« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Omnibusted: $410,000,000,000.00 Omnibus Spending Bill Passes Senate

By: Jeff Emanuel (Diary)  |  March 10th, 2009 at 06:22 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Hat tip to Amanda Carpenter for the slogan. Let’s hear it for the Democratic Congress and President Obama, who have managed to spend nearly $1,200,000,000,000.00 before we even hit the Ides of March.

Robert Gibbs, Obama’s clean, articulate, incredibly skilled press secretary (/snark) said to day that this will help begin the process of getting America back onto a fiscally-responsible track. We haven’t yet heard from President Obama whether the 9,000+ earmarks in this bill qualify it as “a spending bill free of earmarks,” as he called the almost-entirely-pork “stimulus” bill on multiple occasions.

By the way, the bill passed the Senate by voice vote after 62-35 vote to defeat a GOP filibuster.

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • EagleWatcher

    Will Obama pay a price for this? In your dreams.

    • Flagstaff

      even if he drives the economy into the ground, unless the SCUM decides to report his failures straight.

      He (with the help of addled Republicans) is already able to call this “Bush’s Depression” and hide behind the purchase of Citibank stock by the Bush Treasury. If we recover, he gets credit. If not, he deflects the blame.

      • EagleWatcher

        He said that the Dems in the Senate are true believers. They are going to spend money while blaming it all on Bush.

        It’s the perfect storm.

  • red4ever

    They have never seen a taxpayer dollar they didn’t want to spend. It’s the Republicans who voted for this monstrousity that must be held accountable. Which part of “stop spending” is confusing them?

    • paulincolo

      I so tire of these guys. I know not all repubs are conservatives but do they have any limited government principles at all? It seems at this point, they are just taking turns getting their 20 pieces of silver, and the left marches forward.

      Conservatives generally win, but republicans don’t. I believe we are a center right country, but it is no wonder that many conservatives just sit out elections. Indeed, why vote for somebody just to get sold out.

      And yet, we still see these columnists and others mentioned this week as well as people on this site, saying its better to have a RINO than a dem because you get them some of the time. I say BULL, IT IS WORSE. What is the point of getting a conservative vote about some silly mammal of the day protection, but losing that vote for things that really matter like the de-Stimulas 1, Son of de-Stimulas passed today, and coming soon de-Stimulas 2. In addition, it allows the other side to drive wedges.

      So which ones will take the silver on card check?

  • tankertodd

    Who are the turdburger Republicans (alleged) who voted for this megaton of lard? I want to start my vendettas now before Obama taxes them.

    • bk

      Bayh, Feingold, and McCaskill voted nay. Nebraska Senator sat out to offset Kennedy. Here are the Rs who voted aye (Susan Collins voted against it BTW):
      Alexander (TN)
      Bond (MO)
      Cochran (MS)
      Murkowski (AK)
      Shelby (AL)
      Snowe (ME)
      Specter (PA)
      Wicker (MS)

      • pilgrim

        Snowe and Wicker. None of the 3 D who voted aye are on the appropriations committee.

      • Praying

        email to each and every one of them. Apparently Snowe didn’t even have any earmarks for ME in the bill – she’s just obstinate and ornery and beyond hope. The real killer is that many of the projects in this bill were already funded by the “Porkulus” bill, so some programs have received, in essence, a 80 – 100% INCREASE in funding from last year. Gee, I wish I’d gotten an increase in my salary of 80 – 100%. (I made that point in my email), I’m not sure my email blitz will ever convince any of these idiots to change their mind, but I feel better for expressing my first amendment right of free speech (at least while I still can…)

      • zarathustra57

        Shelby and Wicker surprise me, appropriations committee or no. No shock as to the others, really.

    • IJB

      If we’re going to rebuild this party, it will be despite the efforts of Senate Republicans, not because of them. (House Republicans may be a different matter – but Senate Republicans are virtually a complete write-off).

      The truth is, nearly every Senate Republican is worthless (there may, *may*, be about half-a-dozen to a dozen of them that are decent – but the rest are glorified pond scum), and we’re going to have to target nearly each and every one of them for a ‘takedown’ over the next 6 years.

      This is why fiddling with the RNC and the RSCC is useless, and a totally wasted effort – conservatives are going to have to create parallel organizations to circumvent them, to recruit and raise funds for challengers to nearly all of these guys. (It worked for the online Left!)

      Senate Republicans aren’t really members of the Republican Party – they’re members of the “Washington DC Party”.

      And the Washington DC party has got to go.

      • AKSteveB

        What is proves is that these guys represents their states and themselves, not a national constituency, especially on domestic issues. This was more explicit before the 16th(?) Amendment (where they want from appointment by State legislatures to direct vote) but structurally is still the case.

        • IJB

          The Senate GOP votes for Obama’s radical Cabinet nominees was a real eye-opener.

          People around here claim Sessions of AL is some great thing – he *voted* for Eric Holder. That pretty much shreds his credibility as an “originalist” legal eagle, and as a “conservative”.

          What about all the votes for Geithner. For *Solis* for God’s sake?!

          These guys aren’t Republicans, and they don’t represent their states either – their pure “Washington DC Party” and they’ve got to go.

          • johnCV

            As much as I agreee that holder, geithner, and solis et.al. are awful choices, unless they are guilty of a crime, the President should be allowed some latitude in his choices.
            That said, geithner, holder and solis should have been denied BECAUSE they ARE guilty of crimes.

            Hmmmm, I think I just agreed with you – to a point. However, Sessions is a good man and we would sorely miss him. No one’s perfect.

          • AKSteveB

            It seems that even the most well intentioned politicians eventually end up mostly being about themselves. Part of it is probably inherent in the ego of anyone who has the drive for high office, the other is …I don’t know ..in the air that is breathed in the public sector. I’m seeing that while doing my first gig in the public sector after 20 plus years in private. Oddly enough, the only other place I’ve seen it is in the oil patch. I may do a diary about this sometime.

  • Flagstaff

    is the the stock market has hit bottom and will continue an upward course tomorrow.

    I’ll go on record here and assert that the bump up today resulted from severely oversold financials and the hope (I always have the desire to put “hope” into quotes these days) that the budget monstrosity would be rejected and thus reduced. As the Omnibusting Bill has just been passed, my guess is the market will be back down soon, if not tomorrow. Nothing fundamental changed today. In fact, the fundamentals just got worse.

    • IJB

      I had to laugh – there were yahoos on CNBC today basically claiming that we’ve already hit bottom, and the economy will rebound in the second half of this year.

      It’s amazing how many people *don’t* get it.

      Oh well, they’ll learn.

      • Flagstaff

        will it go to 3,000?

        I’m already looking for work.

    • johnCV

      From the Hill:

      Another policy rider embedded in the package reverses a Bush-era rule change that would exempt power plants from efforts to curb emissions in order to protect the sea-ice habitat of polar bears.

      We will now further encumber the power generation industry of this country while ‘protecting’ the ever increasing polar bear population living on an expanding ice sheet.
      Comrade obama was deadly serious when he said he will destroy the coal industry. Kruschev has been vindicated.

  • http://streetlevel.blogtownhall.com Darvin_Dowdy

    …why did this bill pass? One reason, attached to the bill was a provision to stop low paid Mexican truckers from driving into the US stealing US trucking jobs. Now the democrat party is the hero of the 1.5 million member Teamsters union and the 160K member OOIDA. We can thank George W. Bush and his “fatal attraction” relationship with Mexico. This is an issue that heavily contributed to our loss of the last 2 elections cycles. Ronald Reagan aggressively sought and acquired the Teamsters endorsement in both ’80 and ’84. He would not have allowed that provision of Nafta that allowed Mexican or Canadian trucks free access to US taxpayer funded highways. Reagan respected the working class in this nation. Modern Repub’s and Conservatives have contempt for them. Which is why they lose and will continue to lose. DD

  • barry915barry

    “Reagan respected the working class in this nation. Modern Repub?s and Conservatives have contempt for them.”

    There YOU go again ripping on conservatives (and moderates too) again.
    I AM conservative, and I AM the working class.

    Enough of your BS on this already. Oops, broke my own rule about feeding you.

    • barry915barry