Skip to main content

View Diary: Coburn Amendment, on the floor (435 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What are you talking about? (none)
    Your post is kind of inane.  This has nothing to do with support for against deficit spending.  This amendment was about effectively spending our tax money where it's needed, as opposed to on pet projects in Alaska which do not come close to justifying the cost.  Also, wow exactly were Republicans, or anyone, "already planning to cut" the Bridge To Nowhere?

    Coburn's amendment was, in my opinion, a twofold move:  first, it's a genuine opportunity to help the  damaged Gulf Coast region without raising taxes or increasing spending, and second, it highlights the embarrassing Bridge To Nowhere's existence for anyone paying attention.

    I applaud all the Senators with the intelligence to vote for this amendment - and wingnut Coburn for sponsoring it!  As a man with Democratic sympathies, I wish more Democrats had voted for the amendment.

    •  This amendment was about (none)
      "Operation Offset" - the conservative effort to shift money from one part of the budget to reconstruction for New Orleans.

      This amendment was misdirection.  They want the public to believe that the reconstruction can be paid for by cutting bridges to nowhere.  It can't.  But if they can sell it as such, then they might be able to get away with cuts to the programs they really want to gut - like Medicare.

      You know, with all the talk of framing around here, you'd think that some of it would have sunk in.  This amendment was an effort to establish a conservative frame: that the reconstruction of New Orleans can and should be accomplished without, say, raising taxes on the rich, and instead can and should be accomplished by cutting "pork" - to be defined later, and by conservatives, of course.

      Democrats have no business buying into that bullshit frame.  

      Like I said, this is not an opportunity to prove your dedication to the end of the deficit.  This is an opportunity to call upon the wealthiest Americans to give up their big ass tax cuts so that we can rebuild an American city.

      But you know, maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe I should trust the fucking Club for Growth on this.  They're honestly interested in the reconstruction of New Orleans and in a sound fiscal policy, right?

      Right.

      •  OK, then, so (none)
        the Don Young Way and the Bridge to Nowhere deserve tax dollars. Or they don't. If they don't, then the proper vote is "yes" on the Coburn Amendment.

        Coburn's an idiot, very nearly a psycho, but in this case correct.

        Try to look at the long view. The dems have no influence now. But they can make statements with their votes that will be either helpful or harmful come election time. Here's a hint: voting against these bridges would have been helpful come election time.

        •  addendum (none)
          Voting against the bridges would have been especially useful if every Dem had voted against them (for the amendment).
        •  addendum (none)
          Voting against the bridges would have been especially useful if every Dem had voted against them (for the amendment).
        •  The long view (none)
          Is the view I've taken.  You want to pretend this is about whether we want a Bridge to Nowhere or the reconstruction of New Orleans.  That's both a false dilemma and exceedingly myopic, given the current political context.

          This is about whether we agree with conservatives, who believe that we should rob Peter to pay Paul - cut elsewhere in the budget to pay for the mitigation of a national disaster - or whether we agree with liberals, who believe that we should ask the most of those who have the most - repeal the Bush tax cuts to rebuild the city of New Orleans.

          This blog apparently sides with the former.  I don't.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site