[Rushtalk] House and Senate Republicans Might Legalize Bribery ?

John A. Quayle blueoval57 at verizon.net
Mon Dec 15 00:58:23 MST 2014


At 12:12 AM 12/15/2014, Tom Matiska wrote:
>The vote in question happened the same day as 
>the article.    "Rinos" voted against earmarks in worry free 145-67 ratio.

         That's okay, Tom..........Carl still 
doesn't know that Obummer won a second 
term.........he hasn't gotten through his e-mail that far, yet!

>Tom T-Mobile. America's First Nationwide 4G 
>Network Carl Spitzer <cwsiv at keepandbeararms.com> 
>wrote: >-------- Forwarded Message 
>-------- >From: TxForce  > >Folks ,It  looks 
>like the RINOs are  making a push  to 
>take >************************ > > > > >-- > 
>                  Next Week, House and 
>Senate >                                    > 
>                   Republicans Might 
>Legalize >                                    > 
>                               Bribery > 
>                            > 
>  >                                    > 
>  Erickson (Diary)  |  November 14th, 2014 at 
>04:30 
>AM > 
>  >https://www.redstate.com/2014/11/14/house-and-senate-republicans-prepare-to-legalize-bribery/  
> >                                    > 
>                           >Sources in both the 
>House and Senate are expressing grave concern to 
>me >  that Republicans are about to legalize 
>bribery. If you will recall, >   several years 
>ago after a host of arrests of members of 
>Congress, > indictments, and bridges to nowhere, 
>public outrage caused Congress 
>to >                             ban 
>earmarks. >                                    > 
>  The earmarks were serving as bribery. 
>Politicians would get earmarks > sent to state 
>and local public institutions and congressional 
>leaders > would grant and withhold earmarks as 
>bribes to get congressmen to 
>vote >                            particular 
>ways. >                                    > 
>                                > Senate 
>Republicans are dragging their feet and there 
>are, according to >    Senate sources, strong 
>signals the GOP intends to end the 
>Senate >earmarks ban. Just yesterday, Senate 
>Republicans refused to approve 
>the >                             earmarks 
>ban. >                                    >  On 
>the House side, Congressman Mike Rogers (R-AL) 
>is introducing an > amendment to House rules 
>that would allow an exception to the earmarks > 
>ban for “State, locality (including county and 
>city governments), or a >public utility or other 
>public entity.” A House source tells me 
>Speaker >   Boehner has been firmly committed to 
>keeping the earmarks ban, but >      worries 
>other Republicans may latch on to Rogers’ 
>exception. > 
>  >    It is worth noting that virtually all 
>earmarks go to “State[s], >   localit[ies] 
>(including county and city governments), [and] 
>public > 
>utilit[ies].” > 
>     > With Senators Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint 
>out of the picture, the Senate >    seems more 
>likely than the House to move forward on this 
>issue. > 
>  >Sen. Tom Coburn ,Senate Republican Average 
>85%, referred to earmarks at >“the gateway 
>drug” for big spending. The earmarks 
>themselves were often >   relatively small, but 
>they were given by leadership to members of > 
>Congress as a form of bribery to induce those 
>members to vote for 
>much >                       larger spending 
>packages. >                                    > 
>  It would be a shame for either the House or 
>Senate to give up on the >   earmarks ban — 
>particularly wwhen outrage over Republican 
>behavior > related, in part, to corruption 
>induced through earmarks led to 
>their >                      devastating losses 
>in 
>2006. >                                    > 
>You can connect to your member of Congress 
>through the congressional > switchboard at (202) 
>224-3121 and express your support for 
>continuing >                           the 
>earmarks 
>ban. >                                    > 
>                               > > > >___________ 
>  > > > >________________________________________ 
>_______ >Rushtalk mailing 
>list >Rushtalk at csdco.com >http://kalos.csdco.com/ 
>mailman/listinfo/rushtalk 
>_______________________________________________ 
>Rushtalk mailing list Rushtalk at csdco.com 
>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20141215/4502b39f/attachment.html 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list