You are viewing this article in the archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see
Posted on Sat, Nov 12, 2011 : 6 p.m.

Who's the boss? Put the blame in Washington where it belongs

By Letters to the Editor

I hear a lot about the low approval rating for the U.S. Congress, which is under split-party control only since the beginning of 2011, and was single-party control for the four years prior to that.

There is also plenty in the news about what the House and Senate didn’t do. They didn’t give Solyndra $535 million 14 months before the company filed for bankruptcy, the U.S. Department of Energy did. They didn’t give filing-for-bankruptcy Beacon Power $39 million, again, the DOE did.

It isn’t the House and Senate that is working to prevent Arizona, Alabama and South Carolina from enforcing immigration laws, it’s the U.S. Department of Justice. It isn’t the House or the Senate that provided thousands of automatic weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels (Fast and Furious), resulting in the death of U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry and hundreds if not thousands of Mexicans, it was the U.S. Department of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, part of the U.S. Treasury Department.

Who’s allowing people to board planes with weapons and prohibited items in test after test of the airport screening systems? It’s the US Transportation Security Administration, part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

This list isn’t intended to depress you, and if you look, there are lots of other examples of incompetence and worse. Ask yourself, who do all these people report to? What boss? Who’s appointed the bosses? Where does the buck stop?

Arthur J. Godfrey



Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 5:25 p.m.

One thing that stands out more than ever on this thread is that liberals - true to form - cannot make a coherant argument that does not end in name calling or an assault on intellegence. You brilliant types were in complete charge of everything for 2 years and created a train wreck of the economy and almost everything else and made the bed for the train wreck earlier under Bush with Fannie and Freddie (Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and the Black Caucus all claiming any attemtp to question Fannie/Freddy solvency was crazy partisan crap and racially motivated) . No honest person can claim Bush was a good steward of the economy (he spent like a democrat) or that Obama has a clue about anything other than community organizing and what his telepromter gets programmed with for him to read. Where does it end with liberals and the something-for-nothing crowd? How easy it to claim we spend too much on defense and not enough on social programs. Truth is, we spend too much on both BUT defense comes first and sencond -- read the Constitution - defense is federal obligation, social programs and social engineering NOT. Obama over-spends by $1.5 trillion per year added to our national debt and wants to count money previously spent on what democrats rightly argue was an "unfunded war" (that only the top 5 % should have paid for of course) as a cut in spending going forward. This is all scary pathetic and we have plenty of role models in Europe that tell us this liberal utopia idealism junk simply does not work. But hey, go to and check out pictures of Micheal Moore's multi-million dollar vacation home (among other liberal's finger wagging at rest of us). Seems he found something to do with all that money he says he should have been paying in taxes to Uncle Sam (but did not because he is a hypocrit - every millionaire pays or none (now that's standing on principle, do as a I say, not as I do. . .) ..but he's a warrior for the 99% so we got that going


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 9:55 p.m.

Well said!


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 5:42 p.m.

Knick, Your first complaint is that liberals can not make an argument and that they end in name calling. Yeh right. Your post reads like just like a peer reviewed science article.....NOT


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 5:03 p.m.

I have read most of these partisan comments and it outlines the problem succinctly. The only goal of members of Congress is to get reelected. Nothing less and very rarely more. To say that Wall Street/Big Corporations owns one party is a joke. They own both parties. I find it reprehensible that Obama did not adopt Simpson-Bowles and that he did not let the Bush tax cuts expire. I find just as reprehensible the Republicans not stopping the tax breaks for special interests like the Oil Companies and Agribusiness. Neither party has the interest of the country or the voter in mind regardless of the junk they spout. Every vote is up for sale to the highest bidding lobbyist.


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 10:39 p.m.

Art, I mean Diagenes, republicons have voted against any legislation precisely because it would work. They care only that they can not accelerate the already fast growing gap between the 1% and the 99%. They therefore want to get President Obama out of the way at any cost. They are thumbing their nose at the American people. If Harry Reid doesn't bring up bills before the senate, the only part of congress he is a member of, its because he can't get the supermajority required to defeat the party of no's filibuster. The stimulus that was implemented, most economists not on Rupert Murdoch's payroll agree, prevented economic armegedon. What W and his republicon controlled congress did to this country's economy was obscene. It took severe measures to prevent


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 9:52 p.m.

Ray, The GOP does not want to support policies that DO NOT work. Keynsian economics does not work. President Obama and the Dems passed the first stimulus plan in 2009 and it did not reduce unemployment. The GOP refuses to allow the same mistake twice. The only way President Obama gets relected is to lay the blame on the GOP. His policies are so bad Majority Leader Reid wont bring them to a vote in the Senate.


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 5:22 p.m.

The difference is that President Obama, and the Democrats in Congress are trying to get the best they can for the majority of Americans, despite the unrelenting obstructionism of the republicons in congress. The congressional republicons couldn't care less about anyone but the top 1% of wealth holders in this country. Current law favors that top 1% so, in the republicon mind, there is no reason for any additional legislation that doesn't help their wealthy constituency get wealthier.


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 2:23 p.m.

Good letter Art. You correctly point out that many of the problems our country has experienced in the last three years are Cabinet department management issues. You have sighted several examples of incompetence and mismanagement. The President is the Head of the Executive Branch. The Department Secretaries serve at the pleasure of the President. The President must not object to the way his departments are being run. Otherwise someone would have been fired. It does make me laugh that many people writting on this page want to divert attention away from the heart of your letter and blame the "evil GOP" instead of attempting to rebut your charges. All Presidents make mistakes. The real test of leadership is how they handle the mistake. So far President Obama has failed that test.

Art Godfrey

Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 1:34 a.m.

As the author of the letter, be clear that I am a fan of only a few members of Congress. What drove me to write is my perception that too many people are blaming the wrong people. I am a proud Tea Party member who believe the core of a great society is the family, and certainly not the government, controlled by either party. I believe in self-reliance and taking care of one's own, problems, family members, and those who truly need help, judged by me, not a politician buying votes with money taken from others. I would love to see a government one-tenth the size of what we have. I have been employed by private and publicly-held businesses since I was 15 years old, almost 50 years ago. I have felt the need to justify my value in my jobs on a regular basis, not unwillingly. I have known truly bright people who have helped hundreds of others through jobs or job/life training. By the way, none of these were lawyers or politicians. I believe adversity builds character. Whatever you believe or whatever position you take, tell me how it makes you a stronger person, better able to take care of yourself and those you love.


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 5:18 p.m.

And here I just thought you copied and pasted that load of self serving propoganda for the 1% from Faux Noise web site . My background is very similar to yours. I however have learned that the wealthy have no qualms about taking from others to feed their well developed sense of greed. The growing gap between the super wealthy and everyone else, helped along tremendously by W's capital gains tax cut and the elimination of estate taxes, is all the proof anyone should need that class warfare is alive and well. We will continue to lose badly in this metaphorical war until teaparty radicals and the rest of this country wake up to the obvious reality.

Rod Johnson

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 6:04 p.m.

Stunningly disinenuous letter. During the previous two years of "single-party control" the Republicans, with some Blue Dog Democrats along for the ride, tied up every hope of constructive legislation with the filibuster. So for the most part, the President just hasn't had much of a chance to implement an agenda and has been in a position mainly of reacting against congressional obstructionism. The TSA and ATF actions you cite are much the same as they were under the previous administration, and as for working against the immigration "reforms" in Arizona et al., well, bully for him.

Rod Johnson

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 10:54 p.m.

Who is Rob? I'm not responsible for his comments.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 9:34 p.m.

Rod, you and Rob need to get together and get the story straight. Rob says that according to the "house parliamentarian", the dem two years were the most "successful in history in terms of the amount of legislation passed" and you say the opposite - which is it?

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 5:46 p.m.

@Ed And all of those that doubt that the real Tea Party started while Bush/Cheney was in office (2007) and in opposition to the draconian policies of the Bush/Cheney regime, here you go. Please check your facts before Making fun of people. As you can see, the Tea Part opposed the Iraq war (both the Dems and Repubs love), the neo-cons, water boarding or Torture, IMF, and the unconstitutional Patriot Act and Homeland Security. To all you progressives, how are these bad things to oppose. You've been fooled. <a href="" rel='nofollow'>;feature=youtube_gdata_player</a>

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 12:18 a.m.

Whatever. Every one of those clips is over the Ron Paul for President campaign. Every one. I can call a cow a goat. I can hang a sign on the cow that makes it a goat. Doesn't make it so. It's not &quot;splitting hairs&quot;. It's being factually accurate. GN&amp;GL

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 11:03 p.m.

It is obvious you are trying to split very fine hairs. The Tea Party movement started in 2007 just like the OWS started in 2011. In 2008 the TP became a credible party so the Republicans came in and co-opted it. Fooling people into believing it is the extreme right wing of the Republican party. Thus, it did start in 2007 while Bush was the president. Case closed.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 9:59 p.m.

What I see in EVERY one of the clips are &quot;Ron Paul for President.&quot; Ron Paul appropriated the symbolism of the tea party, and that's fine. And there might even be some people who were in Mr. Paul's campaign who moved over to the tea party. But the two are not the same and any effort to equate the two is transparently disingenuous. GN&amp;GL

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 9:04 p.m.

As I said before, the Tea Party started in 2007. Bush was president. Do you not see &quot;Tea Party 2007&quot; in one of the banners? What more evidence do you need?

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 8:59 p.m.

Well, then, I guess the tea party started in 1774. Because they called themselves the tea party, and if all it takes is the use of the name . . . . LOL Talk about fatuous logic. But I guess that I'm the President of the United States if I wear a sign saying I am. LOLOL GN&amp;GL

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 8:46 p.m.

Give me a break Ed. Do you not see the words, &quot;Tea Party&quot; on the banners? Ron Paul and his followers are the ones that started the original Tea Party. What don't you get? Please do not attempt to mislead the readers of this opinion piece.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 7:10 p.m.

This is not the start of the tea party. It is the Ron Paul campaign. But nice try. GN&amp;GL

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 6:07 p.m.

Sorry for the grammar errors. Not easy typing fast on my cell phone. I hope people check the facts. If you do, the progressives should LOVE the real Tea Party and Ron Paul.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 2:40 p.m.

Yes, since tea party republicans were voted in, which was in November 2010 by the way, progress halted and congressional approval ratings have sunk to their current 8% which is the lowest in the history of the USA. The Senate has fillibustered nearly every bill the President has proposed since then despite Democratic majority control of that chamber. In the House, despite campaigning on a platform of jobs, jobs, jobs, no jobs bills have passed according to the independent Congressional Budget Office. The House claims to have a passed 15 of them, but they are regulations bills that create zero jobs and are mostly about clean air and water and passed in prior administrations. They refuse to take up the Presidents Jobs Act that this same CBO says would add 1.3 million new jobs immediately. This congress follows one of the most successful in history according to the House Parliamentarian, in terms of amount of legislation actually made into law. This congress will be rated as one of the worst in history on the same basis. Facts are facts.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 8:10 p.m.

Nice skew there Rob, &quot;this congress follows the most successful in history... in terms of legislation actually made into law.&quot; Well, since both the house and senate were dem controlled, with a dem president - what would you expect? Funny about Obama's last attempt at a budget submission however, it went down by 97 votes in the senate, his own party wouldn't even touch it.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 4:06 p.m.

Rob - I would be jumping up and down to pass the President's &quot;Jobs&quot; bill, if it was about actually creating jobs. Only $80 billion goes to infrastructure, the balance is the same kinds of hand outs that were in the first stimulus bill - More than $350 billion in hand outs. If the bill was all infrastructure, I would be on the phone in a heartbeat. If it brought back the CCC or the WPA, I would be on the phone in a heartbeat to support the bill, but it is not. It is the same old handout mentality that has existed in Washington forever.

Hot Sam

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 1:02 p.m.

The biggest mistake we make as a nation is to get sucked in to believing that congress always needs to &quot; do something&quot;. Our problem is &quot;big government&quot;, with R's and D's. The bigger government gets, the bigger &quot;big business&quot; gets, and the smaller the middle class gets...


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 12:53 p.m.

Mr. Godfrey, I applaud your courage of conviction. I'm sure you were aware the &quot;commenters&quot; would foam at the mouth and become more enraged as they gathered forces. They shovel blame on George Bush (a perennial target), conservative radio talk show hosts, on the Tea Party, on the Republican Party, and on companies who provide jobs. If people don't agree with _their_ President and _their_ Congress, they bellow about racism and &quot;party of no.&quot; They certainly do not skimp on replaying platitudes and favorite sound bites. I believe your point is that President Obama doesn't do much leading in public, doesn't take responsibility for the administration he heads. I agree with you. I have been disappointed in and embarrassed by President Obama. The promises he made have not been kept. The grand plans he promotes do not happen. I believe we are less safe at home and abroad since he took office. I believe the President, the Senate, and the House are more concerned about being re-elected than about taking care of America. I believe the tools politicians use to get re-elected include encouraging class warfare, inciting hatred and mistrust, placating segments of the society to buy votes, selling their vote on the floor for campaign donations, and telling the American people versions of what-is-and-will-happen that have crossed the line of &quot;spin&quot; and are in the realm of fabrications, lies, falsehoods, and insidious fiction. The parties don't want to heal the divide among Americans. They want to fan the flames. Hatred breeds fear and fear is a great motivator. If they can control the fear, they can win the votes. I don't know who I will support in the next Presidential election. I have started making a list of who I will not support. I wish you good health and very good days, Mr. Godfrey. Thank you for your letter.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 12:37 p.m.

Pshaw! There was a majority of Dems? Just barely...can you say filibuster? That slim majority was very slim and short-lived. Oh and yes by all means let the south rise again in ugly racism...preventing kids from going to school with fear tactics that are reminiscent of Nazi Germany, no thanks. Alabama, you got The weight on your shoulders That's breaking your back. Your Cadillac Has got a wheel in the ditch And a wheel on the track

Jon Saalberg

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 4:55 a.m.

Oops. Don't want to give Romney too much credit. Of course he is against gay rights. In fact, I believe it is safe to say that every GOP candidate is comfortably anti-gay? Correct?


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 2:14 a.m.

You have it wrong. They're not anti-gay, they just don't think gays are special nor require special rights. To someone on the right, everyone is created equal, regardless of race, sex, or sexual preference. Liberals are the ones who think gays need special rights because .... I don't really know why actually.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 8:49 p.m.

&quot;He was for it before he was against it, just like every other topic.&quot; Prove it.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 2:26 p.m.

He was for it before he was against it, just like every other topic.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 5:12 a.m.

Ron Paul isn't anti-gay. However, he does not believe any group of people should receive favoritism since the Constitution guarantees equal rights for EVERYONE. Everyone should be treated equal. No favoritism or discrimination.

Jon Saalberg

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 4:54 a.m.

Hmm. I think Mr. Godfrey's missive sounds a lot like cherry picking a couple of relatively insignificant issues when viewed against the momumental destruction the GOP is raining down on the American people. I guess Mr. Godfrey is not concerned with the economy. It's certainly true that the GOP is not. Bush torpedoed it during his administration, and the GOP-controlled House is ensuring that no matter what measure the President puts forward to help our economy, the GOP votes against it. The GOP is not concerned with American's healthcare - they, as a party, are working at every level to obstruct and tie up in court state implementation of health care for all. I guess Mr. Godfrey doesn't want that, either. How about a balanced budget? Or any budget? Not if the rich can't keep their tax breaks. The GOP is VERY concerned with the important issues of the day - such as last week, when they took time out of the critically jammed up legislative agenda to vote on reaffirming &quot;One Nation Under God&quot; as the official motto. So the GOP field consists of people who: can't remember their talking points, make sexual advances towards multiple women, dump their wives while gravely ill, think they can balance the budget without raising taxes, are for gay rights before they were against them... I think the American people have it right when they give Congress the lower marks - since the GOP is doing nothing but obstructing the President, at the expense of getting anything done that helps our country. Next November, the GOP might find themselves not only out of the White House, but out of the majority in Congress as well.

David Paris

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 11:50 a.m.

Mr Orwell, Only a fan of MSM would believe that Obama is to blame for the mess we're in. Mr Obama has made several sincere attempts to fix the cards he's been dealt, only to come up to a wall of obstruction, certainly you can admit that. And if you think that the Tea Party has the solutions, being anti-everything-that-is-government will only get us into a deeper funk. There are solutions, but practically dissolving government is not one of them.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 5:22 a.m.

Both Obama and Bush destroyed our economy and BOTH are war mongers. Invading sovereign nations based on lies. Both supported the TARP. The biggest theft in history. If you have not figured it out, there is no difference between Obama and Bush, Republicans and Democrats. You are contributing to the problems facing this country since you participate in the charade and constantly blaming the other side. You have fallen for the divide and conquer trap.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 4:10 a.m.

@Arthur Godfrey I like your opinion page. It is right on. But, let's not forget the Bush/Cheney was also an absolute disaster. I'd also like to make a correction. It wasn't AUTOMATIC weapons the ATF was buying and shipping to Mexico since you CANNOT purchase automatic weapons in the U.S. The guns purchased and shipped to the Mexican drug cartels were semi-automatic. The fully automatics the Mexican cartels received were from our military. The semi-autos purchased in the U.S. and shipped to Mexico were solely for the purpose of blaming the 2nd. Amendment. Drug cartel do not use semi-auto. They want fully auto. Even though Holder and Napalotano were caught red handed authorizing the shipment of these guns, they still blame the 2nd. Amendment. Along with Senator Diane Feinstein. Unbelievable! They really want our guns.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 3:24 a.m.

Fast and Furious is the continuation of Iran-Contra. Ship guns out and drugs back in. Only this time, the Obama admin. shipped the guns to Mexico in order to blame the 2nd. Amendment in an attempt to restrict our rights to own guns. Why is the Obama admin. afraid that law abiding citizens are armed? What do they have in mind? Contrary to all the anti-gun propaganda, you do not want an unarmed population. Crime explodes since criminals are the only ones armed and it leads to government tyranny. History has proven over and over again. Examples, Germany, Russia, China, Chile, Cambodia, North Korea, etc. Millions of innocent people died at the hands of their own government.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 4 p.m.

You are right. They are all in on it. Like i said, there is no difference between the two administrations.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 2:23 p.m.

What about Bush's gun program called Operation Wide Receiver? He had gun Programs running into Mexico out of Phoenix and Tucson as is now known. The Senate has warned the House and Issa if their investigation won't include these programs and they keep it up with Fast and Furious, the Senate will be forced to begin its own investigation of these Bush programs. LoL.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 3:13 a.m.

I think most people are misinformed about the Tea Party. The Tea Party began in opposition to the Bush admin. and government corruption in general. That is right, the Tea Party started while Bush was in office. The corporate owned media does not like to mention that and want to label it a right wing racist organization. The Tea Party was initially ignored. But, when it started gaining momentum because they were telling the truth, the Republican party, with the nod from the Democratic party (Repubs and Dems do not want to give up the duopoly), co-opted the movement by sending in the like of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. Thus, most uninformed people believe the Tea Party is the right wing of the Republican party. The real Tea Party is the opposite of the Republican party. They are anti-war, anti-Federal Reserve, anti-globalization (globalization is nothing more than aggregating wealth in the hands of fewer people), pro-Constitution, pro-individual liberties, pro-capitalism (anti-crony capitalism), anti-fascism, anti-government corruption and most importantly, anti-establishment. Ron Paul version of the Tea Party is the real Tea Party.


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 2:13 a.m.

The Tea Party is labeled as racist and violent, yet no one can find an example of racism on film or an incident of violence. Occupy Wall street as labeled as a grass roots nice movement, yet there is OPEN ANTISEMITISM and SOMEONE HAS DIED now. What a crazy world, I love the media.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 9 p.m.

@Rob &quot;Why then does the tea party vote lock step with republicans? &quot; Real Tea Party members like Rand and Ron Paul do not. Some politicians may have pretended to be a Tea Partiers to get elected. Thus, when they got into office, voted lock step with Republicans. Politician are known to lie to get elected. What a surprise. &quot;Why did they spit on on civil right leader and member of congress Lewis? &quot; Not true. If you look at the video, the Tea Partier never spit on Lewis. Lewis and/or media lied. Watch the video and see for yourself. Can you see how you and many others have been fooled? &quot;Why do they have posters showing our President looking like a Nazi or with a bullet through his skull?&quot; Maybe, just like Bush, deserves it. Invading countries on lies and killing millions of people is called war crimes. &quot;Why did they force the country to the brink of economic ruin, causing us to lose our AAA credit rating? &quot; Obama is just as responsible. He begged the Congress to pass TARP. The biggest theft in history. Not only that, an additional $16.1 trillion was given in secret loans to banks and other institutions. What did you get?

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 5:23 p.m.

&quot;The Tea Party began in opposition to the Bush admin. and government corruption in general.&quot; That's hilarious!!! GN&amp;GL


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 2:19 p.m.

Why then does the tea party vote lock step with republicans? Why did they spit on on civil right leader and member of congress Lewis? Why do they have posters showing our President looking like a Nazi or with a bullet through his skull? Why did they force the country to the brink of economic ruin, causing us to lose our AAA credit rating? What legislation have they seen passed into law?


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 2:26 a.m.

Nothing to see here. Just another incoherent Tea Party screed.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 1:43 a.m.

Who could possibly argue that the republicons have been anythiing but the party of obstruction since President Obama got elected? Congressional republicons have the majority in the house and filibuster power in the senate. They have used this power they unfortunately possess to shut down everything the President has tried to do for this country. Their sole reason for doing so is to replace the President in 2012 with another representative of the 1%.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 8:39 p.m.

So which is it, CBG. Your post both blames the Democrats for not getting anything done and praises Republicans for being the monkey wrench in the machinery. Oh, never mind. Asking for some modicum of intellectual consistency is the proverbial bridge too far. GN&amp;GL

Charlie Brown's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 3:51 a.m.

Let's see... when the Republicans were in charge or everything, the problems were the fault of the Republicans. When the Democrats were in charge of everything, the problems were still the fault of the Republicans. I might see a pattern here. By the way, saying &quot;no&quot; to garbage that would damage the country even worst that what Obama is doing to it is not a bad thing.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 1:39 a.m.

Let's compare Solyndra to Military boondoggles (in billions): 1. Solyndra $0.5 B 2. Navy/marine intranet $10 B 3. Littoral combat ship $30 B 4. Mine-resistant APV $35 B 5. Ford class supercarrier $120 B 6. Ballistic missile defense $135 B 7. Global information grid $300 B 8. F-35 lightning II $325 B 9. Future combat system $340 B So, we could have funded 240 Solyndra's off the average military boondoggle (supercarrier).

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 5:21 p.m.

Even better: for the $1.2 Trillion you cite we could have gone a long way toward putting the nation on track toward a solar energy future. But the petroleum and coal industries--major donors to the Republican Party and its candidates for office--will not tolerate such. And as for the absurd assertion that these are necessary for our nation's defense: The Ford-class carriers, when they come on line, will replace first the Enterprise and then in order of age the Nimitz-class of carriers. The Enterprise was commissioned in 1961 and likely will have 55 years or so in service by the time the first Ford-class ship replaces it. The Nimitz, by contrast, was commissioned in 1975 and likely will have fewer than 40 years in service by the time it is replaced. As the example of the Enterprise proves (a ship that continues to do combat tours in SW Asia), there is no good reason aside from boondoggle money for defense contractors to replace the Nimitz-class carriers at this stage of their lives. And, item-by-item, the same can be said of many listed in Gill's post. And missing from his list is the boondoggle that is the Osprey. Not only expensive, but deadly to its occupants. But one expects mindless support of the defense industry from conservatives. Certain types of welfare are OK (in this case, welfare for defense contractors) while others are not (welfare for businesses that might make us more energy independent). Good Night and Good Luck


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 3:04 p.m.

I'll take every military boondoggle over a chance of a solyndra boondoggle. I like being safe over presidential buddies getting rich.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 12:35 a.m.

Neither party is in Washington to help the average citizen, they are there to help themselves. Hope and Change - very little of either have happened. Democrats - no to many things Republicans - no to many more things It is time to get both parties out of Washington and replace them with people who represent the voter and not themselves. Name one congressman or senator that left Washington unemployed and broke? I bet you can't.


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 3:09 a.m.

I dislike all pork when it comes to budgets and governments. I am not, contrary to your thinking, a TeaPublicon. I am a fiscal hawk. There is a difference. I would love to see ALL deductions for everyone disappear. If the government wants to subsidize something it should not be hidden in the tax code. I am in favor of cleaning up the military industrial complex and the way procurement is done. I am in favor of keeping existing promises to government employees and retirees, however - I do think that future promises need to be reviewed. I do think we need more teachers, but that some of the contract terms need to change. I do think that our free trade agreements are too often one way streets and we should use identical customs rules as our trading partners (aka Japan has a million tons of US rice sitting in warehouses, because they don't want to put it in the market - we should to that to 100,000 Japanese cars) So, if you think this is TeaPublic thinking, then so be it. I am in favor of throwing all the bums out in DC - all of them.

David Briegel

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 1:26 a.m.

Don, why don't you give a 'conservative&quot; view or analysis of the genius and patriotism of Billy Tauzin? Or the &quot;Bridge to Nowhere&quot;? You see, they/you only hate Democratic pork but not TeaPublicon. And we will be believe the lie that corporations are people when Texas executes a corporation. Heck, even godless commie China executes their corporate criminals!!

David Paris

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 12:22 a.m.

Mr Godfrey, This sounds like smoke &amp; mirrors from The Party of NO. The reason that your points are not the big deal that Republicans would like them to be is because they have nothing to do with the vacuous job market, or all the upside-down mortgages &amp; foreclosures, or blank checks for the military, or Our Corporatocracy, or Oligarchy, or Kleptocracy- you pick, or a recession recovery that is less than impressive- thanks again to The Party of NO. Shall I go on... paid-off cops beating innocent demonstrators, the Republican parties attack on Women, their attack on unions- both Labor, and Civil, privatization of public services. They're not just The Party of No, they are also The Party of Hate... and they may be The Party of Lincoln, but Lincoln would be appalled at what the Republican Party has become, though he surely wouldn't say anything- for fear of retribution from Rush Limbaugh!


Mon, Nov 14, 2011 : 2:09 a.m.

Actually G. Orwell, Obama has few lobbyists on his staff. He made a campaign promise not to hire any active lobbyists, so he hasn't ..... Instead he holds the record for the most former lobbyists on his staff. He makes them quit before he hires them and lets them re-start after they're done. Obama is the king of manipulation.

G. Orwell

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 4:46 a.m.

@David, Those thing you claim the Party of No is doing, is also being done by the Obama admin. and the Democratic Party. Obama received more money from the banks than any other candidate and he has more lobbyists than any other president. For example, Michael Taylor was Monsanto lawyer. Now he is the Food Safety Czar. Can you say fox in charge of the hen house. You need to read beyond your MSM controlled media.

David Paris

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 1:48 a.m.

Be my guest, JB... <a href="" rel='nofollow'></a>


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 1:05 a.m.

I'll take the Party of No to the party of &quot;yes, but we'll pay for it later.&quot;


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 12:16 a.m. posted a conservative story. Checking pulse now......


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 5:51 p.m.

Well liberals lack any wave-form on EEG.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 5:10 p.m.

Don't bother. Most conservatives don't have one. GN&amp;GL


Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 12:06 a.m.

What about you CBG? Can you type one thing that the administration has done that you like or that you support?

Charlie Brown's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 3:43 a.m.

Yes. When he had his teleprompter stolen, I thought that was a good thing.

David Briegel

Sat, Nov 12, 2011 : 11:38 p.m.

Hey Art, Maybe Julius LaRosa could pass a bill in the TeaPublicon controlled House that your boy Mitch could get through the Senate since you guys really are in control of BOTH houses of congress! I mean seriously, shouldn't they have to do something, anything besides say NO? And did it ever occur to you that the Dept of Justice now stands for JUSTICE?

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 5:09 p.m.

Yeah, David, CBG doesn't want to let a little fact get in the way of an ill-informed opinion. Yes, Democrats have controlled the Senate. But Republican obstructionism and abuse of the filibuster has required 60 votes in the Senate to get anything done. But I hear that when conservatives stick their heads sand and yell &quot;na na na na na na na na&quot; at the top of their lungs, all of those inconvenient facts go away. Good Night and Good Luck

Charlie Brown's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 3:41 a.m.

Blab all you want, but 100% control and blaming somebody else for lack of leadership is just pathetic. What you're facing is a &quot;no&quot; from the people, not the Republicans, but Democrats are not the type to give a rat's behind what the people want. They know better than us, you know.

David Briegel

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 1:19 a.m.

Come on Ghost, where is the leadership &quot;genius&quot; of the orange man and the filibusterer in chief? They have passed nothing! They filibuster everything! Why is it not incumbent upon the Speaker and his majority to pass something, anything, that Mitch can get 60 votes? I guess your only &quot;value&quot; is NO!! Does America not deserve something from their &quot;genius&quot;?

Charlie Brown's Ghost

Sun, Nov 13, 2011 : 12:03 a.m.

What David has pointed out is that even though the Democrats control five-sixths of the Government (that is, all but one-half of one-third of it), they can't provide leadership. That's not a surprise, because even when they controlled 100% of the Government they still couldn't provide any leadership. For two years they controlled everything, but it was the Republican's fault nothing got done.


Sat, Nov 12, 2011 : 11:29 p.m.

Has the administration done one thing you like, Art? Just one. Not two, or ten. One, and can you type it here?