Senator Jim Bunning: Jerk or Fiscally Responsible?

• queencitybuckeye

  derek bomar wrote: that isn't the point

  Reintroducing "we can't afford it" to the federal government is exactly the point.
  
  On what do you base "he isn't a good senator"?
• fan_from_texas

  JoeA1010 wrote: We can now officially state that Obama and the rest of the left were flat out lying with the pay-go nonsense. They have no intention of ever implementing it and no intention of paying for any of their trillions of dollars of spending, except for a tax hike on the middle class in 2018.
  
  This country won't get its fiscal house in order until we have a majority of Jim Bunnings in the House and Senate who are willing to stand up to the left and the whining media. Complain about Bunning all you want Obama and company, but know from your grave you selfishly handed your kids and grandkids massive debt that will greatly affect their standard of living.

  Agreed. The baby boomers (among others) have been short-sighted and voted themselves handout after handout. All that does is stick my generation (and my kids, and their kids, and so on) with the massive bill.
• Belly35

  

  Jim Brunning has earned the title Senator ...great job
  Need more like him on both side .......
• derek bomar

  

  JoeA1010 wrote: Yes, I do want that. It is YOU who don't want it because he will end the gravy-train of a massive federal government taking from those according to ability, and giving to those who are determined by politicians to be of need.

  stfu about this Robin Hood bs that you guys fantasize about...it's not happening. How have your taxes gone up this past year?
• derek bomar

  

  queencitybuckeye wrote:

  derek bomar wrote: that isn't the point

  Reintroducing "we can't afford it" to the federal government is exactly the point.
  
  On what do you base "he isn't a good senator"?

  because anyone who votes for two wars and a tax cut and medicare expansion on a credit card and then bitches about 10 billion in unemployment benefits not being paid for, while he wouldn't himself vote for pay-go (because he says it was attached to a bill that raised the debt ceiling, but he'll leave out his previous votes lead to the need to raise the ceiling) is an asshat
• queencitybuckeye

  The coming inflation caused by all of this spending acts as a tax on all of us.
• queencitybuckeye

  derek bomar wrote:

  queencitybuckeye wrote:

  derek bomar wrote: that isn't the point

  Reintroducing "we can't afford it" to the federal government is exactly the point.
  
  On what do you base "he isn't a good senator"?

  because anyone who votes for two wars and a tax cut and medicare expansion on a credit card and then bitches about 10 billion in unemployment benefits not being paid for, while he wouldn't himself vote for pay-go (because he says it was attached to a bill that raised the debt ceiling, but he'll leave out his previous votes lead to the need to raise the ceiling) is an asshat

  Are the 53 senators who voted against cuting $10 billion last night to pay for this $10 billion (a real pay as you go opportunity) also bad sentators, as they just put more on the credit card.
• BCBulldog

  

  derek bomar wrote:

  queencitybuckeye wrote:

  derek bomar wrote: that isn't the point

  Reintroducing "we can't afford it" to the federal government is exactly the point.
  
  On what do you base "he isn't a good senator"?

  because anyone who votes for two wars and a tax cut and medicare expansion on a credit card and then bitches about 10 billion in unemployment benefits not being paid for, while he wouldn't himself vote for pay-go (because he says it was attached to a bill that raised the debt ceiling, but he'll leave out his previous votes lead to the need to raise the ceiling) is an asshat

  Yet, amazingly, everything he did was within the rules. However, those who break the rules, which they just established for themselves, are more responsible in their actions. By your standards, I prefer the 'asshats.'
• wkfan

  Derek's has only one criteria for a good Senator vs. bad Senator or good politician vs. bad politician......
  
  ( R ) behind their name = bad.
  
  ( D ) behind their name = good.
  
  /end
• Paladin

  Bunning is a MAJOR jerk and many here are too. There was no restraint for spending on W.'s wars. No restraint on funding W's tax cuts for the rich while spending like drunken sailors. This will come back to haunt the R's no matter what you say. Lots of people were hurt and lots were scared of the carelessness of the R's. Speak of fiscal restraint all you want -- that was a major reason the R's got their butts kicked in the elections of the past several years. R's are hypocrites and liars. When the R's move to severely cut defense is the day their hypocrisy is modified and an honest outlook demonstrated. The obstruction of the R Congress will come back to bite them severely.
• BCBulldog

  

  Paladin wrote: Bunning is a MAJOR jerk and many here are too. There was no restraint for spending on W.'s wars. No restraint on funding W's tax cuts for the rich while spending like drunken sailors. This will come back to haunt the R's no matter what you say. Lots of people were hurt and lots were scared of the carelessness of the R's. Speak of fiscal restraint all you want -- that was a major reason the R's got their butts kicked in the elections of the past several years. R's are hypocrites and liars. When the R's move to severely cut defense is the day their hypocrisy is modified and an honest outlook demonstrated. The obstruction of the R Congress will come back to bite them severely.

  This kind of argument is exactly why the Ds have screwed themselves. Didn't their mommas ever teach them that two wrongs don't make a right? And I think that the Rs would rather be 'wrong' about protecting our country (within the rules of the Senate, I might add) than being 'right' about adding even more to the debt (outside of the rules of the Senate) when they didn't have to.
• BCBulldog

  

  And if following the rules and pushing for fiscal responsibility is being a 'jerk', then hand me a pair of Opti-Grabs.
• derek bomar

  

  wkfan wrote: Derek's has only one criteria for a good Senator vs. bad Senator or good politician vs. bad politician......
  
  ( R ) behind their name = bad.
  
  ( D ) behind their name = good.
  
  /end

  gtfooh ... there are plenty of good people with R by their name. Please try to open up your mind outside of the labels though and you'll realize JB is a Dbag
• wkfan

  derek bomar wrote:

  wkfan wrote: Derek's has only one criteria for a good Senator vs. bad Senator or good politician vs. bad politician......
  
  ( R ) behind their name = bad.
  
  ( D ) behind their name = good.
  
  /end

  gtfooh ... there are plenty of good people with R by their name. Please try to open up your mind outside of the labels though and you'll realize JB is a Dbag

  I couldn't agree more that there are plenty of good people with an ( R ) behind their name....just as there are plenty of good peoplw with a ( D ) behind their name. I'm just commenting the trend of your posts railing on everything ( R ) related...no matter the person or the cause.
  
  what's the matter....don't know how to spell all of the words in gtfooh?? What a child.
• derek bomar

  

  wkfan wrote:

  derek bomar wrote:

  wkfan wrote: Derek's has only one criteria for a good Senator vs. bad Senator or good politician vs. bad politician......
  
  ( R ) behind their name = bad.
  
  ( D ) behind their name = good.
  
  /end

  gtfooh ... there are plenty of good people with R by their name. Please try to open up your mind outside of the labels though and you'll realize JB is a Dbag

  I couldn't agree more that there are plenty of good people with an ( R ) behind their name....just as there are plenty of good peoplw with a ( D ) behind their name. I'm just commenting the trend of your posts railing on everything ( R ) related...no matter the person or the cause.
  
  what's the matter....don't know how to spell all of the words in gtfooh?? What a child.

  
• BCBulldog

  

  That's creepy. :s
• fish82

  

  Paladin wrote: Bunning is a MAJOR jerk and many here are too. There was no restraint for spending on W.'s wars. No restraint on funding W's tax cuts for the rich while spending like drunken sailors. This will come back to haunt the R's no matter what you say. Lots of people were hurt and lots were scared of the carelessness of the R's. Speak of fiscal restraint all you want -- that was a major reason the R's got their butts kicked in the elections of the past several years. R's are hypocrites and liars. When the R's move to severely cut defense is the day their hypocrisy is modified and an honest outlook demonstrated. The obstruction of the R Congress will come back to bite them severely.

  When? They're up in the congressional generic by their largest margin ever.
  
  And FYI....it's pretty much a D congress, in case you hadn't noticed.
• derek bomar

  

  BCBulldog wrote: That's creepy. :s

  I thought it was funny
• BCBulldog

  

  derek bomar wrote:

  BCBulldog wrote: That's creepy. :s

  I thought it was funny

  The premise and your use of it - absolutely. The pic itself is creepy.
• JoeA1010

  Jim Bunning = Rare grownup telling the 5-year-children in the Senate, "No, you may not!"
  
  And this is followed by the typical response of 5-year-olds of crying and whining and calling the adult "mean." Of course, most of the media are right on board with the children.
• IggyPride00

  

  When?

  When the Republicans take back Congress later this year and then won't be able to get anything done and perpetuate the bloated deficit because Democrats will block any and everything Republicans try and do.
  
  The public loses interest and forgets very fast. 2 years from now Democrats will be running against a "do nothing" Republican Congress that hasn't addressed the budget deficit or any other sorts of things.
  
  Now that the obstruction manual has been effectively laid out as well as proof that it is effective, the payback will come when Democrats turn it back on the Republicans so they can't govern either.
  
  Also, Republicans taking back Congress this year will guarantee another 4 years of BHO much like it did for Clinton in 94, because it will give him a foil to run against instead of his own party.
• Footwedge

  Let those unemployed fuckers starve. I got's mine.
• Paladin

  Unemployed ( & under-employed) effectively at 17%. Then there are those who say "there by the grace of god go I"................... Bunning is a jerk. Elections are decided in the middle. I'd be a little nervous about projecting votes yet. Nothing pretty about Rs and lots of ugliness there.
• BCBulldog

  

  Footwedge wrote: Let those unemployed fuckers starve. I got's mine.

  Paladin wrote: Unemployed ( & under-employed) effectively at 17%. Then there are those who say "there by the grace of god go I"................... Bunning is a jerk. Elections are decided in the middle. I'd be a little nervous about projecting votes yet. Nothing pretty about Rs and lots of ugliness there.

  Straight from the liberal playbook - when you are unable to overcome the argument, attack your opponent with insults targeting their lack of compassion and their religion.
• cbus4life

  Footwedge isn't a liberal...