace.

Way to support the troops, assholes.

[roguevalley]

12. these people are really republicans. fuck them.

[Breeze54]

2. Exactly! That's what I was saying yesterday....

Blue Dogs vow to bite on Iraq spending bill - (they're opposed to the GI Bill of Rights)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3259137

Where were they back then on all the bloviated war spending? :grr:

:kick: & Recommended

[ingac70]

3. That cunt Tanner is my Rep.

He'll be hearing from me this afternoon, once again.

[ljm2002]

8. Hey!

Go ahead and call names, I'm sure he deserves it. But if you must use a word that refers to a person's sexual organ -- could you at least get the gender right?

[ingac70]

9. I get...

my posts deleted as "sexist" if I say it in reference to females.

[ljm2002]

13. I see...

...so your issue is that for some reason you just really, really need to use the word "cunt", and since you can't use it for women without getting reamed for it, you use it in reference to males instead?

Er, okay...

:eyes:

[ingac70]

17. Please get over yourself...

10.cunt:

A nasty person. Used in Australia and UK as a synonym for bastard (but a really bad one).

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cunt&page=2

[tpsbmam]

16. Shuler is mine....

His picture is next to the word "putz" in the dictionary. He hears from me regularly and keeps sending me letters asking for donations. Yeah, I'm going to take my hard-earned money and send it to you, asshole.

[ingac70]

5. I've fired off my e-mail to Tanner...

and it ain't pretty....

(The website automatically put up some shit addressing my e-mail to the "honorable" John Tanner.. ha!)


***Did you really say this in reference to the GI Bill updates in the new Iraq occupation spending bill?

“Some of us oppose creating a new entitlement program in an emergency spending bill, whether it’s butchers, bakers or candlestick-makers”

If so you are the biggest creep I have ever seen. Why not quit calling yourself a Democrat and go ahead and be a Republican? You have given Bush a blank check so he could get his jollies from ordering the rape and murder of Iraqis, all based on LIES, since 2003, and now that something that actually benefits those fighting has been added to the HUNDREDS of BILLIONS already spent you don't want to do it.

I shall do my level best to let everyone know in our district what a vile scumbag you are.

Melanie Haddon*****

[babylonsister]

6. OUCH and excellent! nt

[Breeze54]

14. But you forgot to use the *C* word!

:sarcasm:

.....otherwise, great letter. I hope they read it!

[southerncrone]

15. Good Job, Melanie!

I shall also be sending Sack o' Shit Tanner a letter telling him that this is despicable & that I will be supporting his competition in the primary when he runs for re-election. I will also ask him to stop posing as a Democrat, because he is obviously NOT one.

He should just get on the "LIEbeRMAN" bus. He is NOT a Democrat. And "Blue Dogs" are not our friends. They bite us every time! :grr:

[crimsonblue]

7. When you're 8 trillion in the hole...

what's another 2 billion? It's like having $6000 in credit card debt and not buying toilet paper because "it's just sooo expensive".

[Warpy]

10. Get a veto proof majority first

and then work on picking the blue dogs off in the primaries starting in 2010.

Conservatives are always the problem. They can never be part of the solution.

[gratuitous]

11. Education bills, unlike supply side economics . . .

Helping people pay for education, unlike Laffer Curves and supply side economics, actually does create a stimulus effect for revenue generation (that is to say, more taxes collected). Because folks with more and better education can get better-paying jobs, and let's face it, the regressive nature of our tax structure right now means that working stiffs are the ones making sure the government has the money to pay its bills and meet its obligations.

Spending a few billion on education will result in several more billion down the line, each and every year a person is working at that better-paying job. Of course, the downside for the Blue Dogs is that when people get too intelligent, they start casting around for better candidates than the likes of John Tanner.