Monday, February 9, 2009

Oink, Oink!

Like pigs at a trough, they just can't get enough!

In discussing the "compromise" Senate "stimulus" bill, which cuts about $100 billion in government spending as compared to the House bill, McCaskill justified the cuts by stating that the spending cuts could be added back later in an "omnibus" spending authorization.


Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, told reporters he and others hoped that some of the funds on the chopping block would be restored next week when negotiations open on a House-Senate compromise.

On top of this [that they are just going to spend the money anyway] we have Senator Claire McCaskill (D) saying:

I think there was some spending in the bill that was makeup for a starvation diet under the Bush Administration, some important priorities of our party, frankly of the American people. And, the question is does it belong in the stimulus bill or does it belong in the appropriations bill. I think some of the money that we cut in the compromise to get the votes that we have was in fact spending that more appropriately should go in an appropriations bill.

So, life under Bush was a "starvation diet". The president that spent money like a drunken sailor? What fantasy world does McCaskill live in? Spending under Bush went up across the board and for a Senator to say otherwise is either the height of stupidity or a blatant lie. Being that this is a Senator, either and both are possible.

No comments:

Post a Comment