SOURCE: Associated Press, Jan. 25, 2011:
QUOTE (not in its entirety):
…The earmark ban is one of the few areas where Obama and tea party activists are in agreement, but Reid said the idea unfairly "takes power away from the legislative branch of government. And I think that's the wrong thing to do."
:UNQUOTE.
My response posted to this Yahoo article yesterday:
QUOTE:
"...but Reid said the idea unfairly 'takes power away from the legislative branch of government...'"
No it doesn’t, and Reid is being dishonest by claiming otherwise. What earmarking does, in its present format, is to attach unrelated projects to larger bills. This is an attempt to sneak them in, flying under the radar.
Maybe [Speaker of the House] Boehner could try this as a trial balloon: Arrange for the House to vote on a Bill entitled “Earmarks” and have that Bill contain nothing else. That would provide a nice fat target for the Reps to shoot down. So as not to embarrass anybody, that Bill (though entitled Earmarks) wouldn’t actually list any. It would be just a blank piece of paper with a title.
Symbolically, this would allow the House to send a message to the Senate: Since all spending bills have to originate in the House, if you want us to consider any earmarks, you go ahead and draft an Earmarks-only bill and send it to us for “original consideration” – as if we’d drafted it.
An additional message to the Senate from the House: Rots of ruck.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Reid is an embarrassment to the legislative process – trying to sneak pork past us, indeed!”
No it doesn’t, and Reid is being dishonest by claiming otherwise. What earmarking does, in its present format, is to attach unrelated projects to larger bills. This is an attempt to sneak them in, flying under the radar.
Maybe [Speaker of the House] Boehner could try this as a trial balloon: Arrange for the House to vote on a Bill entitled “Earmarks” and have that Bill contain nothing else. That would provide a nice fat target for the Reps to shoot down. So as not to embarrass anybody, that Bill (though entitled Earmarks) wouldn’t actually list any. It would be just a blank piece of paper with a title.
Symbolically, this would allow the House to send a message to the Senate: Since all spending bills have to originate in the House, if you want us to consider any earmarks, you go ahead and draft an Earmarks-only bill and send it to us for “original consideration” – as if we’d drafted it.
An additional message to the Senate from the House: Rots of ruck.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Reid is an embarrassment to the legislative process – trying to sneak pork past us, indeed!”
:UNQUOTE.
Messages in bottles cast adrift at sea
Why should I even bother trying to respond to news articles posted on Yahoo? These responses are read by so precious few.
I liken what I do to what a shipwrecked sailor would do on a deserted island: Put messages in bottles, toss them into the ocean, and hope for the best. Yes, the odds are poor that anyone will ever get these messages. But if I do nothing, there’s no chance at all. It’s not that I have political ambitions forcing me, with burning desire, to seek a large and public stage. I’m just trying to get a message out. Even if only a few people “get it,” that’s good enough for me.
Besides, unless we – even with our small, powerless voices – say something to contradict pompous, lying, powerful fools like Senator Reid, they’ll assume people don’t see through them. And they’ll assume, if they have the last word, that they’re right. Never, ever let a moron have the last word or else he'll end up thinking he’s right. Humiliate the powerful, even with small gestures. That, I assure you, won’t be our only recourse. It will be only the beginning of massive changes to come. But one must start somewhere.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“Nevadans are afraid of voting against Reid, since (without his powerful intervention) they’re afraid the feds (which own 85% of Nevada
No comments:
Post a Comment