Bunning answers the question - Why

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/03/column-why-i-took-a-stand-.html

Jim Bunning: Why I took a stand

For too long, both Republicans and Democrats have treated the taxpayers' money as a slush fund that does not ever end. At some point, the madness has to stop.

 

Over a month ago, Democrats passed and President Obama signed into law the "Pay-Go" legislation. It calls on Congress to pay for bills by not adding to our debt. It sounds like a common sense tool that would rein in government spending. Unfortunately, Pay-Go is a paper tiger. It has no teeth. I did not vote for the Democrats' Pay-Go legislation because I knew it was just a political dog-and-pony show to get some good press after some political setbacks. Since the Pay-Go rule was enacted, the national debt has gone up $244,992,297,448.11 (as of Wednesday, that is).

Last week, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., asked to pass a 30-day extensions bill for unemployment insurance and other federal programs. Earlier in February, those extensions were included in a broader bipartisan bill that was paid for but did not meet Sen. Reid's approval, and he nixed the deal. When I saw the Democrats in Congress were going to vote on the extensions bill without paying for it and not following their own Pay-Go rules, I said enough is enough.

After four legislative days of impasse, I reached a supposed deal with Majority Leader Reid to have an up-or-down vote on a pay-for amendment that would fully fund the legislation and not add to the debt. Only minutes before the vote, Democrats used a parliamentary maneuver to set aside my amendment and not vote on the actual substance of it. Only in Washington could this happen. The Democrats did not want to vote on my amendment because they knew they were in the wrong and ignored their own rules. Hypocrisy again rules the day in Washington.

If the Senate cannot find $10 billion to pay for a measure we all support, we will never pay for anything.

I think what he says has a lot of merrit. If congress can vote to bypass the pay-go rule it is rather worthless. It is also disappointing to see that there was a bill that was financially viable that the Leader of the Senate dismissed?

 

Comments

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Bullshit, it's only pork when the other guys do it. That this man was silent during the Bush Administration about this says all that needs be said about it. That the Tea Baggers were mum on TARP but whine and bitch about Obama's actions says everything that needs be said about their sincerity. And fuck any mention of Ron Paul, the guy is a kook whose ideas would be the most craptastic failure since the Republic of the Yucatan.

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

He's not calling it pork, he's saying lets fund it before we pass it.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

While simultaneously letting George Bush give lip service to small government and exaggerate Reagan's excess spending and tendency to small wars that became protracted nightmares because our 21st Century armies can't do well with guerrilla conflicts, particularly when Donald "Fuckwit Idiot" Rumsfeld denies there's a war on for an entire year.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Where was he when we decided to send emergency funds to Louisiana?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Get your facts straight and maybe then your conclusions might be valid.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

This from the movement which has been passing utter lies as part of its opposition to the Obama Administration from day one. Sure.....

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I think you're confusing movements...

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

You should do actual research before making an assertion especially when basic research would prove your assertion wrong. The first Tea Party protests were after TARP was passed. I should know because I have emails and posts on conservative sites demanding I take part in them back in the beginning of October.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

let him protest defense appropriations bills, then.

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

I will make not of that when it comes up. If the Defense Appropriations bill does not follow pay-go.

[thies.livejournal.com]

Of course reasonable people might say it would have been a more approriate and humane approach to take such a stand over frivolous pork instead of gambling with the livelihood of citizens who are already face down in the mud.

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

Reasonable leadership would also not have pushed an unfunded bill.

[thies.livejournal.com]

acting like a spoiled brat while causing others misery because his peers haven't done a perfect job to me means he shouldn't be in the office he currently holds

[merig00.livejournal.com]

choosing to ignore rules you voted to follow just some months ago means they shouldn't be in the office too.

[penguin42.livejournal.com]

Why is he only complaining about democrats when a large number of republicans voted for it as well?

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

"For too long, both Republicans and Democrats have treated the taxpayers' money as a slush fund that does not ever end. "

I give him credit for calling out the Republicans in his op-ed too.

[penguin42.livejournal.com]

OK, in the opening line. But for the rest of the excerpt it's only democrats.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

That's sad when you make an assertion that is explicitly wrong per the actual argument given in the original post.

[penguin42.livejournal.com]

Geez lighten up

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

It's hard to lighten up when these are serious times and all I ever see is trite ridicule.

[penguin42.livejournal.com]

In my head you said that in the voice of Rorschach from Watchmen and it fit perfectly.

[ygrii-blop.livejournal.com]

A hypocritical hypocrite in an assembly of hypocritical hypocrites accuses his fellow hypocrites of hypocracy.

[kardashev.livejournal.com]

Welcome to American politics.

Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[bord-du-rasoir.livejournal.com]

"Mr. Bunning claims that he is standing on principle right now. That he won‘t support anything that wasn‘t paid for, that he won‘t support anything that would add to the national debt.

Except for all of the things that Jim Bunning has voted for in just the last few years, that have heaped billions of dollars on to the national debt that he didn‘t bat an eye about voting for, like for example, the 2008 war supplemental bill that he voted for, which wasn‘t paid for, and which - like this legislation—extended unemployment benefits for out-of-work Americans.

Or the 2003 extension of unemployment benefits that weren‘t paid for, but which Senator Bunning voted for anyway. Mr. Bunning was actually quite proud of that vote. He put out this press release the next day that said, “Bunning Touts Extended Benefits for Kentucky‘s Unemployed.” Senator Bunning apparently had no concerns then that the benefits he had just voted for weren‘t paid for.

In 2001, Senator Bunning voted for the first round of Bush tax cuts that weren‘t paid for. Two years later, he voted for a second round of Bush tax cuts that weren‘t paid for. That same year, he voted for the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit that, you guess it, wasn‘t paid for.

And if Senator Bunning is truly concerned about the Senate paying for things that they passed, if he really is standing on a principle that‘s actually his principle here, then you would think he would have voted in favor of the Senate adopting PAYGO rules, pay as you go rules, earlier this year. Those are rules that state that everything has to be paid for. But alas, Mr. Bunning voted no on that, too."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35687516/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

How can anyone take Rachel Maddow seriously as an intellectual when she's making an argument that doesn't address anything Bunning said.

"Sure, you said enough is enough and if the Democrats are desiring to be serious on the deficit they need to act like it but isn't it true that you have spent money in the past?"

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

hypocrisy, of course, only applies to the other guys AMIRITE???

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Hypocrisy isn't defined as "you not doing what I think you should be doing."

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

nope. But it does apply to Jim Bunning, who happily voted for extensions of unemployment when George Bush was president, without Pay-Go.

http://bunning.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsCenter.NewsReleases&ContentRecord_id=169be67f-0b60-4fe6-96bc-af3de696604f&Region_id=&Issue_id=

That, my friend, is hypocrisy. Rampant.

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Ah... so you didn't read what actually happened. Well that makes it clear why you are claiming he's a hypocrite.

Considering he said he's not opposed to extending unemployment and would vote for it, it's doubly amusing.

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

Well, I didn't read what you've imagined in your head happened.

Fact: Bunning has voted for extending unemployment benefits in the past.
Fact: Bunning held up this bill for days, long enough that unemployment benefits, COBRA benefits, federal highway construction and safety projects and more had to expire due to lack of money.
Fact: The difference between now and then? The occupant of the White House.

Conclusion: Massive hypocrisy.

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Please tell me that you're just trolling me to draw out another yellow card and you earnestly aren't being daft.

Fact: You support the Iraq war with Obama
Fact: You opposed the Iraq war with Bush
Fact: You know how turpentine tastes and are a hypocrite!

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

I don't support the Iraq war. I never supported the Iraq war. Find a single place where I support the Iraq war. Go on. You can't do it. So Bunning is a hypocrite and you are a liar.

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Like you in the Bunning case, I don't care what you say. Because you see, Bunning explained why he took his stand but you have chosen to ignore it and substitute your own beliefs in. So I did likewise with you.

So why did you oppose the Iraq war when there was a Republican in the WH but support it under a Democrat? You're a hypocrite!

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

It's funny, because you lack reading comprehension skills.

Bunning says he was holding up this extension because he felt it wasn't being paid for.

Of course, that didn't matter to him back in 2003.

He's a hypocrite, and you're a liar.

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'Bunning says he was holding up this extension because he felt it wasn't being paid for'

What he actually said:

"Over a month ago, Democrats passed and President Obama signed into law the "Pay-Go" legislation. It calls on Congress to pay for bills by not adding to our debt... The Democrats did not want to vote on my amendment because they knew they were in the wrong and ignored their own rules. Hypocrisy again rules the day in Washington."

It's very simple english. You can take a course at your local community college if you need help.

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

And emergency spending bills are not covered by Pay-Go.

It was a heartless, hypocritical, openly political decision. And, if you noticed, he buckled too, so not only is he a hypocrite, but he's a flipflopper. He was for extending unemployment before he was against it before he was for it.

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'And emergency spending bills are not covered by Pay-Go.'

This wasn't an emergency. Saying something is an emergency doesn't make it so. This was a planned and known event.

What's the word for someone who swallows whatever tripe they're given because they really want to believe?

Re: Bunning takes principled stand against ... himself?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

What's the word for someone who swallows whatever tripe they're given because they really want to believe?

mrbogey, apparently.

[prock.livejournal.com]

If he's found religion, that's all well and good. But until he pays penance on his past sins, let him cast no stones.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

I don't know, but it just seems to me that the dems arguments boil down to...."you did, so now we can, nanner nanner". Which, while it does seem fair, I'm not sure it justifies it.

[dzlk.livejournal.com]

If you don't consider something wrong or unwise to begin with then it's not fallacious to point out that people who object to it also do it. It suggests the objection is ill-founded.

Not that I don't generally consider the Democratic party a load of unprincipled careerists and incoherent ninnies (or that Democrats don't jump opportunistically on "fiscal conservatism" when it suits them). Just noting as a point of logic. :)

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

As long as you're willing to accept that the Democrats aren't serious about any fiscal reform or restraint then by all means.

Just when the topic is broached don't try and argue that they're not raging spendaholics because they voted for PayGo.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Democrats weren't raging spendaholics because they voted for PayGo.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

A pointless gesture for rubes and retards. They've ignored it whenever they pleased. Bunning did a good job pointing that out.

Unless you're willing to assert that Catholics are better and more moral people because they pledge to be. Then your own delusion is something I'll leave you to.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Who knew?

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

"Took a stand" is apparently now a euphemism for "fucking over the unemployed for fun and profit".

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

He conveniently fails to mention that this is emergency spending which is not covered under 'paygo'. The shithead never blinked an eye with anything else he voted for but suddenly zomg its bad, and then decides to go after a bill that is emergency spending. Brilliant.

And it's actual emergency spending too, not like natural disaster emergency spending that was never included in the budget until this administration even though it was spent every single year. Didn't look good on the budget though.