Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 67

Thread: House Speakerís State May Get $450 Million Extra

  1. #41
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,360
    Post Thanks / Like
    CBTNY is the best:yes:

    [B]Obama victory as House votes down expensive jet fighter engine
    The House of Representatives voted down an expensive next-generation military jet engine in floor vote today[/B]

    [QUOTE]President Barack Obama won a showdown vote Wednesday in the GOP-controlled House to kill a costly alternative engine for the Pentagon's next-generation fighter jet.

    The win by Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates was a switch from where the House stood last year under Democratic control. It reflected a sustained administration push to win over the votes of scores of Republican freshmen elected last fall on campaign promises to cut the budget.

    Many taxpayer watchdog groups also weighed in against the engine program, slated to cost $3 billion over the next few years and $450 million this year alone.

    The 233-198 tally was a loss for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, whose state reaps about 1,000 jobs from the engine program, built by the General Electric Co. and Rolls-Royce.

    It was a big victory for lawmakers from Democrat-dominated Connecticut, where the main F-35 fighter engine is built by Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp. Former President George W. Bush had also tried to kill the second engine.

    The showdown vote came just hours after Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen testified against the alternative engine before the Armed Services Committee, which has repeatedly backed it.

    "I've been doing money a long time, I can't make sense out of a second engine," Mullen said.

    The vote was an early test for 87 GOP freshmen who confronted a choice between cutting spending and injecting competition into the F-35 program, the costliest weapons program in Defense Department history.

    The money for the engine was included in a $1.2 trillion spending bill that would make deep cuts while wrapping up the unfinished business lawmakers inherited after last year's collapse of the budget process. That includes $1.03 trillion for agency operating budgets that need annual approval by Congress and $158 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The Democratic-controlled Senate supports the second engine. That, combined with Boehner's backing, could yet keep the program alive.

    The engine battle divides along regional rather than party lines, in contrast to the partisan warfare on the underlying bill, which sharply cuts domestic programs and foreign aid and earned a veto threat from the White House budget office and a warning from Obama against unwise cuts "that could endanger the recovery."

    Debate on the bill is expected to take all week. A frosty reception awaits the bill in the Democratic-controlled Senate, which won't take up its version until next month. So it'll require passage of a separate short-term government funding bill by March 4 to prevent a government shutdown that neither side says it wants.

    The GOP bill, separate from the 2012 budget Obama unveiled on Monday, covers spending for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30.

    The GOP legislation would make sweeping cuts to domestic programs ranging from education and science to agriculture and the Peace Corps. It would slash the Environmental Protection Agency, a favorite target of Republicans, by 29 percent from last year's levels, and would eliminate federal funding for public broadcasting, the AmeriCorps national service program, police hiring grants and family planning programs unpopular with conservatives.

    On Wednesday, Democrats scored a 228-203 victory to restore almost $300 million for police hiring grants. That amendment, by Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., shifted money from NASA to pay for the move. Rep. Mike Michaud, D-Maine, won a 305-127 vote to restore most of a 40 percent cut to the Economic Development Administration, which issues grants for job-creating projects in congressional districts across the country.

    The Food and Drug Administration budget would decline by 10 percent, and spending also would fall by 10 percent for a food program for pregnant women and mothers and their children.

    The cuts are all the more dramatic because they would be shoehorned into the last half of the budget year that started Oct. 1.

    The bill marks the first significant attack on federal deficits by Republicans elected last fall with the support of smaller-government tea party activists.

    The measure came to the floor just a day after Obama unveiled his budget for next year and is merely a first round in what looms as a politically defining struggle that soon will expand to encompass Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the massive government programs that provide benefits directly to tens of millions of people.

    "We know we can't balance this budget simply by reducing non-security, nondefense spending," said Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, referring to the 359-page bill that would cut $61 billion from domestic programs.

    The measure is sweeping in its scope, cutting spending from literally hundreds of domestic budget accounts and eliminating many others. At the same time, the Pentagon budget would be increased by almost 2 percent from current levels.

    In a reflection of tea party priorities, the practice in which lawmakers direct money to their pet projects is banned in the bill. And in a fulfillment of a promise that Republicans made to the voters last fall, about $100 billion would be cut from funds that Obama requested for the current fiscal year.

    At a White House news conference, Obama said he looked forward to working with lawmakers in both parties on the spending bill, but warned against "a series of symbolic cuts this year that could endanger the (economic) recovery."

    A few hours after Obama spoke, the White House issued a formal statement expressing "strong opposition" to the legislation for "cuts that would sharply undermine core government functions and investments key to economic growth and job creation."[/QUOTE]

    [url]http://www.salon.com/news/us_military/?story=/news/feature/2011/02/16/house_kills_jet_engine[/url]

  2. #42
    All League
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Midland Park, NJ
    Posts
    3,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3960926]Since you are obviously not a D Student, can you enlighten me on some of the Tea Party Economic and Governmental Policy positions you find "wacky".

    Just curious, thanks.[/QUOTE]

    Me personally? Expecting to lower the deficit by lowering taxes while bloated government defense contracts are handed out like candy (the F-35 secondary engine shoot down in the house was but a drop in the bucket)

    From the other perspective, Dems not raising the taxes on corporations while they increase taxes on small businesses which in turn crushes them.

    Everyone is moving furniture in a room with too much sh*t to begin with. Either knock down the stupid half wall dividing the room to give yourself more space or throw away the stupid f*cking fake tree that is blocking the tv

  3. #43
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3960926]Since you are obviously not a D Student, can you enlighten me on some of the Tea Party Economic and Governmental Policy positions you find "wacky".

    Just curious, thanks.[/QUOTE]OK, that sounded very elitest (but no, never lower than a B ;)). Mea culpa - you keep me in check, I'll admit that.

    The people that I know who wave the tea party banner loudest and proudest are wacky - some of the ideas are certainly not. For example, I don't like career politicians, and from what I know of the tea party policy with regards to federal employees, if it was put in place, it would likely erase politics/fed govt as a career choice for many. On the other hand, I can't get behind the 'drill, and then drill some more' mentality. It's a finite resource, not the long term answer, you know? I could go on with things I both agree and disagree with. Much of it, for sure, is not wacky.

    So I should have used the word 'extreme' with regards to why I would never say they would not fall in line with the GOP (GOP is just as unlikely as the Dems to make federal employment a low-wage opportunity overnight, yeah?), and 'wacky' in regards to the people I've seen. Sarah Palin is typical of what I've seen. She's wacky. Perfect for our reality-tv society, I guess. Probably what we deserve.

    BTW, I don't think you are unintelligent, and I certainly don't think southpark is either - as I said, "Anyone that anoints Sarah Palin as their hero can't be taken seriously.", and I'd guess that Sarah Palin isn't your hero...
    Last edited by isired; 02-16-2011 at 07:12 PM.

  4. #44
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;3960937]The Tea party are easy targets, take photo's of a couple of flag wearing red-necks etc...but IMO, they are mainly mis represented by the "media" and accordingly misunderstood. As a CPA of MANY companies doing between $1 and $10mil annually, many of them agree with much (not all) of the tea party fundamentals. These are educated people from lawyers, Doctors, MBA's etc.. THEY are on the frontline of government bureacracy and have to provide EVERY bit of fringe benefit themselves.[/quote]You're right there, I got carried away. As Warfish pointed out, the principals are not wacky, for the most part. I don't think most of them are implementable, but that doesn't make them wacky.

    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;3960937]Smaller government, less regulation.[/quote]I don't trust corporations as much as you do, I guess. Or their influence on politicians.

    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;3960937]You recognize that the government budgets and payroll have more than doubled in the last few years?[/QUOTE]Yeah, and I don't know what to do there, tbh - part of me thinks the tea party 'cut the fed employee salary immediately' would go a good way towards minimizing career politicans, but I don't know that, for the politicians, it wouldn't eventually be made up one way or the other, 'on the back end', so to speak. So we might just wind up with less motivated people doing the 'work', and not affecting the politicians much at all. I don't know.

  5. #45
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=isired;3960915]I never thought the Tea Party would follow the mainstream GOP, they are far too wacky for that. Anyone that anoints Sarah Palin as their hero can't be taken seriously.

    And, for the record: being right, and then having the party that's wrong change their mind, doesn't mean I was wrong to begin with.

    From now on i will refer to you as Herm Edwards in honor of your confused doubletalk.:yes:

    Jesus, everyone I know that's a tea party fanatic is/was a D student. To a man/woman. My ****ing facebook is full of former HS classmates that were total non-thinkers, and now they're copy/pasting every bit of nonsense they come across and thumping their chest. Not surprising I guess.[/QUOTE]

    where's the double talk rich kotite???

    i'll show you where the double talk is- the Tea Party reduced spending by cutting military spending....not the norm for the GOP....

    let's see how serious the rats are about cutting spending when it comes time to cutting entitlement programs....i'm sure you'll be back here whining like a b!tch with your usual excuses...:yes:

    as far as "D" students- take that to john kerry, a "D" student definitely not a member of the tea party...:yes:

  6. #46
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;3960975]where's the double talk rich kotite???[/QUOTE]I tried to do it. I would have done it. But you caught me, so I didn't do it. Hah! You were wrong about me all along! I didn't do it!

    You don't see any inconsistency there. I get it.

    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;3960975]as far as "D" students- take that to john kerry, a "D" student definitely not a member of the tea party...:yes:[/QUOTE]
    John Kerry was a pitiful candidate. Epic Democratic fail.

  7. #47
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=isired;3960967]You're right there, I got carried away. As Warfish pointed out, the principals are not wacky, for the most part. I don't think most of them are implementable, but that doesn't make them wacky.

    I don't trust corporations as much as you do, I guess. Or their influence on politicians.

    Yeah, and I don't know what to do there, tbh - part of me thinks the tea party 'cut the fed employee salary immediately' would go a good way towards minimizing career politicans, but I don't know that, for the politicians, it wouldn't eventually be made up one way or the other, 'on the back end', so to speak. So we might just wind up with less motivated people doing the 'work', and not affecting the politicians much at all. I don't know.[/QUOT

    Chris Christie is providing the answers..albeit nobody wants to hear it. TRUST corporations??? That makes little sense IMO. Trust yourself, provide for yourself etc... I don't trust Walmart but that doesn't mean I need a typical federal worker retiring at 50 and being a burden on the rest of us for the next 30 years under the guise of protecting me.

  8. #48
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;3961054]TRUST corporations???[/QUOTE]don't you have to trust corporations to strip away regulation?

  9. #49
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=isired;3961090]don't you have to trust corporations to strip away regulation?[/QUOTE]

    Regulation in my view does NOT mean layers upon layers of ineffective regulation. We need some government and nobody is advocating NO regulation. BUT, to my point, As an example, we need a county, state and federal dept of labor??? Same with education. Dept of energy needs to be 5000 people??? SEC was handed Madoff and did nothing. Well you get the idea....

  10. #50
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,433
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;3961054]Chris Christie is providing the answers..albeit nobody wants to hear it....[/QUOTE]

    Nope.

    Not even people in his own party unfortunately. (see CPAC straw poll results)

  11. #51
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,769
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;3961054][QUOTE=isired;3960967]You're right there, I got carried away. As Warfish pointed out, the principals are not wacky, for the most part. I don't think most of them are implementable, but that doesn't make them wacky.

    I don't trust corporations as much as you do, I guess. Or their influence on politicians.

    Yeah, and I don't know what to do there, tbh - part of me thinks the tea party 'cut the fed employee salary immediately' would go a good way towards minimizing career politicans, but I don't know that, for the politicians, it wouldn't eventually be made up one way or the other, 'on the back end', so to speak. So we might just wind up with less motivated people doing the 'work', and not affecting the politicians much at all. I don't know.[/QUOT

    Chris Christie is providing the answers..albeit nobody wants to hear it. TRUST corporations??? That makes little sense IMO. Trust yourself, provide for yourself etc... I don't trust Walmart but that doesn't mean I need a typical federal worker retiring at 50 and being a burden on the rest of us for the next 30 years under the guise of protecting me.[/QUOTE]

    Gov. Christie is collecting his U.S. Attorney pension as we speak. You know the whole 8 years he worked for the federal gov't. :yes:

  12. #52
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;3961113]

    Gov. Christie is collecting his U.S. Attorney pension as we speak. You know the whole 8 years he worked for the federal gov't. :yes:[/QUOTE]

    link

  13. #53
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,433
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;3961119]link[/QUOTE]

    Please don't defend Christie.

    I like the guy and want him to run. If you like him too, my whole world will shatter. I may cry a little.

    ;):D

  14. #54
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;3961113][QUOTE=southparkcpa;3961054]

    Gov. Christie is collecting his U.S. Attorney pension as we speak. You know the whole 8 years he worked for the federal gov't. :yes:[/QUOTE]

    Yeah.... that's the problem. Not the hundreds of thousands of civil servants retiring after 25 years of "work" (cough,cough) and then being a burden on the system anf their neighbor.

  15. #55
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,769
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;3961235][QUOTE=cr726;3961113]

    Yeah.... that's the problem. Not the hundreds of thousands of civil servants retiring after 25 years of "work" (cough,cough) and then being a burden on the system anf their neighbor.[/QUOTE]

    What happens to the money these retires receive from their pension? Do they hoard it and live off the interest? Do they put it back into the economy? What do they do with all this money?

  16. #56
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;3961376]
    What happens to the money these retires receive from their pension? Do they hoard it and live off the interest? Do they put it back into the economy? What do they do with all this money?[/QUOTE]

    yup- there's justification for some of the six figure pensions received by these "low paid" civil servantt....just like pelosi justifying unemployment as a "stimulator" to the economy....lol

  17. #57
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;3961376][QUOTE=southparkcpa;3961235]

    What happens to the money these retires receive from their pension? Do they hoard it and live off the interest? Do they put it back into the economy? What do they do with all this money?[/QUOTE]

    THAT is not worthy of a response. Please...that now sounds like a far left liberal justifying that unemployment is "pumped" into the economy.

  18. #58
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,769
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;3961421]yup- there's justification for some of the six figure pensions received by these "low paid" civil servantt....just like pelosi justifying unemployment as a "stimulator" to the economy....lol[/QUOTE]

    It was a question. Take out LI and tell me about all the six figure pensions that are out there?

    Does this money not go back into the economy? If it isn't, let me know where it goes.

  19. #59
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,687
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE]The people that I know who wave the tea party banner loudest and proudest are wacky - some of the ideas are certainly not.[/QUOTE]

    That is a fair enough clarification.

    [QUOTE]On the other hand, I can't get behind the 'drill, and then drill some more' mentality. It's a finite resource, not the long term answer, you know?[/QUOTE]

    I do. My understanding of "drill baby drill", an admitted simpletons way of describing somethign as complex as energy policy, is to exploit domestic resources now, respurces often protected for dubious environmental reasons, end (or limit) need for Middle Eastern resources, and with the time we have left before domestic sources expire, work to develop new domestic technology/resources.

    [QUOTE]BTW, I don't think you are unintelligent, and I certainly don't think southpark is either[/QUOTE]

    Thank you. I would wager that Southpark is literally degrees more intelligent than I, tbh, both professionally and more broadly.

    [quote]I'd guess that Sarah Palin isn't your hero...[/QUOTE]

    No, I find her impossible to support.

  20. #60
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;3961452]It was a question. Take out LI and tell me about all the six figure pensions that are out there?

    Does this money not go back into the economy? If it isn't, let me know where it goes.[/QUOTE]

    Please...read anything in an economics text book. Anything.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us