Op Ed: Neo-Republicans Are Not The Grand Old Party, scattalogical analogies.
Neo-Republicans are the angry CAT. The Obama Administration must clean the CAT BOX. The SHIT is the result of eight years of mismanagement and corruption and plain old greed. Now the CAT demonizes the scooper and bullies the cleaning methods … this makes no sense. It stinks! Neo-Republicans are not really the CAT, they are an elephant and their shit is BIG! They love their shit. This is very sick, their shit has contaminated their ability to think. The Neo-Republican mantra is NO! The Neo-Republican mantra accuses the scooper of SOCIALISM!
There is a big cause and effect here. What Neo-Republicans describe as Capitalism, is really despotism with a dash of totalitarianism. They lost control, they are fighting dirty! The American people are the throw away issue, their big business must be saved. Big business is just fine, if big business behaved responsibly. But NO! Big business used methods, supported by Neo-Republicans, that depended on deception and greed. Neo-Republicans are neck deep in their own deception.
The current state of the US Economy, and the world economies, are in critical condition. Doctors must take drastic measures to save the patient. The relatives fight the doctor to do it their way, eve though their way caused the condition. Enter the Republicans.
Republicans took eight years to fill the US full of shit. The cat box is full. Obama is tasked with cleaning the mess. It is nasty. Republicans of old were fiscally responsible adults. Neo-Republicans are out of control 2 year old children, all they can say is NO! All they can do is throw tantrums and screech Socialism! The lowest percentage of Americans in history recognize the contradictions Neo-Republicans are trying to sell. Americans are afraid that the “old ways” may return and finish them off.
EARMARKS: Neo-Republicans have adopted the rhetoric that earmarks are terrible, even after decades of using those same earmarks for their own gain. Targeted Earmarks can also be used for good, except when they are devised by Democrats …
House turns back call for PMA probe: One of the most powerful “Earmark Producers” PMA Group “How can you stay ahead of evolving legislation and regulations that can have a critical impact on your enterprise? How can you be first to seize major new business opportunities in the federal arena? How can your organization’s legislative goals be realized?”
OMB defines earmarks as funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to manage critical aspects of the funds allocation process.
- Earmarks vs. Unrequested Funding. At the broadest level, unrequested funding is any additional funding provided by the Congress — in either bill or report language — for activities/projects/programs not requested by the Administration. Earmarks are a subset of unrequested funding. The distinction between earmarks and unrequested funding is programmatic control or lack thereof of in the allocation process.
- Earmarks and Programmatic “Control.” If the congressional direction accompanying a project/program/funding in an appropriations bill or report or other communication purports to affect the ability of the Administration to control critical aspects of the awards process for the project/program/funding, this IS an earmark. Note: The definition of “control critical aspects” includes specification of the location or recipient or otherwise circumventing the merit-based or competitive allocation process and may be program specific. However, if the Congress adds funding and the Administration retains control over the awards process for the project/program/funding, it is NOT an earmark; it is unrequested funding.
- Earmarks Include:
- Add-ons. If the Administration asks for $100 million for formula grants, for example, and Congress provides $110 million and places restrictions (such as site-specific locations) on the additional $10 million, the additional $10 million is counted as an earmark.
- Carve-outs. If the Administration asks for $100 million and Congress provides $100 million but places restrictions on some portion of the funding, the restricted portion is counted as an earmark.
- Funding provisions that do not name a recipient, but are so specific that only one recipient can qualify for funding.
OMB has used this definition to gather data on earmarks internally. This definition is similar to the definition that the Congress recently developed for disclosing earmarks in spending legislation (H. Res. 6 and the Senate-passed version of S. 1).
Other documents on collection of information about earmarks:
Even President Bush’s Office of Budget and Management issued this. On January 3, 2007, the President called on the Congress to enact earmark reform, including reducing the number and cost of earmarks by at least half. To provide a transparent baseline from which the cut-in-half goal will be measured, agencies will be required to:
1) identify and catalogue earmarks in all appropriations bills and certain authorization bills, including report language;
2) submit that data to OMB; and
3) provide rapid analysis of the earmarks in each bill as they move through the legislative process in order to facilitate the development of an Administration position on the bill.
For the purposes of this data collection the definition of an earmark is as follows:
Earmarks are funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents the merit-based or competitive allocation process, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Administration to control critical aspects of the funds allocation process.
On this page you can access preliminary information on earmarks in the appropriations bills for fiscal year 2009 as they move through the legislative process to become law.
During the FY 2009 appropriations process, federal departments and agencies are providing information on the number and cost of earmarks by appropriations bills. Identifying earmarks does not reflect agency decisions to commit, obligate, or expend funds on those earmarks. The “count” is the number of earmarks identified by the agency in the bill and report, or through other communication. The “amount” is the total value of the earmarks in the bill, in thousands of dollars. The “Date Published” is the date that amounts, counts, and supporting citation information were last modified.
Note: These estimates were developed with limited access to information and often under a tight time line dictated by the legislative process. For most accounts, the estimates include links to detail listings of earmarks with descriptions, funding by stage, Congressional sponsors, and supporting citations. In some cases, account estimates are only supported by a PDF that explains the basis of the Agency estimates; these estimates will be updated at a later date with a detail listing of earmarks. These estimates may differ from those of other entities due to differences in the definition of an earmark used by that entity. Definitions used by the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate can be found in the Rules sections of their respective websites.
President Obama can’t assure that the economy will bounce back this year, but he says he will “get all the pillars in place for recovery this year.”
“I don’t think that people should be fearful about our future,” he told the newspaper. “I don’t think that people should suddenly mistrust all of our financial institutions.”
- “We’ve got big challenges ahead of us,” Obama says
- Obama says stimulus plan will help reverse the economic downturn
- Stimulus providing funds to employ the 25 graduating officers through 2009
- More than 3.3 million jobs have been lost over the past six months
Conservative opponents have criticized Obama’s new administration, saying it has pushed the country toward socialism and that his $787 billion economic
stimulus package will do little to revive the struggling economy.
The analogies for Neo-Republican obstruction are endless, and nasty. They are vengeful about the exposure of their dark agenda. Their pursuit of total control driven by a philosophy that they deserve exceptional profit (elitism), begins to shrink. Transparency is their enemy. They become more vicious as their cloak is ripped away. Recognize the hateful rhetoric by Limbaugh, et. al., for what they are, the inner workings of the Neo-Republican subconscious. They have a great fall back excuse that Limbaugh, et. al., are nothing but entertainers. Oh yes! Neo-Republicans do beleive these hateful talking heads are very entertaining. Socialism will be the Neo-Republican mantra as long as they seek exclusive reign over the Americans. To Hell with Liberty and Justice for all …