Conservative Senate Leader.... LOL

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,039
31,557
1,743
oklahoma city
#1
Can anyone explain to me how adding $1 billion dollars to the Federal budget to buy votes in your state is conservatism?

People complain about Andrew Yang giving away money. He at least is giving money directly back to the individuals to improve their individual lot in life. This taking of taxpayer money to spend on big pork-barrel projects and targeted tax breaks to the well connected is taxpayer money going only to the powerful and is far worse. It is much closer to Venezuelan-style socialism. And, as the leader, he is proud of this, not shying away. He is proud of this ridiculous federal waste and is declaring it as his and his alone.

If you feel a strong desire to defend this is some way, just simply realize that makes you a republican, not a conservative. They are not even close to the same thing.


McConnell flexes reelection muscle with $1B gift for Kentucky
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...s-reelection-muscle-with-1b-gift-for-kentucky

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is delivering more than $1 billion worth of federal spending and tax breaks to his Kentucky constituents, just in time for Christmas and ahead of a potentially tough reelection campaign.

McConnell’s biggest obstacle to getting the deal done was not Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) or Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), but President Trump, who proclaimed last year that he was not going to sign another omnibus spending bill and whose White House made rumblings about backing a year-end spending freeze instead.

But McConnell, who is running for his seventh Senate term next year, flexed his political muscle to secure $914.2 million in direct spending for Kentucky in the two year-end omnibus spending bills. The windfall will likely boost his political standing at home in the face of a well-financed Democratic opponent and his perennially low approval ratings.


McConnell touted his spending and tax-relief accomplishments at a press conference in Louisville, and drew a sharp contrast with his Democratic opponent, Amy McGrath, a retired Marine Corps fighter pilot who raised nearly $11 million in the third quarter this year for the 2020 race.

Noting that he’s the only top congressional leader who isn’t from California or New York, McConnell emphasized he was one of four people in the room making final decisions about specifics on the year-end spending and tax deals.

The GOP leader argued that his presence at the high-level talks gave Kentucky “an advantage to punch above its weight.”

“I saw a commercial from my likely opponent indicating that I was all that was wrong with Washington. So I have a question for her here as we go into the new year: In what way would Kentucky have been better off without any of these items that I put in the year-end spending bill?” McConnell said.

It's a powerful argument from a politician who registers a 37 percent approval rating at home, according to a Morning Consult poll from the third quarter.

"He's never had a great level of personal popularity so it's been important for him to deliver for the state, and he does a good job of doing that," said Al Cross, a journalism professor at the University of Kentucky and a longtime commentator on state politics.


Cross said McGrath has enough fundraising prowess to match McConnell on the airwaves next year and noted the GOP leader "never takes anything for granted."

McConnell's wins in the spending legislation included coal miners’ pension benefits; $410 million for the construction of the new Robley Rex Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Louisville; $314 million for cleanup of Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, a $40 million increase over last year’s funding level; a tax break for spirits distillers worth an estimated $426 million in 2020 alone; and $65 million for the construction of the Forage Animal Production Lab at the University of Kentucky.

“I was directly responsible — directly responsible — for these items,” McConnell declared at the press conference.

He also secured a tax break for Kentucky’s thoroughbred horse racing industry, $16.5 million for the Department of Agriculture to implement the pro-hemp provisions McConnell got into the 2018 farm bill and $61.3 million for new military construction projects at Fort Campbell.

Steve Ellis, who tracks federal spending bills as executive vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, said that while spending items that go directly to Kentucky total $914.2 million, the amount is “easily going to exceed a billion dollars” when factoring in items that benefit other states in addition to Kentucky.

Bourbon whiskey, thoroughbreds and hemp aren’t exclusive to Kentucky, but they are some of the state’s signature industries.


Ellis noted the tax-relief provision allowing for three-year-old thoroughbred horses was not in the House spending legislation.

“It is something that he clearly wanted because it was not in the House package and then got added in and is something that has been his pet initiative,” he said.

“It’s clear Sen. McConnell took advantage of the push to get the bill through to grab all the cash he possibly can for the Commonwealth of Kentucky,” Ellis added. “It’s Santa Mitch delivering the baubles for Kentuckians.”

But those provisions were far from certain as recently as November.

The GOP fought to avoid a possible yearlong continuing resolution, which would have prevented McConnell from adding special provisions for his home state, by initiating spending talks with Trump and Pelosi back in April.

The spending deal was later stalled for months and appeared in doubt until the final moment, as Democrats refused to negotiate while the issue of funding for Trump’s border wall remained unresolved, and the president was distracted by impeachment in the House.


In the end, Trump settled for keeping border-barrier funding at $1.375 billion. He was also dealt a setback earlier this month when a federal judge blocked his plan to use $3.6 billion in military funding for border-barrier construction.

McConnell said the spending talks were “difficult” because he and the other three leaders — Pelosi, Schumer and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) — have “veto power” over what’s in the bill.

“I think it ended very, very well, particularly given all the contentious things going on right now,” he said, a reference to impeachment.

Congressional leaders broke the spending package into two bills so Trump could live by the letter — if not the spirit — of his pledge not to sign another massive omnibus into law.

But the size of the spending package left several Senate conservatives fuming.

“Christmas came early in Washington,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) quipped in a Twitter video blasting the legislation.


"While you were with your family, while you were shopping for Christmas, the lobbyists were spending and spending. I present to you, the massive omnibus bill that Congress is voting on," he said.

McConnell predicted in April that he would likely take heat from the right for the spending bill. But he didn’t seem to mind.

“The only way we can, in a divided government, get a rational spending-cap bill is in the political center,” he told reporters at the time about his upcoming spending negotiations with Pelosi.

“Her most liberal members probably won’t vote for it, many of my conservative members won’t vote for it. But we have to do it because the country will suffer either through a [continuing resolution] or, even worse, a sequester if we don’t do it,” he said.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
15,853
16,888
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#2
I doubt you'll find many people on the right, if any at all, who will defend McConnell as conservative.....his party is still the best fiscal option even with crap like this.....which is sad.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,039
31,557
1,743
oklahoma city
#4
I doubt you'll find many people on the right, if any at all, who will defend McConnell as conservative.....his party is still the best fiscal option even with crap like this.....which is sad.
I disagree. I do not think his party is the best fiscal option. I think his party is the fiscal option that takes money from everyone and rewards those in power with even more money, just like he is doing. It claims to be something it isn't to allow it to continue to take from those it harms. It is political hypocrisy. That isn't a defense of the other party as they are bad too. But, thinking one is better than the other is fools gold. The deficit data backs me on that. The emperor has no clothes. And, it isn't like I just picked some random. He is the leader of the Senate. He is their chosen one to give direction to the party.
 

ramases2112

Federal Marshal
Banned
A/V Subscriber
Jun 28, 2008
10,915
5,434
1,743
29
Inside the Basket of Deplorables
www.reddit.com
#5
I doubt you'll find many people on the right, if any at all, who will defend McConnell as conservative.....his party is still the best fiscal option even with crap like this.....which is sad.
I disagree. I do not think his party is the best fiscal option. I think his party is the fiscal option that takes money from everyone and rewards those in power with even more money, just like he is doing. It claims to be something it isn't to allow it to continue to take from those it harms. It is political hypocrisy. That isn't a defense of the other party as they are bad too. But, thinking one is better than the other is fools gold. The deficit data backs me on that. The emperor has no clothes. And, it isn't like I just picked some random. He is the leader of the Senate. He is their chosen one to give direction to the party.
You just described socialism which is the current political identity of the democrats. Socialism destroys the middle class and enriches the top 1%.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
15,853
16,888
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#7
disagree. I do not think his party is the best fiscal option. I think
You can disagree all you want but it's simple math, $1 billion in spending is a better option than $1 trillion. That does not mean McConnell or the Republicans should be considered fiscally conservative or fiscally responsible, they are not, but there really is no comparison between what Reps spend and what the Dem candidates, including Yang, are talking about spending. No comparison.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
6,557
3,303
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#8
I disagree. I do not think his party is the best fiscal option. I think his party is the fiscal option that takes money from everyone and rewards those in power with even more money, just like he is doing. It claims to be something it isn't to allow it to continue to take from those it harms. It is political hypocrisy. That isn't a defense of the other party as they are bad too. But, thinking one is better than the other is fools gold. The deficit data backs me on that. The emperor has no clothes. And, it isn't like I just picked some random. He is the leader of the Senate. He is their chosen one to give direction to the party.
Good to see you say that.
 
Oct 12, 2019
505
92
43
30
Dustin,ok
#9
Money to Ky, Ok, Ut or the Border wall is money well spent compared to one and a half billion in cash on pallets to Iran. I’m no longer bothered by welfare to Americans rather than welfare to illegals. MAGA, USA no longer sugar tit to the world.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,039
31,557
1,743
oklahoma city
#11
You can disagree all you want but it's simple math, $1 billion in spending is a better option than $1 trillion. That does not mean McConnell or the Republicans should be considered fiscally conservative or fiscally responsible, they are not, but there really is no comparison between what Reps spend and what the Dem candidates, including Yang, are talking about spending. No comparison.
Again, look at the deficits. Your one billion vs one trillion is myth.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
70,117
40,719
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#13
You can disagree all you want but it's simple math, $1 billion in spending is a better option than $1 trillion. That does not mean McConnell or the Republicans should be considered fiscally conservative or fiscally responsible, they are not, but there really is no comparison between what Reps spend and what the Dem candidates, including Yang, are talking about spending. No comparison.
Yeah, we're going down the hole either way. I see no sense in the party that promises to take us to hell in a handbasket faster.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
15,853
16,888
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#14
Again, look at the deficits. Your one billion vs one trillion is myth.
I've been yelling for people to look at the debt and deficits for years. YOU look at the deficits and tell me how you can support UBI.

It's not a myth that UBI would double our federal spending....a billion dollars in pork spending, while unacceptable, is still EASILY a better option than 3 trillion in new spending.

That's not even mentioning the environmental and health spending that the Dems want to add which would make a billion dollars look like literal pennies in comparison.

Seriously, this isn't even close. The Reps are terrible with spending, the Dems are completely insane on spending. It's fact, not myth.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,039
31,557
1,743
oklahoma city
#15
I've been yelling for people to look at the debt and deficits for years. YOU look at the deficits and tell me how you can support UBI.

It's not a myth that UBI would double our federal spending....a billion dollars in pork spending, while unacceptable, is still EASILY a better option than 3 trillion in new spending.

That's not even mentioning the environmental and health spending that the Dems want to add which would make a billion dollars look like literal pennies in comparison.

Seriously, this isn't even close. The Reps are terrible with spending, the Dems are completely insane on spending. It's fact, not myth.
Simple. There is a plan to fund the UBI. The pork barrel is just add on spending for our kids to deal with. McConnell didn't create a funding mechanism for his bribes to his supporters. He just added them on to the tab for the future. UBI will make our nation function better. Pork barrel creates the problems of our nation.

Again, if you look at the history of deficit spending, the republicans are not better. You are listening to the campaigns of each party and claiming them as fact. I'm talking about what happens when they actually govern.
 
Jul 25, 2018
3,642
1,020
243
49
Boulder, CO
#16
Simple. There is a plan to fund the UBI. The pork barrel is just add on spending for our kids to deal with. McConnell didn't create a funding mechanism for his bribes to his supporters. He just added them on to the tab for the future. UBI will make our nation function better. Pork barrel creates the problems of our nation.

Again, if you look at the history of deficit spending, the republicans are not better. You are listening to the campaigns of each party and claiming them as fact. I'm talking about what happens when they actually govern.
Nothing but conjecture on your part.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
15,853
16,888
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#17
There is a plan to fund the UBI.
Yeah and Mexico was going to pay for the wall. :rolleyes:

look at the history of deficit spending,
I'm not looking at the history, they both suck and are both responsible for getting us where we are today. I'm talking strictly about the future. What the Democrats are running on is fiscal insanity. UBI, green new deal, single payer, free college, reparations, free stuff for every illegal that manages to get a toe on US soil. We can't change history, but we can pick the less damaging spending options for the future, for our kids to deal with as you very accuearely describe it ....and there is just no comparison between the two.
 
Jul 25, 2018
3,642
1,020
243
49
Boulder, CO
#19
Not really. Plenty of data of the benefits of UBI on a smaller scale. Would that mean that it is 100% certain on a larger scale? Of course not. But, that is how things are done.
Yes, that's exactly what your blanket claim is, conjecture. You flatly stated "UBI will make our nation function better." That's what you said.

I've read the data on it, thanks. The data doesn't support your outlandish claim, at all.